This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project
to make the world's books discoverable online.
It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.
Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the
publisher to a library and finally to you.
Usage guidelines
Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:
+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.
+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.
+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.
+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.
About Google Book Search
Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web
at |http : //books . qooqle . com/
MAR 2 T 1986
I
ogle I
CLARK'S
FOREIGN
*
I
..V ,y
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CLACK'S
FOREIGN
THEOLOGICAL LIBRARY.
FOUBTH SERIES.
VOL. II.
fittl anH 9tltt$*ci) on ti)t JJtntattucf).
VOL. 1.
EDINBURGH:
T. AND T. CLARE, 88, GEORGE STREET.
MDOCCLXXXV.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
ranmo bt morrisoh axb oibb,
ros
T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH.
LONDON, .... HAMILTON, ADAMS, AKO COk
DUBLIN, .... OEOEOB HXBBXRT.
■CW YORK. . . aCRIBMIB AND WILTORft
Digitized by VjOOQlC
BIBLICAL COMMENTARY
on
THE OLD TESTAMENT.
BY
C. F KEIL, D.D. and F. DELITZSCH, D.D,
PEOPESSOES OF THEOLOGY.
VOLUME I.
THE PENTATEUCH.
TRANSLATED FBOH THE GERMAN
BY THE
BEV. JAMES MARTIN, B.A.,
BorrraoHAK.
EDINBURGH:
T. & T. CLARK, 38, GEORGE STREET.
MDOCCLXXXV.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
LIBRARY OFTHE
iva !L:-:;!d icr;iaarj
NEW YORK CITY
PK£:C.«TtO BY
el'**
JUN 9 1936
//V
II ^ T*- : ; ••■ .sL
II
...:>/
Digitized by
Google
I if 'r' Co *-£> o
TABLE OP CONTENTS
PREFACE,
Twje
7
GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE FIVE BOOKS OF MOSES.
§ 1. Prolegomena on the Old Testament and its leading divisions, 9
§ 2. Title, Contents, and Plan of the Books of Moses, . . 15
§ 3. Origin and Date of the Books of Moses, . . .17
§ 4. Historical Character of the Books of Moses, . . 28
THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES (GENESIS).
Introduction.
Contents, Design, and Plan of Genesis,
The Creation of the World (Chap. i. 1-ii. 3),
I. History of the Heavens and the Earth (Chap.
II. History of Adam (Chap, v.-vi. 8),
III. History of Noah (Chap. vi. 9-ix. 29),
IV. History of the Sons of Noah (Chap, x.-xi. 9),
V. History of Shem (Chap. xi. 10-26), .
VI. History of Terah (Chap. xi. 27-xxv. 11),
ii. 4-iv.
26),
33
87
70
5 20
140
161
177
179
Digitized by
Google
6 TABLE OF CONTENTS.
VII. History of Ishmael (Chap. nv. 12-18),
VIII. History of Isaac (Chap. xxv. 19-xxxv.),
IX. History of Esau (Chap, xxxvi.),
X. History of Jacob (Chap, xxxvii.-!.), .
Flf*
264
266
320
329
THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES (EXODUS).
Introduction.
Contents and Arrangement of the Book of Exodus,
Increase in the Number of the Israelites and their Bondage in Egypt
(Chap.i.),
Birth and Education of Moses; Flight from Egypt, and life in
Midian (Chap, ii.), .....
Call of Moses, and his return to Egypt (Chap. iii. and iv.),
Moses and Aaron sent to Pharaoh (Chap, v.-vii. 7),
Moses' Negotiations with Pharaoh (Chap. vii. 8-zi. 10),
The first three Plagues (Chap. vii. U-viii. 15),
The three following Plagues (Chap. viii. 20-ix. 12),
The last three Plagues (Chap. ix. 13-xi. 10), .
415
418
426
436
461
472
477
485
489
Digitized by
Google
PREFACE.
| HE Old Testament is the basis of the New. " God,
who at sundry times and in divers manners spake
unto the fathers by the prophets, hath spoken onto
us by His only-begotten Son." The Church of Christ is built
upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets. For Christ
came not to destroy the law or the prophets, but to fulfil. As He
said to the Jews, u Search the Scriptures, for in them ye think ye
have eternal life, and they are they which testify of Me ;" so also,
a short time before His ascension, He opened the understanding
of His disciples, that they might understand the Scriptures, and
beginning at Moses and all the prophets, expounded unto them
in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself. With firm
faith in the truth of this testimony of our Lord, the fathers and
teachers of the Church in all ages have studied the Old Testa-
ment Scriptures, and have expounded the revelations of God
under the Old Covenant in learned and edifying works, unfold-
ing to the Christian community the riches of the wisdom and
knowledge of God which they contain, and impressing them upon
the heart, for doctrine, for reproof, for improvement, for instruc-
tion in righteousness. It was reserved for the Deism, Natural-
ism, and Rationalism which became so prevalent in the closing
quarter of the eighteenth century, to be the first to undermine
the belief in the inspiration of the first covenant, and more and
more to choke up this well of saving truth ; so that at the present
day depreciation of the Holy Scriptures of the Old Testament is
Digitized by VjOOQlC
8 rUEFACK.
as widely spread as ignorance of what they really contain. 1 At
the same time, very much has been done during the last thirty
years on the part of believers in divine revelation, to bring about
a just appreciation and correct understanding of the Old Testa-
ment Scriptures.
As a still further contribution towards the same result, it is
our present intention to issue a condensed Commentary upon the
whole of the Old Testament, in which we shall endeavour to
furnish not only a grammatical and historical exposition of the
facts and truths of divine revelation, but a biblical commentary
also, and thus to present to all careful readers of the Bible,
especially to divinity students and ministers of the Gospel, an
exegetical handbook, from which they may obtain some help to-
wards a full understanding of the Old Testament economy of
salvation, so far as the theological learning of the Church has
yet been able to fathom it, and possibly also an impulse to further
study and a deeper plunge into the unfathomable depths of the
Word of God.
May the Lord grant His blessing upon our labours, and
assist with His own Spirit and power a work designed to pro-
mote the knowledge of His holy Word.
C. F. KEIL.
1 This is unquestionably the case in Germany ; and although it is grow-
ingly applicable to England also, it is happily far from describing our present
condition. — Tr.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
TO
THE FIVE BOOKS OF MOSES.
§ 1. PROLEGOMENA ON THE OLD TESTAMENT AND ITS
LEADING DIVISIONS.
||HE Holy Scriptures of the Old Testament contain the
divine revelations which prepared the way for the
redemption of fallen man by Christ. The revela-
tion of God commenced with the creation of the
heaven and the earth, when the triune God called into existence
a world teeming with organized and living creatures, whose life
and movements proclaimed the glory of their Creator ; whilst, in
the person of man, who was formed in the image of God, they
were created to participate in the blessedness of the divine life.
But when the human race, having yielded in its progenitors to
the temptation of the wicked one, and forsaken the path ap-
pointed by its Creator, had fallen a prey to sin and death, and
involved the whole terrestrial creation in the effects of its fall ;
the mercy of God commenced the work of restoration and re-
demption, which had been planned in the counsel of the triune
love before the foundation of the world. Hence, from the very
beginning, God not only manifested His eternal power and god-
head in the c reatio n, preservation, and government of the world
and its inhabitants, bat also revealed through His Spirit His
purpose and desire for the well-being of man. This manifesta-
PENT. — Vt)L. I. B
Digitized by
Google
10 GENERAL INTRODUCTION.
tion of the personal God upon and in the world assumed, in
consequence of the fall, the form of a plan of salvation, rising
above the general providence and government of the world, and
filling the order of nature with higher powers of spiritual life, in
order that the evil, which had entered through sin into the
nature of man and passed from man into the whole world,
might be overcome and exterminated, the world be transformed
into a kingdom of God in which all creatures should follow
His holy will, and humanity glorified into the likeness of God
by the complete transfiguration of its nature. These mani-
festations of divine grace, which made the history of the world
" a development of humanity into a kingdom of God under the
i <Lx~< educational and judicial superintendence of the living God,"
•WW ''(*)- culminated in th e, incarnation of God in Christ to reconcile the
j pU*^**'^^' world unto Himself. ~ •■•
' This act of unfathomable love divides the whole course of
the world's hist ory into two periods — th e times of preparation,
a nd the times of accomplishment and completi on. TEeTormer
extend from the fall of Adam to the coming of Christ, and have
their culminating point in the economy of the first covenant.
The latter commence with the appearance of the Son of God on
earth in human form and human nature, and will last till His
return in glory, when He will change the kingdom of grace
into the kingdom of glory through the last judgment and the
creation of a new heaven and new earth out of the elements of
the old world, "the heavens and the earth which are now."
The course of the universe will then be completed and closed,
and time exalted into eternity (1 Cor. xv. 23-28; Rev. xx.
and xxi.).
If we examine the revelations of the first covenant , as they
have been handed down to us in the sacred scriptures of the
a Old Testament, we_ can distinguish three sta gesof pro gressiv e
i development : p reparation for the kmgd ogLflf-iatod in its Old
i .1/ J ' Testament form ; its e stablishment through the mediator ial
\ ' office of Moses ; an d its develo pme nt and extension th rough
t he prophets. In all these periods (iod revealed Himself and
' His salvation to the human race by words and deeds. As the
Gospel of the New Covenant is not limited to the truths and
moral precepts taught by Christ and His apostles, but the fact
of the incarnation of God in Christ Jesus, and the work of re-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
I 1. PBOI.EGOMENA ON THE OLD TESTAMENT. 11
demption completed by the God-man through deeds and suffer-
ings, death and resurrection, constitute the quintessence of the
Christian religion; so also the divine revelations of the Old
Covenant are not restricted to the truths proclaimed by Moses,
and by the patriarchs before him and prophets after him, as to
the real nature of God, His relation to the world, and the divine
destiny of man, but consist even more of the historical events
by whr*h the personal and living God manifested Himself to
men in His infinite love, in acts of judgment and righteousness,
of mercy and grace, that He might lead them back to Himself
as the only source of life. Hence all the acts of God in history,!
by which the rising tides of iniquity have been stemmed, and'
piety and morality promoted, including not only the judgments,
of God which have fallen upon the earth and its inhabitants,!
but the calling of individuals to be the upholders of His salva- 1
tion and the miraculous guidance afforded- them, are to be re-
garded as essential elements of the religion of the Old Testament,
quite as much as the verbal revelations, by which God made
known His will and saving counsel through precepts and
promises to holy men, sometimes by means of higher and
supernatural light within them, at other times, and still more
frequently, through supernatural dreams, and visions, and theo-
phanies in which the outward senses apprehended the sounds
and words of human language. T foveaWl religion tm« nnt ™il y
b een introd uced into the w orld by the special interposition of
fi™l r bq* is essentially a history of what God has done to
establish His kin gdo m upon the ear th ; in other words, to restore
a real personal fellowship between God whose omnipresence
fills the world, and man who was created in His image, in order
that God might renew and sanctify humanity by filling it with
His Spirit, and raise it to the glory of living and moving in
His fulness of life.
The way was opened for the establishment of this kingdom
in its Old Testament form by the , call of Abraham , and his
election to be the father of that nation, with which the Lord
was about to make a covenant of grace as the source *>f blessing
to all the families of the earth. Th&Ji rst stage in the sacre d
history coim npngffl with the departure of Abraham, in obedience
to the call of God, from his native country and his father's
bouse, and Beaches to the time when ^"wiaepitVNpcomScd^to
t
\
h*
12 GENERAL INTRODUCTION.
the patriarch had expanded in Egypt into the twelve tribes of
Israel. The divine revelations during this period consisted of
promises, which laid the foundation for the whole future de-
velopment of the kingdom of God on earth, and of that special
guidance, by which God proved Himself, in accordance with
these promises, to be the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
The second s tage commences with the call of Moses and th e
deli verance of Israel from the bondage of Egypt, and embraces
the establishment of the Old Testament kingdom of God, not
only through the covenant which God made at Sinai with the
people of Israel, whom He had redeemed with mighty deeds out
of Egypt, but also through the national constitution, which He
gave in the Mosaic law to the people whom He had chosen as
His inheritance, and which regulated the conditions of their
covenant relation. In this constitution the eternal truths and
essential characteristics of the real, spiritual kingdom are set
forth in earthly forms and popular institutions, and are so far
incorporated in them, that the visible forms shadow forth
spiritual truths, and contain the germs of that spiritual and
glorified kingdom in which God will be all in all. In conse-
quence of t he design of this kin gdo m being merely to p repare
and typif}' the full reve lation of God in His kingdom, jts_pre-
dominant character was that of law, in order_that, whilst pro-
ducing a deep and clear insight into human sinfulness and
divine holiness, it might _excite an ear nest cra ving for A*.
liyer ance from sin and death, and for the blessedness of living
in the peace of Go<E Bui the laws and institutions of this
kingdom not only impressed upon the people the importance of
consecrating their whole life to the Lord God, they also opened
. up to them the way of holiness and access to the grace of God,
whence power might be derived to walk in righteousness before
God, through the institution of a sanctuary which the Lord of
heaven and earth filled with His gracious presence, and of a
sacrificial altar which Israel might approach, and there in the
blood of the sacrifice receive the forgiveness of its sins and re-
joice in the gracious fellowship of its God.
JThfijAireZ stage in the Old Testament,
progr essive development of the kingdom of God establis hed up on
death of Mo
■Miuii, from the death of Moses, the lawgiver, till the extinction
of prophecy at the close of the Babylonian captivity. During
Digitized by
Google
I L PROLEGOMENA ON THE OLD TESTAMENT. 13
this lengthened period God revealed Himself as the covenant
God and the monarch in His kingdom, partly by the special
protection which He afforded to His people, so long as they were
faithful to Him, or when they returned to Him after a time of
apostasy and sought His aid, either by raising up warlike heroes
to combat the powers of the world, or by miraculous displays of
His own omnipotence, and partly by the mission of prophets
endowed with the might of His own Spirit, who kept His law
and testimony before the minds of the people, denounced judg-
ment upon an apostate race, and foretold to the righteous the
Messiah's salvation, attesting their divine mission, wherever it
was necessary, by the performance of miraculous deeds. In the
fitgt centnries after Moses the re was a predominance of the direct
acts of G od to establish His kingdom in Canaan, and exalt it to
power and distinctionTh comparison with' the nations round
about. But after it had attained its highest earthly power, and
when the separation of the ten tribes from the house of David
had been followed by the apostasy of the nation from the Lord,
and the kingdom of God was hurrying rapidly to destruction,
God increased the number of prophets, and thus prepared the
way by the word of prophecy for the full revelation of His sal-
vation in the establishment of a new covenant.
Thus did the works of God go hand in hand with His reve
lation in the words of promise, of law, and of prophecy, in the
economy of the Old Covenant, not merely as preparing the way
for the introduction of the salvation announced in the law and
in prophecy, but as essential factors of the plan of God for the
redemption of man, as acts which regulated and determined the
whole course of the world, and contained in the germ the
consummation of all things ; — the law, as a " schoolmaster to I
bring to Christ," by training Israel to welcome the Saviour ;
and prophecy, as proclaiming His advent with growing clearness,
and even shedding upon the dark and deadly shades of a world
at enmity against God, the first rays of the dawn of that coming
day of salvation, in which the Sun of Righteousness would rise
upon the nations with healing beneath His wings.
As the revelation of the first covenant may be thus divided
into three progressive stages, so the documents containing this
revelation, the sac red books ofjhe PHJ^f'tvag.nt, hav° bN" k otm
divided into three classes- — the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagio-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
14 GENERAL INTRODUCTION
grapha or holy writings. But although this triple classification
of the Old Testament canon has reference not merely to three
stages of canonization, but also to three degrees of divine inspira-
tion, the three parts of the Old Testament do not answer to the
three historical stages in the development of the first covenant.
The only division sustained by the historical facts is that of Law
iH ,Pn?jiM* These two contain all that was objective in the
Old Testament revelation, and so distributed that the Thorali,
as the five books of Moses are designated even in the Scriptures
themselves, contains the groundwork of the Old Covenant, or
that revelation of God in words and deeds which laid the foun-
dation of the kingdom of God in its Old Testament form, and
also those revelations of the primitive ages and the early history
of Israel which prepared the way for this kingdom ; whilst the
Prophets, on the other hand, contain the revelations which helped
to preserve and develop the Israelitish kingdom of God, from
the death of Moses till its ultimate dissolution. The Prophets
are also subdivided into two classes. The first of these embraces
the so-called earlier prophets (prophetce priores), t.e. the prophe-
tical books of history (Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and the Kings),
which contain the revelation of God as fulfilled in the historical
guidance of Israel by judges, kings, high priests, and prophets ;
the second, the later prophets (prophetce posteriores), Le. the pro-
phetical books of prediction (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the
twelve minor prophets), which contain the progressive testimony
to the counsel of God, delivered in connection with the acts of
God during the period of the gradual decay of the Old Testament
kingdom. The former, or historical books, are placed among the
Prophets in the Old Testament canon, not merely because they
narrate the acts of prophets in Israel, but still more, because they
exhibit the development of the Israelitish kingdom of God from
a prophet's point of view, and, in connection with the historical
development of the nation and kingdom, set forth the progressive
development of the revelation of God. The predictions of the
later prophets, which were not composed till some centuries after
the division of the kingdom, were placed in the same class with
these, as being " the national records, which contained the pledge
of the heavenly King, that the fall of His people and kingdom
in the world had not taken place in opposition to His will, but
expressly in accordance with it, and that He had not therefore
Digitized by VjOOQlC
{ Z. TITLE, CONTENTS, AND PLAN OF THE BOOKS OF MOSES. 15
given np His people and kingdom, bnt at some future time,
when its inward condition allowed, would restore it again in new
and more exalted power and glory" (Auberleri).
The other writings of the Old Covenant are all grouped
together in the third part of the Old Testament canon under the
title of ypafela, Scripta, or Hagiographa, as being also composed
under the influence of the Holy Ghost. The Hagiographa diffe r
fmm thft propW. jcal books both of history and prediction in
t heir peculiarly subjective charact er, and the individuality of
their representations of the facts and truths of divine revelation ;
a feature common to all the writings in this class, notwithstand-
ing their diversities in form and subject-matter. They include,
(1) thojuuticaLhpoks : Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Song of Solomon,
Ecclesiastes, and the Lamentations of Jeremiah, — which bear
witness of the spiritual fruits already brought to maturity in the
faith, the thinking, and the life of the righteous by the revealed
religion of the Old Covenant ; — (2) the book of Daniel, who lived
and laboured at the Chaldean and Perslan^^oTtrty-with its rich
store of divinely inspired dreams and visions, prophetic of the
future history of the kingdom of God ; — (3) theJ>oricaJ books
of Ruth, Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther, which depict
the history of the government of David and his dynasty, with
special reference to the relation in which the kings stood to the
Levitical worship in the temple, and the fate of the remnant of
the covenant nation, which was preserved in the downfall of the
kingdom of Judah, from the time of its captivity until its return
from Babylon, and its re-establishment in Jerusalem and Judah.
§ 2. TITLE, CONTENTS, AND PLAN OF THE BOOKS OF MOSES.
The five books of Moses (17 ilon-aTew^o? sc. /3l/3\o$, Penta-
teuchus sc. liber, the book in five parts) are called in the Old
Testament Sepher hattorah, the Law-book (Deut. xxxi. 26; Josh.
L 8, etc.), or, more concisely still, Hattorah, 6 v6fw<;, the Law
(Neh. viii. 2, 7, 13, etc.), — a name descriptive both of the
contents of the work and of its importance in relation to the
economy of the Old Covenant The wordjg ^a Hiphil noun
from rnin, demonstrare, docere, denotes instruction. The TJiorah
Digitized by VjOOQlC
16 GENERAL INTRODUCTION.
'>
is t he book^of instruction , which Jehovah gave through Moses
to the people of Israel, and is therefore called Torath Jehovah
(2 Chron. xvii. 9, xxxiv. 14 ; Neh. ix. 3) and Torath Mosheh
(Josh. viii. 31 ; 2 Kings xiv. 6 ; Neh. viii. 1), or Sepher Mosheh,
the book of Moses (2 Chron. xxv. 4, xxxv. 12 ; Ezra vi. 18 ;
Neh. xiii. 1). Its contents are a divine revelation in words and
deeds, or rather the fundamental revelation, through which
Jehovah selected Israel to be His people, and gave to them their
rule of life (voftfc), or theocratical constitution as a people and
kingdom.
The entire work, though divided into five parts, forms both
in plan and execution one complete and carefully constructed
whole, commencing with the creation, and reaching to the death
of Moses, the mediator of the Old Covenant. The foundation
for the divine revelation was really laid in and along with the
creation of the world. The world which God created is the
scene of a history embracing both God and man, the site for
the kingdom of God in its earthly and temporal form. All that
the first book contains with reference to the early history of the
human race, from Adam to the patriarchs of Israel, stands in
a more or less immediate relation to the kingdom of God in
Israel, of which the other books describe the actual establish-
ment. The second depicts the inauguration of this kingdom
at Sinai. Of the third and fourth, the former narrates the
spiritual, the latter the political, organization of the kingdom
by facts and legal precepts. The fifth recapitulates the whole
in a hortatory strain, embracing both history and legislation,
and impresses it upon the hearts of the people, for the purpose
of arousing true fidelity to the covenant, and securing its
lasting duration. The economy of the Old Covenant having
been thus established, the revelation of the law closes with the
death of its mediator.
The division of the work into five books was, therefore, the
most simple and natural that could be adopted, according to the
contents and plan which we have thus generally described. The
three middle books contain the history of the establishment of
the Old Testament kingdom ; the first sketches the preliminary
history, by which the way was prepared for its introduction ;
and the fifth recapitulates and confirms it. This fivefold divi-
sion was not made by some later editor, but is founded in the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
i 8. ORIGIN AND DATE OF THE BOOKS OF HOSES 17
entire plan of the law, and is therefore to be regarded as
original. For even the three central books, which contain a
continuous history of the establishment of the theocracy, are
divided into three by the fact, that the middle portion, the third
book of the Pentateuch, is separated from the other two, not
only by its contents, but also by its introduction, chap. i. 1, and
its concluding formula, chap, xxvii. 34.
§ 3. ORIGIN AND DATE OF THE BOOKS OF MOSES.
The five books of Moses occupy the first place in the canon
of the Old Testament, not merely on account of their peculiar
character as the fo undation and norm of alL-the res t, but also
because of their actual date, as being t he oldest writin gs in th e
canon , and the groundwork of the whole of the Old Testament
literature ; all the historical, prophetic, and poetical works of the
Israelites subsequent to the Mosaic era pointing back to the
law of Moses as their primary source and type, and assum-
ing the existence not merely of the law itself, but also of a book
of the law, of precisely the character and form of the five books
of Moses. In all the other historical books of the Old Testa-
ment not a single trace is to be found of any progressive expan-
sion of, or subsequent additions to, the statutes and laws of
Israel ; for the account contained in 2 Kings xxii. and 2 Chron.
xxxiv. of the discovery of the book of the law, t.e. of the copy
placed by the side of the ark, cannot be construed, without a
wilful perversion of the words, into a historical proof, that the
Pentateuch or the book of Deuteronomy was composed at that
time, or that it was then brought to light for the first time. 1 On
1 Vaihinger geeks to give probability to EwabT* idea of the progressive
growth of the Mosaic legislation, and also of the Pentateuch, daring a period
of nine or ten centuries, by the following argument : — " We observe in the
law-books of the ancient Parsees, in the Zendavesta, and in the historical
writings of India and Arabia, that it was a custom in the East to tupple-
merd the earlier works, and after a lapse of time to reconstruct them, so
that whilst the root remained, the old stock was pruned and supplanted
by a new one. Later editors constantly brought new streams to the old,
until eventually the circle of legends and histories was closed, refined, and
transfigured. Now, as the Israelites belonged to the same great family aa
t
18 GENERAL INTRODUCTION.
the contrary, we find that, from the time of Joshua to the age of
Ezra and Nehemiah, the law of Moses and his book of the law
were the only valid and unalterable code by which the national
life was regulated, either in its civil or its religious institutions.
Numerous cases undoubtedly occur, in which different com-
mands contained in the law were broken, and particular ordi-
nances were neglected ; but even in the anarchical and troubled
times of the Judges, public worship was performed in the
tabernacle at Shiloh by priests of the tribe of Levi according
to the directions of the ThoraJi, and the devout made their
periodical pilgrimages to the house of God at the appointed
feasts to worship and sacrifice before Jehovah at Shiloh (Judg.
xviii. 31, cf Josh, xviii. 1 ; 1 Sam. i. 1-iv. 4). On the estab-
lishment of the monarchy (1 Sam. viii.-x.), the course adopted
was in complete accordance with the laws contained in Deut.
xvii. 14 sqq. The priesthood and the place of worship were
reorganized by David and Solomon in perfect harmony with
the law of Moses. Jehoshaphat made provision for the instruc-
tion of the people in the book of the law, and reformed the
jurisdiction of the land according to its precepts (2 Chron.
xvii. 7 sqq., xix. 4 sqq.). Hezekiah and Josiah not only abo-
lished the idolatry introduced by their predecessors, as Asa
had done, but restored the worship of Jehovah, and kept the
Passover as a national feast, according to the regulations of the
Mosaic law (2 Chron. xxix.-xxxi. ; 2 Kings xxiii. ; and 2 Chron.
xxxiv. and xxxv.). Even in the kingdom of the ten tribes,
which separated from the Davidic kingdom, the law of Moses
retained its force not merely in questions of civil law, but also
in connection with the religious life of the devout, in spite of
the rest of the Oriental nations (sic! bo that the Parsees and Hindoos are
Semitic !), and had almost everything in common with them so far as dress,
manners, and customs were concerned, there is ground for the supposition,
that their literature followed the same course" (Herzog's Cycl.). But to
this we reply, that the literature of a nation is not an outward thing to be
put on and worn like a dress, or adopted like some particular custom or
habit, until something more convenient or acceptable induces a change;
and that there is a considerable difference between Polytheism and heathen
mythology on the one hand, and Monotheism and revealed religion on the
other, which forbids us to determine the origin of the religious writings of
the Israelites by the standard of the Indian Veda and Parana, or the
different portions of the Zendavesta.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
I 8. ORIGIN AND DATE OF THE BOOKS OF MOSES. 19
the worship established by Jeroboam in opposition to the law,
as we may clearly see from the labours of Elijah and Elisha,
of Hosea and Amos, within that kingdom. Moreover, all the
historical books are richly stored with unmistakeable allusions
and references to the law, which furnish a stronger proof than
the actual mention of the book of the law, how deeply the
Thorah of Moses had penetrated into the religious, civil, and
political life of Israel. (For proofs, see my Introduction to the
Old Test. § 34, i.)
In precisely the same way propliecy derived its authority and
influence throughout from the law of Moses ; tor all the prophets,
from the rirst to the last," invariably kept the precepts and pro-
hibitions of the law before the minds of the people. They judged,
reproved, and punished the conduct, the sins, the crimes of the
people according to its rules ; they resumed and expanded its
threats and promises, proclaiming their certain fulfilment ; and
Anally, they employed the historical events of the books of Moses
for the purpose of reproof or consolation, frequently citing the
very words of the Thorah, especially the threats and promises of
Lev. xxvi. and Dent, xxviii., to give force and emphasis to their
warnings, exhortations, and prophecies. And , lastly, the poetr y.
that flourished under David and Solomon, had also its roots in
the law, which not only scans, illumines, and consecrates all the
emotions and changes of a righteous life in the Psalms, and all
the relations of civil life in the Proverbs, but makes itself heard
in various ways in the book of Job and the Song of Solomon,
and is even commended in Ecclesiastes (chap. xii. 13) as the
sum and substance of true wisdom.
Again, the int ernal charac ter of the book is in perfect har-
mony with this indisputable tact, that the "Thorah, as Delitztch
says, "is as certainly presupposed by the whole of the post-
Mosaic history and literature, as the root is by the tree." For
it cannot be shown to bear any traces of post-Mosaic times and
circumstances; on the contrary, it has the evident stamp of
Mosaic origin both in substance and in style. All that has
been adduced in proof of the contrary by the so-called modern
criticism is founded either upon misunderstanding and misinter-
pretation, or upon a misapprehension of the peculiarities of the
Semitic style of historical writing, or lastly upon doctrinal pre-
judices, in other words, upon a repudiation of all the super-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
w>
20 GENERAL INTRODUCTION.
natural characteristics of divine revelation, whether in the form
of miracle or prophecy. The evidence of this will be given in
the Commentary itself, in the exposition of the passages which
have been supposed to contain either allusions to historical cir-
cumstances and institutions of a later age, or contradictions and
repetitions that are irreconcilable with the Mosaic origin of
the work. The Thorah "answers all the expectations which
a study of the pe rsonal character of Moses could lead us justly
to form of any work composed by him. - He was one of those
master-spirits, in whose life the rich maturity of one historical
period is associated with the creative commencement of another,
in whom a long past culminates, and a far-reaching future
strikes its roots. In him the patriarchal age terminated, and
the period of the law began ; consequently we expect to find
him, as a sacred historian, linking the existing revelation with
its patriarchal and primitive antecedents. As the mediator of
the law, he was a prophet, and, indeed, the greatest of all pro- "
phets: we expect from him, therefore, an incomparable, pro-
phetic insight into the ways of God in both past and future.
He was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians ; a work
from his hand, therefore, would show, in various intelligent
allusions to Egyptian customs, laws, and incidents, the well-
educated native of that land" (Delitzsch). In all these respects,
not only does the Thorah satisfy in a general manner the de-
mands which a modest and unprejudiced criticism makes upon
a work of Moses ; but on a closer investigation of its contents, it
presents so many marks of the Mosaic age and Mosaic spirit,
that it is a priori probable that Moses was its author. How
admirably, for example, was the way prepared for the revela-
tion of God at Sinai, by the revelations recorded in Genesis
of the primitive and patriarchal times ! The same God who,
when making a covenant with Abram, revealed Himself to him
in a vision as Jehovah who had brought him out of Ur of the
Chaldees (Gen. xv. 7), and who afterwards, in His character
of El Shaddai, i.e. the omnipotent God, maintained the cove-
nant which He had made with him (Gen. xvii. 1 sqq.), giving
him in Isaac the heir of the promise, and leading and preserving
both Isaac and Jacob in their way, appeared to Moses at Horeb,
to manifest Himself to the seed of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob
in the full significance of His name Jehovah, by redeeming
Digitized by VjOOQlC
I 3. ORIGIN AND DATE OF THE BOOKS OF MOSES. 21
the children of Israel from the bondage of Egypt, and by ac-
cepting them as the people of His possession (Ex. vi. 2 sqq.).
How magnificent are the prophetic revelations contained in the
. T/iorah, embracing the whole future history of the kingdom of
God till its glorious consummation at the end of the world!
Apart from such promises as Gen. xii. 1-3, Ex. xix. 5, 6, and
others, which point to the goal and termination of the ways of
God from the very commencement of His work of salvation ;
not only does Moses in the ode sung at the Bed Sea behold his
people brought safely to Canaan, and Jehovah enthroned as the
everlasting King in the sanctuary established by Himself (Ex.
xv. 13, 17, 18), but from Sinai and in the plains of Moab he
surveys the future history of his people, and the land to which
they are about to march, and sees the whole so clearly in the
light of the revelation received in the law, as to foretell to a
people just delivered from the power of the heathen, that they
will again be scattered among the heathen for their apostasy
from the Lord, and the beautiful land, which they are about
for the first time to take possession of, be once more laid waste
(Lev. xxvi.; Deut. xxviii.-xxx., but especially xxxii.). And with
such exactness does he foretell this, that all the other prophets, in
their predictions of the captivity, base their prophecies upon the
words of Moses, simply extending the latter in the light thrown
upon them by the historical circumstances of their own times. 1
How richly stored, again, are all five books with delicate and
casual allusions to Egypt, its historical events, its manners,
customs, and natural history I Hengttenberg has accumulated
a great mass of proofs, in his " Egypt and the Books of Moses,"
of thejnostaccurate acquain tance on the part of the author o f
t he Tlwrah^vnth -Egypt and its institutions . To select only a
few — and those such as are apparently trivial, and introduced
quite incidentally into either the history or the laws, but which
are as characteristic as they are conclusive, — we would mention
the thoroughly Egyptian custom of man parrying baskets up on
t heir head s, in the dream of Pharaoh's chief baker (Gen. xL 16);
the s having of the beard (xli. 14); p rophesying with the cup
1 Yet we never find in these words of Moses, or in the Pentateuch
generally, the name Jehovah Sabaoth, which was unknown in the Mosaic
age, but was current as early as the time of Samuel and David, and sc
favourite a name with all the prophets.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
22 GENERAL INTRODUCTION.
-p (xliv. 5) ; t he custom of emb alming dead bodies and placing
them in sarcophagi (1. 2, 3, and 26) ; the basket made of the
-^papyrus ._aai_cQYere_d with. asphalt and pitch (Ex. ii. 3), "the
pr ohibition against lyin g with cattle (Ex. xxii. 19 ; Lev. xviii.
* 23, zx. 15, 16), and against other unnatural crimes which were
common in Egypt; t he remark that Hebron was bnilt. nav^ n
» years before Zoa n in Egypt (Num. xiii. 22); the allusion in
5> Num. xi. 5 t f!_lh£."rdi n ° , 7 anA i*™™**. fond nf Egypt ; the
Egy ptian mod e of ,wjatering^Deut. xi. 10, 11) ; the reference to
the E gyptian m ode of whipping (Deut. xxv. 2, 3) ; the express
9 mention of the eruptions and diseases of Egypt (Deut. vii. 15,
xxriii. 27, 35, 60), and many other things, especially in the ac-
count of the plagues, which tally so closely with the natural
history of that country (Ex. vii. S-x. 23).
In its general form, too, the Thorah answers the expecta-
tions which we are warranted in entertaining of a work of
Moses. In such a work we should expect to find " the unity o f
a magnificent plan , c omparati va indiff erence to the mere de-
Jajls* but a comprehensive and spirited grasp of the whole and
of salient points ; depth and elevation combined with the
greatest simplicity. In the magnificent unity of plan, we sha ll
detect the mi ghty leadeTand ruler oflTpe nple nnmWjng tp.n« nf
thousands : in the childlik e simplicity, the shepherd of Midian.
who fed the sheep of Jethro tar away from the varied scenes
of Egypt in the fertile clefts of the mountains of Sinai"
(Delitzsch). The unity of the magnificent plan of the Thorah
we have already shown in its most general outlines, and shall
point out still more minutely in our commentary upon the sepa-
rate books. The childlike naiveti of the shepherd of Midian
is seen most distinctly in those figures and similes drawn from
the immediate contemplation of nature, which we find in the
more rhetorical portions of the work. To this class belong such
poetical expressions as " covering the eye of the earth " (Ex. x.
5, 15 ; Num. xxii. 5, 11) ; such similes as these : " as a nursing
father beareth the suckling" (Num. xi. 12) ; "as a man doth
bear his son " (Deut. i. 31) ; " as the ox licketh up the grass of
the field" (Num. xxii. 4); " as sheep which have no shepherd"
(Num. xxvii. 17); "as bees do" (Deut. i. 44); "as the eagle
flieth " (Deut. xxviii. 49) ; — and again the figurative expressions
" borne on eagles' wings" (Ex. six. 4, cf. Deut. xxxii. 11) ; " de-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
i S. ORIGIN AND DATE OF THE BOOKS OF MOSES. 23
Touring fire " (Ex. xxiv. 17 ; Deut. iv. 24, ix. 3) ; u head and tail"
(Dent, xxviii. 13, 44) ; " a root that beareth gall and wormwood"
(Dent. xxix. 18); "wet to dry" (Deut. xxix. 19), and many others.
To this we may add t he antiquated character of the sty le,
which is common to all five books, and distinguishes them essen-
tially from all the other writings of the Old Testament. This
appears sometimes in the use of words, of forms, or of phrases,
which subsequently disappeared from the spoken language, and
which either do not occur again, or are only used here and
there by the writers of the time of the captivity and afterwards,
and then are taken from the Pentateuch itself ; at other times,
in the fact that words and phrases are employed in the books
of Moses in simple prose, which were afterwards restricted to
poetry alone ; or else have entirely changed their meaning.
For example, the pronoun van and the noun "ip? are used in the
Pentateuch for both gender s, whereas the forms KVl and 'TJJO
were afterwards employed for the feminine ; whilst the former
of these occurs only eleven times in the Pentateuch, the latter
only once. T he demonstrativ e pronoun is spelt ?Mn, afterwards
H9Kn ; the infinitive construct of the verbs' rf'^ is often written ri
or \ without n, as ibTJ Gen. xxxi. 38, wkg Ex. xviii. 18, nk"j Gen.
xlviii. 11 ; the third person plural of verbs is still for the most
part the full form p, not merely in the imperfect, but also here
and there in the perfect, whereas afterwards it was softened into
1. Such words, too, as MK an ear of corn ; nnnow a Back ; TTja
dusecuit ho*tia* ; "ina a piece ; 7$l a young bird ; ">3t a present ;
"t?J to present ; Bte"jn a sickle ; KJO a basket ; IHpVl an existing,
living thing; rnoo a veil, covering; ^$? a sprout (applied to
men) ; "WB> a blood-relation ; such forms as TOj for T3T mat,
3P3 for feoa a lamb ; phrases like VBIT7K *|DW, " gathered to his
people ; " and many others which I have given in my Introduc-
tion, — you seek in vain in the other writings of the Old Testa-
ment, whilst the words and phrases, which are used there instead,
are not found in the books of Moses.
And whilst the contents and form of the Thorah bear wit-
ness that it belongs to the Mosaic age, t here are express state-
ments to the effec t that^it was written by Moses himself. Even
in the central books, certain events and laws are said to have
been written down. After^ the d efeat of the Amalekites, for
example, Moses received orderefrom God to write the command
Digitized by VjOOQlC
24 GENERAL INTRODUCTION.
to exterminate Amalek, for a memorial, «'n <% hnnh ({.«. a book
appointed for a record of the acts of the Lord in Israel : Ex.
xviL 14). According to Ex. xxiv. 3, 4, 7, Moses wrote the
words of the covenant (Ex. xx. 2-17) and the laws of Israel (Ex.
xxi.-xxiii.) in the book of the covenant, and read them to the
people. Again, in Ex. xxxiv. 27, Moses is commanded to write
the words of the renewed covenant, which he no doubt did. And
lastly, it is stated in Num. xxxiii. 2, that he wrote an account
of the different encampments of the Israelites in the desert,
according to the commandment of God. It is true that these
statements furnish no direct evidence of the Mosaic authorship
of the whole Thorah ; but from the fact that the covenant of
Sinai was to be concluded, and actually was concluded, on the
basis of a written record of the laws and privileges of the cove-
nant, it may be inferred with tolerable certainty, that Moses
committed all those laws to writing, which were to serve the
people as an inviolable rule of conduct towards God. And from
the record, which God commanded to be made, of the two his-
torical events already mentioned, it follows unquestionably, that
it was the intention of God, that all the more important mani-
festations of the covenant fidelity of Jehovah should be handed
down in writing, in order that the people in all time to come
might study and lay them to heart, and their fidelity be thus
preserved towards their covenant God. That Moses recognised
this divine intention, and for the purpose of upholding the work
already accomplished through his mediatorial office, committed
to writing not merely the whole of the law, but the entire work
/ \^J of the Lord in and for Israel, — in other words, that he wrote o nt
- r-T^dX +1t« wjiola Tivth in the form in whic h it ha s come d own to n s,
and handed over the work to the nation before hi s departu re
from this life, thaFTlf might "be preserved and obeyed, — is dis-
tinctly stated "at the conclusion of the Thorah, in Deut. xxxi. 9,
%i. When he had delivered his last address to the people, and
appointed Joshua to lead them into their promised inheritance,
" he wrote this Tliorah, and delivered it unto the priests, the sons
of Levi, and unto all the elders of Israel " (Deut. xxxi. 9), with a
command that it was to be read to the people every seven years
at the feast of Tabernacles, when they came to appear before the
Lord at the sanctuary. Thereupon, it is stated (vers. 24 sqq.)
that " it came to pass, when Moses had made an end of writing
Digitized by VjOOQlC
§ 3. ORIGIN AND DATE OF THE BOOKS OF MOSES. 25
the words of this law in a book, to the very close, that Moses
commanded the Levites, which bare the ark of the covenant of
the Lord, saying : Take this book of the law, and put JLby-ihe I v
si de of the a rk of the covenant of Jehovah your God, that it^\
may be there for a witness against thee," etc. This double \\
testimony to the Mosaic authorship of the Thorah i g_ confirme d
still further by the command in Deut. xvii. 18, that the king to
he afterwards chosen sho uld cause a copy of th is law^_to be
written in a book by th e Leyitical priests, and should.jread
th erein all the days of his life, and by the repeated allusions
to " the words of this law, which are written in this book," or
"in the book of the law" (Deut. xxviii. 58, 61, xxix. 21, xxx.
10, xxxi. 26) ; for the former command and the latter allusions
are not intelligible on any other supposition, than that Moses was
engaged in writing the book of the law, and intended to hand
it over to the nation in a complete form previous to his death ;
though it may not have been finished when the command itself
was written down and the words in question were uttered, but,
as Dent. xxxi. 9 and 24 distinctly affirm, may have been com-
pleted after his address to the people, a short time before his
death, by the arrangement and revision of the earlier portions,
and the addition of the fifth and closing book.
The validity of this evidence must not be restricted, how-
ever, to the fifth book of the Thorah, viz. Deuteronomy, alone ;
it extends to all five books, that is to say, to the whole connected
work. For it cannot be exeget ically_prQyed from Deuteronomy,
that the expression, "this law," in every passage of the book
from chap, l, .5. to xxxi. 24 relates to the so-called J^euterosis-ai
the law, i.e. to the fifth book alone, or that Deuteronomy was
written before the other four books, the contents of which it in-
variably presupposes. Nor can it be historically proved that th."
command respecting the copy of the law to be made for the
future king, and the regulations for the reading of the law at
the feast of Tabernacles, were understood by the Jews as refer-
ring to Deuteronomy only. Josephus says nothing about any
such limitation, but speaks, on the contrary, of the reading of
the law generally (o dp^iepew . . . dvayivaxrKerm roixi vo/iov<{
vaxrt, Ant. iv. 8, 12). The Rabbins, too, understand the words
" this law," in Deut. xxxi. 9 and 24, as relating to the whole
Thorah from Gen. i. to Deut. xxxiv., and only differ in opinion
pent. — vol. i. c
Digitized by VjOOQlC
26 GENERAL INTRODUCTION.
as to the question whether Moses wrote the whole work at once
after his last address, or whether he composed the earlier books
gradually, after the different events and the publication of the
law, and then completed the whole by writing Deuteronomy and
appending it to the four books in existence already. 1
1 Cf. Hacerniek's Introduction, and the opinions of the Rabbins on
Deut. xxxi. 9 and 21 in Meyer's adnotatt. ad Seder Olam. But as Delitzsch
s till mainta ins that Deut. xxxi. 9 sqq, merely proves that the popk of
Deuteronomy was wri t ten by Moses, and observes in support of this, that
at the time of the second temple it was an undoubted custonTto read that
book alone at the feast of Tabernacles in the year of release, as is evident
from Sota, c. 7, and a passage of Si/ri (one of the earliest Midrashim of the
school of Rab, born c. 165, d. 247), quoted by Rashi on Sota 41, we will
give a literal translation of the two passages for the benefit of those who
may not possess the books themselves, that they may judge for themselves
what ground there is for this opinion. The passage from the Sota is headed,
tectio regis quomodo, i.e. sectio a Reye prsdegenda, quibus ritihis recitata
est, and runs thus : — " Transacta festivitatis tabernaculorum prima die,
complete jam septimo anno et octavo ineunte, parabant Regi suggestum
ligneum in Atrio, huic insidebat juxta illud : a fine septem annorum, etc.
(Deut. xxxi. 10). Turn jEdituus (mere correctly, diaconus Synagogse)
sumto libro legis tradidit eum Primario coetus (synagogte), hie porrigebat
eum Antistiti, Antistes Summo Sacerdoti, Summus Sacerdos denique exhi-
bebat ipsum regi. Rex autem stans eum accipiebat, verum prselegens con-
sedit." Then follows a Haggada on a reading of King Agrippa's, and it
proceeds : — " Prselegit vero (rex) ab initio Deuteronomii usque ad ilia •
Audi Israel (c. 4, 4), qu» et ipse pnelegit. Turn subjecit (ex. c. 11, 13) :
Eritque si serio auscultaveritis, etc. Dehinc (ex. c. 14, 22) : Fideliter
decimato, etc. Postea (ex. c. 26, 22) : Cum absolveritis dare omnes deci-
mas, etc. Deinde sectionem de Rege (qua? habetur, c. 17, 14 sqq.). Deni-
que benedictiones et exsecrationes (ex. cc. 27 et 28) usque dum totam
Ulam sectionem finiret." But how can a mere tradition of the Talmud like
this, respecting the formalities with which the king was to read certain
sections of the Thorah on the second day of the feast of Tabernacles, be
adduced as a proof that in the year of release the book of Deuteronomy
alone, or certain extracts from it, were read to the assembled people? Even
if this rule was connected with the Mosaic command in Deut. xxxi. 10, or
derived from it, it does not follow in the remotest degree, that either by
ancient or modern Judaism the public reading of the Thorah appointed by
Moses was restricted to this one reading of the king's. And even if the
precept in the Talmud was so understood or interpreted by certain Rabbins,
the other passage quoted by Delitzsch from Si/ri in support of his opinion,
proves that this was not the prevailing view of the Jewish synagogue, or
of modern Judaism. The passage runs thus : " He (the king) shall write
ntftn rrrinn mvm DK- He shall do this himself, for he is not to use his
ancestor's copy. Mishneh in itself means nothing more than Thorah Mishneh
Digitized by VjOOQlC
§ 3. ORIGIN AND DATE OF THE BOOKS OF MOSES.
27
Still less can this evidence be set aside or rendered doubtful
by the objection, offered by Vaihinger, that "Moses cannot
have related his own death and burial (Deut. xxxiv.) ; and yet
the account of these forms an essential part of the work as we
possess it now, and in language and style bears a close resem-
blance to Num. xxvii. 12-23." The words in chap. xxxi. 24.
" When Moses had finished writing the words of this law in a
book to the end," are a sufficient proof of themselves that the
account of his death was added by a different hand, without its
needing to be distinctly stated. 1 The argument, moreover, re-
(Deuteronomy). How do I know that the other words of the Thorah were to
tie written also ? This is evident from the Scriptures, which add, ' to do all
the words of this law.' But if this be the case, why is it called Mishneh
Thorah f Because there would be a transformation of the law. Others say
that on the day of assembly Deuteronomy alone was read." From this passage
of the ancient Midrash we learn, indeed, that many of the Rabbins were of
opinion, that at the feast of Tabernacles in the sabbatical year, the book of
Deuteronomy only was to be read, but that the author himself was of a differ-
ent opinion ; and, notwithstanding the fact that he thought the expression
Mishneh Thorah must be understood as applying to the Deuterosis of the law,
still maintained that the law, of which the king was to have a copy taken,
was not only Deuteronomy, but the whole of the Pentateuch, and that he
endeavoured to establish this opinion by a strange but truly rabbinical in-
terpretation of the word Mishneh as denoting a transformation of the law.
1 The weakness of the argument against the Mosaic authorship of the
Thorah, founded upon the account of the death and burial of Moses, may
be seen from the_analogous case cited by Hengstenberg in his Dissertation*
on the Pentateuch. In the IS5T book of the Cdmmeniarii de statu religioni*
et reipublicse Carolo V. Csesare, by J. Sleidanus, the account of Charles
having abdicated and sailed to Spain is followed, without any break, by the
words : " Octobris die ultimo Joannes Sleidanus, J. U. L., vir et propter
eximias animi dotes et singularem doctrinam omni laude dignus, Argentorati e
vita decedit, atque ibidem honorifice sepelitur." This account of the death
and burial of Sleidan is given in every edition of his Commentarii, contain-
ing the 26th book, which the author added to the 25 books of the first
edition of April 1555, for the purpose of bringing down the life of Charles
T. to his abdication in September 1556. Even in the very first edition,
Argentorati 1558, it is added without a break, and inserted in the table of
contents as an integral part of the book, without the least intimation that
it is by a different hand. " No doubt the writer thought that it was quite
unnecessary to distinguish himself from the author of the work, as every-
body would know that a man could not possibly write an account of his
own death and burial." Yet any one who should appeal to this as a proof
that Sleidan was not the author of the Commentarii, would make himself
ridiculous in the eyes of every student of history.
Digitized by
Google
28 GENERAL INTRODUCTION.
tains all its force, even if not only chap, xxxiv., the blessing of
Moses in chap, xxxiii., whose title proves it to be an appendix
to the Thorah, and the song in chap, xxxii., are included in the
supplement added by a different hand, but if the supplement
commences at chap. xxxi. 24, or, as Delitzsch supposes, at chap,
xxxi. 9. For even in the latter case, the precepts of Moses on
the reading of the Thorah at the feast of Tabernacles of the
year of release, and on the preservation of the copy by the side
of the ark, would have been inserted in the original prepared by
Moses himself before it was deposited in the place appointed ;
and the work of Moses would have been concluded, after his
death, with the notice of his death and burial. The supplement
itself was undoubtedly added, not merely by a contemporary,
but by a man who was intimately associated with Moses, and
occupied a prominent position in the Israelitish community, so
that his testimony ranks with that of Moses.
Other objections to the Mosaic authorship we shall notice,
so far as they need any special refutation, in our commentary
upon the passages in question. At the close of our exposition
of the whole five books, we will review the modern hypotheses,
which regard the work as the resultant of frequent revisions.
§ 4. HISTOBICAL CHAHAOTER OP THE BOOKS OF HOSES.
Acknowledgment . of the his torical credib ility of the facts
recorded in the books of Moses requires a previous admission of
thlTreality o f a supe rnatu ral revelation fromTrbcL The wide-
spread naturalism o7 modern theologians, which deduces the
origin and development of the religious ideas and truths of the
Old Testament from the nature of the human mind, must of
necessity remit all that is said in the Pentateuch about direct or
supernatural manifestations or acts of God, to the region of fic-
titious sagas and myths, and refuse to admit the historical truth
and reality of miracles and prophecies. But such an opinion
must be condemned as neither springing from the truth nor
leading to the truth, on the simple ground that it is directly at
variance with what Christ and His apostles have taught in the
New Testament with reference to the Old, and also as leading
either to an unspiritual Deism or to a comfortless Pantheism,
Digitized by VjOOQlC
§ 4. HISTORICAL CHARACTER OF THE BOOKS OF MOSES 29
which ignores the working of God on the one hand, and the
inmost nature of the human mind on the other. Of the reality
of the divine revelations, accompanied by miracles and prophe-
cies, the Christian, t'.e. the believing Christian, has already a
pledge in the miracle of regeneration and the working of the
Holy Spirit within his own heart. He who has experienced in
himself this spiritual miracle of divine grace, will also recognise
as historical facts the natural miracles, by which the true and
living God established His kingdom of grace in Israel, wherever
the testimony of eye-witnesses ensures their credibility. Now
we have this testimony in the case of all the events of Moses'
own time, from his call downwards, or rather from his birth till
his death ; that is to say, of all the events which are narrated /
in the last four books of Moses. The l egal code contained in "VyCs
these books is now acknowledged by the most naturalistic oppo- 6f*(e
nents of _biblical revelation to have proceeded from Mo.ses.1. so far l(j -
asJts-BiOkt eiseiitwl elements :ire concerned ; and this is in itself ft£( r ]\ •,
;; Miir !e confession that the Mosaic age is not a dark ancTmythi- ^ t "' .
c al oue,_ but falls within the clear light of history. The events
of such an age might, indeed, by possibility be transmuted into
legends in the course of centuries; but only in cases where they
had been handed down from generation to generation by simple
word of mouth. Now this cannot apply to the events of the
Mosaic age ; for even the opponents of the Mosaic origin of the
Pentateuch admit, that the art of wr iting had h**™ ^»rm>A )iy
the Israelites from the Egyptians long before th at ti me, and
that not merely separate laws, but also memorable events, were
committed to writing. To this we must add, that the historical
events of the books of Moses contain no traces of legendary
transmutation, or mythical adornment of the actual facts. Cases
of discrepancy, which some critics have adduced as containing
proofs of this, have been pronounced by others of the same theo-
logical school to be quite unfounded. Thus Bertheau says, with
regard to the supposed contradictions in the different laws : " It
always appears to ine rash, to assume that there are contradic-
tions in the laws, and to adduce these as evidence that the con-
tradictory passages must belong to different periods. The state
of the case is really this : even if the Pentateuch did gradually
receive the form in which it has come down to us, whoever made
additions must have known what the existing contents were, and
Digitized by VjOOQlC
30 GENERAL INTRODUCTION.
would therefore not only admit nothing that was contradictory,
but would erase anything contradictory that might have found
its way in before. The liberty to make additions does not
appear to me to be either greater, or more involved in difficulties,
than that to make particular erasures." And on the supposed
discrepancies in the historical accounts, C. v. Lengerke himself
says : " The discrepancies which some critics have discovered in
the historical portions of Deuteronomy, as compared with the
earlier books, have really no existence." Throughout, in fact,
the pretended contradictions have for the most part been intro-
duced into the biblical text by the critics themselves, and have
so little to sustain them in the narrative itself, that on closer
research they resolve themselves into mere appearance, and the
differences can for the most part be easily explained. — The result
•is just the same in the case of the repetitions of the same historical
events, which have been regarded as legendary reduplications of
things that occurred but once. There are only two miraculous
occurrences mentioned in the Mosaic era which are said to have
I been repeated; only two cases, therefore, in which it is possi-
ble to place the repetition to the account of legendary fiction :
viz. the feeding with quails, and bringing of water from a rock.
But both of these are of such a character that the appearance of
identity vanishes entirely before the distinctness of the historical
accounts, and the differences in the attendant circumstances.
The first feeding with quails took place in the desert of Sin,
before the arrival of the Israelites at Sinai, in the second month
of the first year ; the second occurred after their departure from
Sinai, in the second month of the second year, at the so-called
graves of lust. The latter was sent as a judgment or plague,
which brought the murnrarers into the graves of their lust ; the
former merely supplied the deficiency of animal food. The
water was brought from the rock the first time in Rephidim,
during the first year of their journey, at a spot which was called
in consequence Massah and Meribah ; the second time, at Ka-
desh, in the fortieth year, — and on this occasion Moses and Aaron
sinned so grievously that they were not allowed to enter Canaan.
It is apparently different with the historical contents of the
book of Genesis. If Genesis was written by Moses, even be-
tween the history of the patriarchs and the time of Moses there
is an interval of four or five centuries, in which the tradition
Digitized by VjOOQlC
§ 4. HISTORICAL CHARACTER OF THE BOOKS OF MOSES. 31
might possibly have been corrupted or obscured. But to infer
the reality from the bare possibility would be a very unscientific
proceeding, and at variance with the simplest rules of logic.
Now, if we look at the history which has been handed down to
us in the book of Genesis from the primitive times of the human
race and the patriarchal days of Israel, t he traditions from _the
primitive times are restric ted t o a few simple incident s na turally
described, and to genealogies which exhibit the development of
the earliest families, and the origin of the different nations, in the
plainest possible style. These transmitted accounts have such a
g ennine historical stamp , that no well-founded question can be
raised concerning their credibility; but, on the contrary, all
thorough historical research into the origin of different nations
o nly tends to their confirma tion. This also applies to the patri-
archal history, in which, with the exception of the divine mani-
festations, nothing whatever occurs that could in the most remote
degree call to mind the myths and fables of the heathen nations,
as to the lives and deeds of their heroes and progenitors. There
are three separate accounts, indeed, in the lives of Abraham and
Isaac of an abduction of their wives ; and modern critics can
see nothing more in these, than three different mythical embel-
lishments of one single event. But on a close and unprejudiced
examination of the three accounts, the attendant circumstances
in all three cases are so peculiar, and correspond so exactly to
the respective positions, that the appearance of a legendary mul-
tiplication vanishes, and all three events must rest upon a good
historical foundation. " As the history of the world, and of the
plan _of sa lvation, aboun ds not onl y in repetitions of wonderful
e vents, but also in wonderful repetitions, critics had need act
modestly, l est in e xcess of wisdom they become foolisbjaad
ridiculous" (Delitzsch). Again, we find that in the guidance of
the human race, from the earliest ages downwards, more espe-
cially in the lives of the three patriarchs, God prepared the way
by revelations for the covenant which He made at Sinai with the
people of Israel. But in these preparations we can discover no
sign of any legendary and unhistorical transference of later cir-
cumstances and institutions, either Mosaic or post-Mosaic, to the
patriarchal age ; and they are sufficiently justified by the facts
themselves, since the Mosaic economy cannot possibly have been
brought into the world, like a dew ex machina, without the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
32 GENERAL INTRODUCTION.
slightest previous preparation. The natural simpl icity of the
patriarchal^ life, which shines out in every narrative, is another
thing that produces on every unprejudiced reader the impression
of a genuine historical tradition. This tradition, therefore, even
though for the most part transmitted from generation to genera-
tion by word of mouth alone, has every title to credibility, since
it was perpetuated within the patriarchal family, " in which,
according to divine command (Gen. xviii. 19), the manifesta-
tions of God in the lives of the fathers were handed down as an
heirloom, and that with all the greater ease, in proportion to the
longevity of the patriarchs, the simplicity of their life, and the
closeness of their seclusion from foreign and discordant influ-
ences. Such a tradition would undoubtedly be guarded with
the greatest care. It was the foundation of the very existence
of the chosen family, the bond of its unity, the mirror of its
duties, the pledge of its future history, and therefore its dearest
inheritance" (Delitzsch). But we are by no means to suppose
that all the accounts and incidents in the book of Genesis were
dependent upon oral tradition ; on the contrary, there is much
which was simply copied from written documents handed down
from the earliest times. Not only the ancient genealogies, which
may be distinguished at once from the historical narratives by
their antique style, with its repetitions of almost stereotyped
formularies, and by the peculiar forms of the names which they
contain, but certain historical sections — such, for example, as
the account of the war in Gen. xiv., with its superabundance of
genuine and exact accounts of a primitive age, both historical
and geographical, and its old words, which had disappeared from
the living language before the time of Moses, as well as many
others — were unquestionably copied by Moses from ancient docu-
ments. (See Havernictt 's Introduction.)
To all this must be added the fact, that the historical con
tents, not of Genesis only, but of all the five books of Moses,
are p ervaded and sustained b y thespjri^ofjru e religio n. This
spirit has impressed a seal of truth upon the historical writings
of the Old Testament, which distinguishes them from all merely
human historical compositions, and may be recognised in the
fact, that to all who yield themselves up to the influence of the
Spirit which lives and moves in them, it points the way to the
knowledge of that salvation which God Himself has revealed.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
(GENESIS.)
INTRODUCTION.
CONTENTS, DESIGN, AND PLAN OF TIIE BOOK OF GENESIS.
j HE first book of Moses, which has the superscription
nW3 in the original, reveai,<; K6<t/aov in the Cod.
Alex, of the LXX., and is called liber creatUmia
by the Rabbins, has received the name of Genesis
from its entire contents. Commencing with the creation of
the heaven and the earth, and concluding with the death of the
patriarchs Jacob and Joseph, this book supplies us with infor-
mation with regard not only to the first beginnings and earlier
stages of the world and of the human race, but also to those of
the divine institutions which laid the foundation for the king-
dom of God. Genesis commences with the_ creation of the
world, because the heavens and the earth form the appointed
s phere, s6~Tar~ as~tTme arid space are concerned, for the .kingdom
o f God ; because God, according to His eternal counsel, ap-
pointed the world to be the scene both for the revelation of His
invisible essence, and also for the operations of His eternal love
within and among His creatures ; and because in the beginning
He created the world to be and to become the kingdom of God.
The creation of the heaven and the earth, therefore, receives as
its centre, paradise ; and in paradise, man, created in the image
of God, is the head and crown of all created beings. The his-
tory of the world and of the kingdom of God begins with him.
His fall from God brought death and corruption into the whole
creation (Gen. iii. 17 sqq. ; Eom. viii. 19 sqq.) ; his redemp-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
34 INTRODUCTION.
tion from the fall will be completed in and with the glorifi-
cation of the heavens and the earth (Isa. lxv. 17, lxvi. 22 ; 2
Pet. iii. 13 ; Rev. xxi. 1). By sin, men have departed and
separated themselves from God; but God, in His infinite mercy,
has not cut Himself off from men, His creatures. Not only
did He announce redemption along with punishment imme-
diately after the fall, but from that time forward He continued
to reveal Himself to them, that He might draw them back to
Himself, and lead them from the path of destruction to the way
of salvation. And through these operations of God upon the
world in theophanies, or revelations by word and deed, the histo-
rical development of the human race became a history of the
plan of salvation. The book of Genesis narrates that history in
broad, deep, comprehensive sketches, from its first beginning to
the time of the patriarchs, whom God chose from among the
nations of the earth to be the bearers of salvation for the entire
world. This long space of 2300 years (from Adam to the
flood, 1656 ; to the entrance of Abram into Canaan, 365 ; to
Joseph's death, 285 ; in all, 2306 years) is divisible into two
periods. T he first p eriod J^pb r gjl p 5 t^e dBKelopmeat_of_the
h uman race f rom its first creation and fall to its dispersion over
the earthy and the division of the one race into many nafidhs,
wifEdifferent languages (chap. ii. 4-xi. 26) ; and is divided by
t he floo d into two distinct ages ? which we may_call the jprimeval
age and the_preparatory~age. All that is related of the primeval
age, from Adam to Noah, is the history of the fall ; the mode of
life, and longevity of the two families which descended from the
two sons of Adam ; and the universal spread of sinful corruption
in consequence of the intermarriage of these two families, who
differed so essentially in their relation to God (chap. ii. 4-vi. 8).
The primeval history closes with the flood, in which the old
world perished (chap. vi. 9-viii. 19). Of the preparatory age,
from Noah to Terah the father of Abraham, we have an account
of the covenant which God made with Noah, and of Noah's
blessing and curse ; the genealogies of the families and tribes
which descended from his three sons ; an account of the con-
fusion of tongues, and the dispersion of the people ; and the
genealogical table from Shem to Terah (chap. viii. 20-xi. 26). —
Th ^xer.ond period consists of thejatriiirrhal era. From this we
have an elaborate description cf theTIves of the three patriarchs
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CONTENTS, DESIGN, AND PLAN OF THE BOOK OF GENESIS. 35
of Israel, the family chosen to be the people of God, from the
call of Abraham to the death of Joseph (chap. xi. 27-1.). Thus .
the history of humanity, is gathered up into the history of the
one family, which received the promise, that God would multiply
it into a great people, or rather into a multitude of peoples,
would make it a blessing to all the families of the earth, and
would give it the land of Canaan for an everlasting possession.
This general survey will suffice to bring out the design of
the book of Genesis, viz., to relate the early history of the Old
Testament kingdom of God. By a simple and unvarnished
description of the development of the world under the guidance
and discipline of God, it shows how God, as the preserver and
governor of the world, dealt with the human race which He had
created in His own image, and how, notwithstanding their fall
and through the misery which ensued, He prepared the way
for the fulfilment of His original design, and the establishment
of the kingdom which should bring salvation to the world.
Whilst by virtue of the blessing bestowed in their creation, the
human race was increasing from a single pair to families and
nations, and peopling the earth; God stemmed the evil, which sin
had introduced, by words and deeds, by the announcement of
His will in commandments, promises, and threats, and by the
infliction of punishments and judgments upon the despisers of
His mercy. Side by side with the law of expansion from the
unity of a family to the plurality of nations, there was carried
on from the very first a law of separation between the ungodly
and those that feared God, for the purpose of preparing and
preserving a holy seed for the rescue and salvation of the whole
human race. This double law is the organic principle which
lies at the root of all the separations, connections, and disposi-
tions which constitute the history of the book of Genesis. In
accordance with the law of reproduction, which prevails in the
preservation and increase of the human race, the genealogies
show the historical bounds within which the persons and events
that marked the various epochs are confined ; whilst the law of
selection determines the arrangement and subdivision of such
historical materials as are employed.
So far as the plan of the book is concerned, the historical
contents are divided into ten groups, with the uniform heading,
" These are the generations'' (with the exception of chap. v. 1 :
Digitized by VjOOQlC
36 INTRODUCTION.
"This is the book of the generations"); the account of the
creation forming the substratum of the whole. These groups
consist of the Tholedoth : 1. of the heavens and the earth (chap,
ii. 4-iv. 26) ; 2. of Adam (v. 1-vi. 8) ; 3. of Noah (vi. 9-ix.
29) ; 4. of Noah's sons (x. 1-xi. 9) ; 5. of Shem (xi. 10-26) ;
6. of Terah (xi. 27-xxv. 11) ; 7. of Ishmael (xxv. 12-18) ; 8.
of Isaac (xxv. 19-xxxv. 29) ; 9. of Esau (xxxvi.) ; and 10. of
Jacob (xxxvii.-l.). There are five groups in the first period,
and five in the second. Although, therefore, the two periods
diffettconsiderably with regard to their scope and contents, in
their historical importance to the book of Genesis they are upon
a par ; a nd the number ten s tampsnpon jhe e ntire boo k, or
rather upon the early history of Israel recorded in the book, the
pViqraptP r of completeness . This arrangement flowed quite
naturally from the contents and purport of the book. The two
periods, of which the early history of the kingdom of God in
Israel consists, evidently constitute two great divisions, so far as
their internal character is concerned. All that is related of
the first period, from Adam to Terah, is obviously connected, no
doubt, with the establishment of the kingdom of God in Israel,
but only in a remote degree. The account of paradise exhibits
the primary relation of man to God and his position in the
world. In the fall, the necessity is shown for the interposition
of God to rescue the fallen. In the promise which followed the
curse of transgression, the first glimpse of redemption is seen.
The division of the descendants of Adam into a God-fearing and
an ungodly race exhibits the relation of the whole human race
to God. The flood prefigures the judgment of God upon the
ungodly; and the preservation and blessing of Noah, the pro-
tection of the godly from destruction. And lastly, in the
genealogy and division of the different nations on the one hand,
and the genealogical table of Shem on the other, the selection of
one nation is anticipated to be the recipient and custodian of
the divine revelation. The special preparations for the training
of this nation commence with the call of Abraham, and consist
of the care bestowed upon Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and their
posterity, and of the promises which they received. The leading
events in the first period, and the prominent individuals in the
second, also furnished, in a simple and natural way, the requisite
points of view for grouping the historical materials of each under
Digitized by VjOOQlC
THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES L 1- II. 8. 37
a fivefold division. The proof of this will be found in the ex-
position. "Within the different groups themselves the arrange-
ment adopted is this : the materials are arranged and distri-
buted according to the law of divine selection ; the familie s
whjch ^ branched off from the main line are noticed first of all:
and when they have been removed from the general "scope of
the history, the course of the main line is more elaborately de-
scribed, and the history itself is carried forward. According to
this plan, which is strictly adhered to, the history of Cain and
his family precedes that of Seth and his posterity ; the gene-
alogy of Japhet and Ham stands before that of Shem ; the
history of Ishmael and Esau, before that of Isaac and Jacob ;
and the death of Terah, before the call and migration of Abra-
ham to Canaan. In this regularity of composition, according to
a .settled plan, the book of Genesis may. .clearly he seen, to.be
the careful production of one single author, who looked at the
historical development of the human race in the light of divine
revelation, and thus exhibited it as a complete and well arranged
introduction to the history of the Old Testament kingdom of
God.
THE CREATION OF THE WORLD.
CHAP. I. l-II. 3
The account of the creation, its commencement, progress,
and completion, bears the marks, both in form and substance,
of a historical document in which it is intended that we should
accept as actual truth, not only the assertion that God created
the heavens, and the earth, and all that lives and moves in the
world, but also the description of the creation itself in all its
several stages. If we look merely at the form of this document,
i ts place at the beg inning of the book of Genesis is sufficient to
warxanj.^ths. expectation that, it will give us history, and riot
fictio n^gr human speculation. As the development of the
human family has been from the first a historical fact, and as
man really occupies that place in the world which this record
assigns him, the creation of man. as well as that of the earth on
Digitized by VjOOQlC
38 THE FIEST BOOK OF MOSF.S.
which, and the heaven for which, he is to live, must also be a.
work of God, i.e. a fact of objective truth and reality. The
grand simplicity of the account is in perfect harmony with the
fact. " T he whole narrative is so ber, definitej^lear^ an d, con -
crete. The historical events described contain a rich treasury
of speculative thoughts and poetical glory ; but they themselves
are free from the influence of human invention and human
philosophizing" (Delitzsch). This is also true of the arrange-
ment of the whole. The work of creation does not fall, as
Herder and others maintain, into two triads of days, with the
work of the second answering to that of the first. For although
the creation of the light on the first day seems to correspond to
that of the light-bearing stars on the fourth, there is no reality
in the parallelism which some discover between the second and
third days on the one hand, and the third and fourth on. the
other. On the second day the firmament or atmosphere is
formed ; on the fifth, the fish and fowl. On the third, after the
sea and land are separated, the plants are formed ; on the sixth,
the animals of the dry land and man. Now, if the creation of
the fowls which fill the air answers to that of the firmament,
the formation of the fish as the inhabitants of the waters ought
to be assigned to the sixth day, and not to the fifth, as being
parallel to the creation of the seas. The creation of the fish
and fowl on the same day is an evident proof that a parallelism
between the first three days of creation and the last three is not
intended, and does not exist. Moreover, if the division of the
work of creation into so many days had been the result of
human reflection ; the creation of man, who was appointed lord
of the earth, would certainly not have been assigned to the same
day as that of the beasts and reptiles, but would have been kept
1 'I H distinct from the creation of the beasts, and allotted to the seventh
(1 t/"" I 'jr \i , ^ a y> m which the creation was completed, — a meaning which
P A *" u v Richers and Keerl have actually tried to force upon the text of
' , >M the Bible. In the different acts of creation we perceive indeed
an_evident progress from the £eneraTtoTlie particular, from the
lower to the higher orders of creatures, or rather a steady advance
towards more and more concrete forms. Bu_t o n the fo urth day
this progress is interrupted in a way which we can not expla in.
Tn the transition from the creation of the plants to that of sun,
moon, and stars, it is impossible to discover either a "well-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. I. l-II. 3. 39
arranged and constant progress," or " a genetic advance," since
the stars are not intermedi ate links between .plants and animals,
and, in fact, have no place at all in the scale of earthly creatures.
— If we pass on to the contents of onr account of the creation, a r
they differ as widely from all other cosmogonies as tru th from "
fiction. Those o f heathen .nations are either hylozojgjjcal, de-
ducing the origin of life and living beings from some primeval
matter ; or pantheistical , regarding the whole world as emanating
from a common divine substance ; or mythological , tracing both
gods and men to a chaos or world-egg. They do not even rise
to the notion of a creation, much less to the knowledge of an
almighty God, as the Creator of all things. 1 Even in the
Etruscan and Persian myths, which correspond so remarkably
to the biblical account that they must have been derived from it,
the successive acts of creation are arranged according to the
suggestions of human probability and adaptation.* In contrast
1 According to Berosus and Syncellus, the Ch aldean mv jh represents the
"All" as consisting of darkness and water, filled with monstrous creatures,
and ruled by a woman, Markaya, or 'Oftopaxx (? Ocean). Bel divided the
darkness, and cut the woman into two halves, of which he formed the
heaven and the earth ; he then cut off his own head, and from the drops of
blood men were formed. — According to the Phoenician myth of Sancht-
niathon, the beginning of the All was a movement of dark air, and a dark,
turbid chaos. By the union of the spirit with the All, Mar, i.e. slime, was
formed, from which every seed of creation and the universe was deve-
loped ; and the heavens were made in the form of an egg, from which the
sun and moon, the stars and constellations, sprang. By the heating of tho f y ; -t
earth and sea there arose winds, clouds and rain, lightning and thunder, ^ , r (
the roaring of which wakened up sensitive beings, so that living creatures / lj**
of both sexes moved in the waters and upon the earth. In another passage >-^ vV ^
Sanchuniathon represents KoXvi* (probably ira ^ip, the moaning of the
wind) and his wife B<c*v (bohi) as producing A/«» and trpari'/ovoi;, two
mortal men, from whom sprang Yhos and Tina, the inhabitants of Phoe-
nicia. — It is well known from Hesiod's theogony how the Grecian myth
represents the gods as coming into existence at the same time as the world.
The numerous inventions of the Indians, again, all agree in this, that they
picture the origin of the world as an emanation from the absolute, through
Brahma's thinking, or through the contemplation of a primeval being called
Tad (it). — Buddhism also acknowledges no God as creator of the world,
teaches no creation, but simply describes the origin of the world and the
beings that inhabit it as the necessary consequence of former acts performed
by these beings themselves.
2 According to the Etruscan saga, which Suidas quotes from a his-
torian, who was a " xxp xirroif (the Tyrrhenians) t/fz-upo; dviip (therefor*
Digitized by VjOOQlC
40
THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
with all these mythical inventions, the biblical account snines out
in the clear light of truth, and proves itself by its contents to be
an integral part of the revealed history, of which it is accepted
as the pedestal throughout the whole of the sacred Scriptures.
This is not the case with the Old Testament only ; but in the
New Testament also it is accepted and t anpht by Chri st and the
apostles as the basis of the divine revelation. To select only a
few from the many passages of the Old and New Testaments,
in which God is referred to as the Creator of the heavens and
the earth, and the almighty operations of the living God in the
world are based upon the fact of its creation : in Ex. xx. 9-11,
xxxi. 12—17, the command to keep the Sabbath is founded upon
the fact that God rested on the seventh day, when the work of
creation was complete ; and in Ps. viii. and civ., the creation is
depicted as a work of divine omnipotence in close adherence to
the narrative before us. From the creation of man, as described
in Gen. i. 27 and ii. 24, Christ demonstrates the indissoluble
character of marriage as a divine ordinance (Matt. xix. 4-6) ;
Peter speaks of the earth as standing out of the water and in
the water by the word of God (2 Pet. iii. 5) ; and the author of
the Epistle to the Hebrews, " starting from Gen. ii. 2, describes
it as the motive principle of all history, that the Sabbath of God
is to become the Sabbath of the creature" (DelitztcK).
The biblical account of the creation can also vindicate its
claim to be true and actual history, in the presence of the
doctrines of philosophy and the established results of natural
science. S o long, in deed, as philosophy undertakes to construct
tte_uniyerse jxom general ideas, it will be utterly jinable to
comprehend the creation ; "But ideas will never explain the exisfc-
not a native)," God created the world in six periods of one thousand year.\
each : in the first, the heavens and the earthy; in the second, the firmament ; <
in the third, the sea and other waters of the earth; in the fourth, sun, moon, >
and stars ; in the fifth, the beasts of the air, the water, and the land ; in '
the sixth, men. The world will last twelve thousand years, the human race
six thousand. — According to the saga of the Zend in Avesta, the supreme
Being Ormuzd created the visible world by his wonrin-eix periods or thou-
sands of years : (1) the heaven, with the stare ; (2) the water on the earth,
with the clouds ; (3) the earth, with the mountain Alborj and the other
mountains ; (4) the trees ; (5) the beasts, which sprang from the primeval
beast; (6) men, the first of whom was Kajomorts. Every one of these
separate creations is celebrated by a festival. The world will last twelve
thousand years.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. L 1— II. 8. 41
cnce of t hings. Creation is an ikat-Qf-_the_.p.e£Sflflal God 3 not a
process of nature , the development of which can be traced to
the laws of birth and decay that prevail in the created world.
But the work of God, as described in the history of creation, is
in perfect harmony with the correct notions of divine omnipo-
tence, wisdom, and goodness. The assertion, so frequently made,
that the course of the creation takes its form from the Hebrew
week, which was already in existence, and the idea of God's rest-
ing on the seventh day, from the institution of the Hebrew Sab-
bath, is entirely without foundation. Thersjsjaa allusion In
Gen, ii. 2, 3 to the Sa bbath of the Israelites ; and the week of
sevendays_js older than ._Jhe. Sabbath _of the 3ewish covenant.
Natural research, again, will never explain the origin of the
universe, or even of the earth ; for the creation lies beyond the
limits of the territory within its reach. By all modest natural-
ists, therefore, it is assumed that the origin of matter, or of the
original material of the world, was due to an act of divine crea-
tion. But there is no firm ground for the conclusion which they
draw, on the basis of this assumption, with regard to the forma-
tion or development of the world from its first chaotic condition
into a fit abode for man. All the theories which have been
adopted, from Descartes to the present day, are not the simple
and well-established inductions of natural science founded upon
careful observation, but combinations of partial discoveries em-
pirically made, with speculative ideas of very questionable worth.
The periods of creation, which modern geology maintains with
such confidence, that not a few theologians have accepted them
as undoubted and sought to bring them into harmony with the
scriptural account of the creation, if not to deduce them from
the Bible itself, are inferences partly from the successive strata
which compose the crust of the earth, and partly from the
various fossil remains of plants and animals to be found in
those strata. The former are regarded as proofs of successive
formation; and from the difference between the plants and
animals found in a fossil state and those in existence now, the
conclusion is drawn, that their creation must have preceded the
present formation, which either accompanied or was closed by
the advent of man. But it is not difficult to see that the former
of these conclusions could only be regarded as fully established,
if the process by which the different strata were formed were
pent. — vol. l. r>
Digitized by VjOOQlC
42 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
clearly and fully known, or if the different formations were
always found lying in the same order, and could be readily dis-
tinguished from one another. But with regard to the origin of
the different species of rock, geologists, as is well known, are
divided into two contending schools : the Neptunists, who attri-
bute all the mountain formations to deposit in water ; and the
Plutonists, who trace all the non-fossiliferous rocks to the action
of heat. According to the Neptunists, the crystalline rocks are
the earliest or primary formations ; according to the Plutonists,
the granite burst through the transition and stratified rocks, and
were driven up from within the earth, so that they are of later
date. But neither theory is sufficient to account in this mecha-
nical way for all the phenomena connected with the relative
position of the rocks ; consequently, a third theory, which sup-
poses the rocks to be the result of chemical processes, is steadily
gaining ground. Now if the rocks, both crystalline and strati-
fied, were formed, not in any mechanical way, but by chemical
processes, in which, besides fire and water, electricity, galvanism,
magnetism, and possibly other forces at present unknown to
physical science were at work; the different formations may
have been produced contemporaneously and laid one upon
another. Till natural science has advanced beyond mere opi-
nion and conjecture, with regard to the mode in which the rocks
were formed and their positions determined ; there can be no
ground for assuming that conclusions drawn from the successive
order of the various strata, with regard to the periods of their
formation, must of necessity be true. This is the more apparent,
when we consider, on the one hand, that even the principal for-
mations (the primary, transitional, stratified, and tertiary), not to
mention the subdivisions of which each of these is composed, do
not always occur in the order laid down in the system, but in
not a few instances the order is reversed, crystalline primary
rocks lying upon transitional, stratified, and tertiary formations
(granite, syenite, gneiss, etc., above both Jura-limestone and
chalk) ; and, on the other hand, that not only do the different
leading formations and their various subdivisions frequently
shade off into one another so imperceptibly, that no boundary
line can be drawn between them and the species distinguished
by oryctognosis are not sharply and clearly defined in nature,
but that, instead of surrounding the entire globe, they are all
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. I. 1— II. 3. 43
met with in certain localities only, whilst whole series of inter-
mediate links are frequently missing, the tertiary formations
especially being universally admitted to be only partial. — Tlw
second of these conclusions also stands or falls with the assump-
tions on which they are founded, viz. with the three, proposi-
tions : (1) that each of the fossiliferous formations contains an
order of plants and animals peculiar to itself ; (2) that these are
so totally different from the existing plants and animals, that
the latter could not have sprung from them ; (3) that no fossil
remains of man exist of the same antiquity as the fossil remains
of animals. Not one of these can be regarded as an established
truth, or as the unanimously accepted result of geognosis. The
assertion so often made as an established fact, that the transition
rocks contain none but fossils of the lower orders of plants and
animals, that mammalia are first met with in the Trias, Jura,
and chalk formations, and warm-blooded animals in the tertiary
rocks, has not been confirmed by continued geognostic re-
searches, but is more and more regarded as untenable. Even
the frequently expressed opinion, that in the different forms of
plants and animals of the successive rocks there is a gradual and
to a certain extent progressive development of the animal and
vegetable world, has not commanded universal acceptance.
Numerous instances are known, in which the remains of one
and the same species occur not only in two, but in several suc-
cessive formations, and there are some types that occur in nearly
all. And the widely spread notion, that the fossil types are alto-
gether different from the existing families of plants and animals,
is one of the unscientific exaggerations of actual facts. All the
fossil plants and animals can be arranged in the orders and
classes of the existing flora and fauna. Even with regard to the
genera there is no essential difference, although many of the
existing types are far inferior in size to the forms of the old
world. It is only the species that can be shown to differ, either
entirely or in the vast majority of cases, from species in exist-
ence now. But even if all the species differed, which can by
no means be proved, this would be no valid evidence that the
existing plants and animals had not sprung from those that
have passed away, so long as natural science is unable to obtain
any clear insight into the origin and formation of species, and
the question as to the extinction of a species or its transition into
Digitized by VjOOQlC
44 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
another has met with no satisfactory solution. Lastly, even now
the occurrence of fossil human bones among those of animals
that perished at least before the historic age, can no longer
be disputed, although Central Asia, the cradle of the human
race, has not yet been thoroughly explored by palaeontologists.
— If then the premises from which the geological periods have
been deduced are of such a nature that not one of them is
firmly established, the different theories as to the formation
of the earth also rest upon two questionable assumptions, viz.
(1) that the immediate working of God in the creation was re-
stricted to the production of the chaotic matter, and that the
formation of this primary matter into a world peopled by in-
numerable organisms and living beings proceeded according to
the laws of nature, which have been discovered by science as in
force in the existing world ; and (2) that all the changes, which
the world and its inhabitants have undergone since the creation
was finished, may be measured by the standard of changes ob-
served in modern times, and still occurring from time to time.
But the Bible actually mentions two events of the primeval age,
whose effect upon the form of the earth and the animal and
vegetable world no natural science can explain. We refer to
the curse pronounced upon the earth in consequence of the fall
of the progenitors of our race, by which even the animal world
was made subject to <f>0opa (Gen. iii. 17, and Rom. viii. 20) ;
and the flood, by which the earth was submerged even to the
tops of the highest mountains, and all the living beings on the
dry land perished, with the exception of those preserved by
Noah in the ark. Hence, even if geological doctrines do con-
tradict the account of the creation contained in Genesis, they
cannot shake the credibility of the Scriptures.
But if the biblical account of the creation has full claim to
be regarded as historical truth, the question arises, whence it
was obtained. The opinion that the Israelites drew it from
the cosmogony of this or the other ancient people, and altered
it according to their own religious ideas, will need no further
refutation, after what we have said respecting the cosmogonies
of other nations. Whenee^thendid Israel obtain a pure kn ow-
ledgeofGod, such as we cannot findTITany heathen nation, or
in the most celebrated of the wise men of antiquity, if not from
divine revelation ? This is the source from which the biblical
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. I. l-II. 3. 46
account of the creation springs. God ^^ed_it_tomen, — not
first to Moses or Abraham, but undoubtedly to the first men,
since without this revelation they eould not have understood
either their relation to God or their true position in the world.
The account contained in Genesis does not lie, as Hofmann
says, " within that sphere which was open to man through his
historical nature, so that it ma" be regarded as the utterance of
the knowledge possessed by the first man of things which pre-
ceded his own existence, and which he might possess, without
needing any special revelation, if only the present condition of
the world lay clear and transparent before him." By simple i
int uition the first man might discern what nature had effected, '
v jz. the existing condi tion~oT the world, and possibly also ks J
ca usality, but no t the fact that it was created in six days, or the t
successive acts of creation, and the sanctification of the seventh
day. _ Uur record contains not merely religious truth transformed
into history, but the true and actual history of a work of God,
which preceded the existence of man, and to which he owes his
existence. Of this work he could only have obtained his know-
ledge, through divine revelation, by the direct instruction of
God. Nor could he have obtained it by means of a vision.
The seven days' works are not so many " prophetico-historical
tableaux," which were spread before the mental eye of the seer,
whether of the historian or the first man. The account before
us does not contain the slightest marks of a vision, is no picture
of creation, in which every line betrays the pencil of a paintei
rather than the pen of a historian, but is obviously a historical
narrative, which we could no more transform into a vision than
the account of paradise or of the fall. As God revealed Him-
self to the first man not in visions, but by coming to him in a
visible form, teaching him His will, and then after his fall
announcing the punishment (ii. 16, 17, iii. 9 sqq.) ; as He
talked with Moses " face to face, as a man with his friend,"
" mouth to mouth," not in vision or dream : so does the written
account of the Old Testament revelation commence, not with
visions, but with actual history. The manner in which God
instructed the first men with reference to the creation must be
judged according to the intercourse carried on by Him, as
Creator and Father, with these His creatures and children.
What God revealed to them upon this subject, they transmitted
Digitized by VjOOQlC
4G THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
to their children and descendants, together with everything of
significance and worth that they had experienced and dis-
covered for themselves. This tradition was kept in faithful
remembrance by the family of the godly ; and even in the con-
fusion of tongues it was not changed in its substance, but
simply transferred into the new form of the language spoken by
the Semitic tribes, and thus handed down from, generation to
generation along with the knowledge and worship of the true
God, until it became through Abraham the spiritual inheritance
of the chosen race. Nothing certain can be decided as to the
period when it was committed to writing ; probably some tin**
before Moses, who inserted it as a written record in the Thorah
of Israel.
Chap. i. 1. " In Hie beginning God created Hie heaven and the
earth." — Heaven and earth have not existed from all eternity,
but had a beginning ; nor did they arise by emanation from an
absolute substance, but were created by God. This sentence,
which stands at the head of the records of revelation, is not a
mere heading, nor a summary of the history of the creation, but
a declaration of the primeval act of God, by which the universe
was called into being. That this verse is not a heading merely,
is evident from the fact that the following account of the course
of the creation commences with 1 (and), which connects the
different acts of creation with the fact expressed in ver. 1, as
the primary foundation upon which they rest. n^B^oa (in the
beginning) is used absolutely, like iv apXP m John i. 1, and
n'^Nno in Isa. xlvi. 10. The following clause cannot be treated
as subordinate, either by rendering it, " in the beginning when
God created . . , the earth was," etc., or "in the beginning
when God created . . (but the earth was then a chaos, etc.),
God said, Let there be light " (Ewald and Bunsen). The first is
opposed to the grammar of the language, which would require
ver. 2 to commence with pKn vim ; the second to the simplicity
of style which pervades the whole chapter, and to which so
involved a sentence would be intolerable, apart altogether from
the fact that this construction is invented for the simple purpose
of getting rid of the doctrine of a creatio ex nihilo, which is so
repulsive to modern Pantheism. JVKW in itself is a relative
notion, indicating the commencement of a series of things or
events ; but here the context gives it the meaning of the very
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. I. 1. 47
first beginning, the commencement of the world, when time
itself began. The statement, that in the beginning God created
the heaven and the earth, not only precludes the idea of the
eternity of the world a parte ante, but shows that the creation of
the heaven and the earth was the actual beginning of all things.
The verb tQ3, indeed, to judge from its use in Josh. xvii. 15,
18, where it occurs in the Piel (to hew out), means lit erall y "to
cut, or h ew," but in Kal it always means to create, and is only
applied to a divine creation, the production of that which had
no existence before. It is never joined with an accusative of
the material, although it does not exclude a pre-existent material
unconditionally, but is used for the creation of man (ver. 27,
ch. v. 1, 2), and of everything new that God creates, whether
in the kingdom of nature (Num. xvi. SO) or of that of grace
(Ex. xxxiv. 10 ; Ps. li. 10, etc.). In this verse, however, the
existence of any primeval material is precluded by the object
created : " the heaven and the earth." This expression is fre-
quently employed to denote the world, or universe, for which
there was no single word in the Hebrew language ; the universe
consisting of a twofold whole, and the distinction between
heaven and earth being essentially connected with the notion of
the world, the fundamental condition of its historical develop-
ment (vid. ch. xiv. 19, 22 ; Ex. xxxi. 17). In the earthly
creation this division is repeated in the distinction between spirit
and nature; and in man, as the microcosm, in that between
spirit and body. Through sin this distinction was changed into
an actual opposition between heaven and earth, flesh and spirit ;
but with the complete removal of sin, this opposition will cease
again, though the distinction between heaven and earth, spirit
and body, will remain, in such a way, however, that the earthly
and corporeal will be completely pervaded by the heavenly and
spiritual, the new Jerusalem coming down from heaven to earth,
and the earthly body being transfigured into a spiritual body
(Rev. xxi. 1, 2; 1 Cor. xv. 35 sqq.). Hence, if in the begin-
ning God created the heaven and the earth, " there is nothing
belonging to the composition of the universe, either in material
or form, which had an existence out of God prior to this divine
act in the beginning" (Delitzsch). This is also shown in the
connection between our verse and the one which follows : " and
the earth was without form and void," not before, but when, or
Digitized by VjOOQlC
48 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
after God created it. From this it is evi dentihat_t he void and
fnrmle^ state pf the earth was pot_j?ncrea.ted, or withoutbe-
ginning. At the same time it is obvious from the creative acts
which follow (vers. 3-18), that the heaven and earth, as God
created them in the beginning, were not the well-ordered uni-
verse, but the world in its elementary form ; just as Euripides
applies the expression ovpavbs km, yala to the undivided mass
(fiopcjyfj iila), which was afterwards formed into heaven and
earth.
Vers. 2-5. The First Day. — Though treating of the crea-
tion of the heaven and the earth, the writer, both here and in
what follows, describes with minuteness the original condition
and progressive formation of the earth alone, and says nothing
more respecting the heaven than is actually requisite in order to
show its connection with the earth. He is writing for inhabitants
of the earth, and for religious ends; not to gratify curiosity,
but to strengthen faith in God, the Creator of the universe.
What is said in ver. 2 of the chaotic condition of the earth, is
equally applicable to the heaven, " for the heaven proceeds from
the same chaos as the earth." — " And the earth was (not became)
waste and void." The alliterative nouns tohu vabohu, the ety-
mology of which is lost, si gnify w aste and empty (barren), but
not laying waste and desolating. Whenever they are used
together in other places (Isa. xxxiv. 11 ; Jer. iv. 23), they are
taken from this passage ; but tohu alone is frequently employed
as synonymous with T.S, non-existence, and 73n, nothingness
(Isa. xl. 17, 23, xlix. 4). The coming earth was at first waste
and desolate, a formless, lifeless mass, rudis indigestaque moles,
vKn a/wfxfwi (Wisdom xi. 17) or ^ao?. — " And darkness was
upon the face of the deep." tnnn, from tun, to roar, to rage,
denotes the raging waters, the roaring waves (Ps. xlii. 7) or
flood (Ex. xv. 5 ; Deut. viii. 7) ; and hence the depths of the
sea (Job xxviii. 14, xxxviii. 16), and even the abyss of the
earth (Ps. lxxi. 20). As an old traditional word, it is construed
like a proper name without an article (Ewald, Gramm.). The
chaotic mass in which the earth and the firmament were still
undistinguished, unformed, and as it were unborn, was a heav-
ing deep, an abyss of waters (a/3vao-o<;, LXX.), and this deep
was wrapped in darkness. But it was in process of formation,
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. I. 8-6. 49
for the Spirit of God moved upon the waters, nn (breath) de-
notes wind and spirit, like irvev/ia from uvea). Ruach Elohim is
not a breath of wind caused by God (Theodoret, etc.), for the verb
does not suit this meaning, but the creative Spirit of God, the
principle of all life (Ps. sxxiii. 6, civ. 30), which worked upon
the formless, lifeless mass, separating, quickening, and preparing
the living forms, which were called into being by the creative
words that followed, jm in the P iel is applied to t he hoverin g
and bro oding of a bird oy erjts_young^to warmjhejn, an d dpyp. lnp
t heir vital powers (Deut. xxxii. 11). In such a way as this the
Spirit of God moved upon the deep, which had received at its
creation the germs of all life, to fill them with vital energy by
His breath of life. The three statements in our verse are
parallel ; the substantive and participial construction of the second
and third clauses rests upon the nrprn of the first. All three
describe the condition of the earth immediately after the creation
of the universe. This suffices to prove that the theosophic specu-
lation of those who " make a gap between the first two verses,
and fill it with a wild horde of evil spirits and their demoniacal
works, is an arbitrary interpolation" (Ziegler). — Ver. 3. The
word of God then went forth to the primary material of the
world, now filled with creative powers of vitality, to call into
being, out of the germs of organization and life which it con-
tained, and in the order pre-ordained by His wisdom, those crea-
tures of the world, which proclaim, as they live and move, the
glory of their Creator (Ps. viii.). The work of creation commences
with the words, " and God said." The words which God speaks
are existing things. " He speaks, and it is done ; He commands,
and it stands fast." These words are deeds of the essential Word,
the X0709, by which " all things were made." Speaking is the
revelation of thought ; the creation, the realization of the thoughts
of God, a freely accomplished act of the absolute Spirit, and not
an emanation of creatures from the divine essence. The first
thing created by the divine Word was " light,'' the elementary
light, or light-material, in distinction from the " lights," or light-
bearers, bodies of light, as the sun, moon, and stars, created
on the fourth day, are called. It is now a generally accepted
truth of natural science, that the light does not spring from the
sun and stars, but that the sun itself is a dark body, and the
light proceeds from an atmosphere which surrounds it. Light
Digitized by VjOOQlC
50 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
was the first thing called forth, and separated from the dark
chaos by the creative mandate, " Let there be" — the first radiation
of the life breathed into it by the Spirit of God, inasmuch as it
is the fundamental condition of all organic life in the world, and
without light and the warmth which flows from it no plant or
animal could thrive. The expression in ver. 4, " God saw the
light that it was good," for " God saw that the light was good,"
according to a frequently recurring antiptosis (cf. ch. vi. 2, xii.
14, xiii. 10), is not an anthropomorphism at variance with enlight-
ened thoughts of God ; for man's seeing has its type in God's,
and God's seeing is not a mere expression of the delight of the
eye or of pleasure in His work, but is of the deepest significance
to every created thing, being the seal of the perfection which
God has impressed upon it, and by which its continuance before
God and through God is determined. The creation of light,
however, was no annihilation of darkness, no transformation
of the dark material of the world into pure light, but a separa-
tion of the light from the primary matter, a separation which
established and determined that interchange of light and dark-
ness, which produces the distinction between day and night.
Hence it is said in ver. 5, " God called the light Day, and Hie
darkness Night;" for, as Augustine observes, " all light is not
day, nor all darkness night ; but light and darkness alternating
in a regular order constitute day and night." None but super-
ficial thinkers can take offence at the idea of created things
receiving names from God. The name of a thing is the expres-
sion of its nature. If the name be given by man, it fixes in a word
the impression which it makes upon the human mind ; but when
given by God, it expresses the reality, what the thing is in God's
creation, and the place assigned it there by the side of other
things. — " Thus evening was and morning was one day." "IfiK
(one), like ch and unus, is used at the commencement of a
numerical series for the ordinal primus (cf. ch. ii. 11, iv. 19, viii.
5, 15). Like the numbers of the days which follow, it is without
the article, to show that the different days arose from the con-
stant recurrence of evening and morning. It is not till the sixth
and last day that the article is employed (ver. 31), to indicate
the termination of the work of creation upon that day. It is to
be observed, that the days of creation are bounded by the coming
of evening and morning. The first day did not consist of the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. I. 2 5. 51
primeval darkness and the origination of light, but was formed
after the creation of the light by the first interchange of even-
ing and morning. The first evening was not the gloom, which
possibly preceded the full burst of light as it came forth from
the primary darkness, and intervened between the darkness
and full, broad daylight. It was not till after the light had been
created, and the separation of the light from the darkness had
taken place, that evening came, and after the evening the morn-
ing ; and this coming of evening (lit. the obscure) and morning
(the breaking) formed one, or the first day. It follows from
this, that the days of creation are not reckoned from evening to
evening, but from morning to morning. The first day does not
fully terminate till the light returns after the darkness of night ;
it is not till the break of the new morning that the first inter-
change of light and darkness is completed, and a q/xepovvtcTiov
has passed. The rendering, " out of evening and morning there
came one day," is at variance with grammar, as well as with the
actual fact. With grammar, because such a thought would
require inK tin ; and with fact, because th« time from evening
to morning does not constitute a day, but the close of a day.
The first day commenced at the moment when God caused the
light to break forth from the darkness ; but this light did not
become a day, until the evening had come, and the darkness
which set in with the evening had given place the next morn-
ing to the break of day. Again, neither the words vm any <m
np3, nor the expression npa any, evening-morning (= day), in
Dan. viii. 14, corresponds to the Greek w^Orifiepov, for morn-
ing is not equivalent to day, nor evening to night. The reckon-\
ing of days from evening to evening in the Mosaic law (Lev. I
xxiii. 32), and by many ancient tribes (the pre-Mohammedan_ _
Arabs, the Athenians, Gauls, and Germans), arose not from the"
days of creation, but from the custom of regulating seasons by
the changes of the moon. But if the days of creation are regu-
lated by the recurring interchange of light and darkness, they
must be regarded not as periods of time of incalculable dura-
tion, of years or thousands of years, but as simple earthly days.
It is true the morning and evening of the first three days were
not produced by the rising and setting of the sun, since the sun
was not yet created ; but the constantly recurring interchange
of light and darkness, which produced day and night upon the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
52 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
earth, cannot for a moment be understood as denoting that the
light called forth from the darkness of chaos returned to that
darkness again, and thus periodically burst forth and disap-
peared. The only way in which we can represent it to our-
selves, is by supposing that the light called forth by the creative
mandate, " Let there be," was separated from the dark mass of
the earth, and concentrated outside or above the globe, so that
the interchange of light and darkness took place as soon as the
dark chaotic mass began to rotate, and to assume in the process
of creation the form of a spherical body. The time occupied in
the first rotations of the earth upon its axis cannot, indeed, be
measured by our hour-glass ; but even if they were slower at
first, and did not attain their present velocity till the completion
of our solar system, this would make no essential difference
between the first three days and the last three, which were regu-
lated by the rising and setting of the sun. 1
Vers. 6-8. The Second Day. — When the light had been
separated from the darkness, and day and night had been
created, there followed upon a second fiat of the Creator, the
division of the chaotic mass of waters through the formation of
the firmament, which was placed as a wall of separation ('""l??)
in the midst of the waters, and divided them into upper and
lower waters. Jfi?"], fro m Vp"i to stretc h, spread out, then beat or
tread out, means expamum, the spreading out of the air, which
surrounds the earth as an atmosphere. According to optical
appearance, it is described as a carpet spread out above the
earth (Ps. civ. 2), a curtain (Isa. xl. 22), a transparent work of
sapphire (Ex. xxiv. 10), or a molten looking-glass (Job xxxvii.
18) ; but there is nothing in these poetical similes to warrant the
1 Exegesis must insist upon this, and not allow itself to alter the plain
sense of the words of the Bible, from irrelevant and untimely regard to the
so-called certain inductions of natural science. Irrelevant we call such
considerations, as make interpretation dependent upon natural science,
"~ ; ^tecause the creation lies outside the limits of empirical and speculative re-
search, and, as an act of the omnipotent God, belongs rather to the sphere of
miracles and mysteries, which can only be received by faith (Heb. xi. 8) ;
and untimely, because natural science has supplied no certain conclusions
as to the origin of the earth, and geology especially, even at the present
time, is in a chaotic state of fermentation, the issue of which it is impos-
sible to foresee.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. I. 8-8 53
idea that the heavens were regarded as a solid mass, a cnSjpeov,
or yaKKeov or iroXvxaXicov, such as Greek poets describe. The
JTP^ (rendered Veste by Luther, after the <rrepea>fia of the LXX.
and firmamentum of the Vulgate) is called lieaven in ver. 8, i.e.
the vault of heaven, which stretches out above the earth. The
waters under the firmament are the waters upon the globe itself ;
those above are not ethereal waters 1 beyond the limits of the
1 There is no proof of the existence of such " ethereal waters" to be found
in such passages as Rev. iv. 6, xv. 2, xxii. 1 ; for what the holy seer there
beholds before the throne as " a sea of glass like unto crystal mingled with
fire," and " a river of living water, clear as crystal," flowing from the throne
of God into the streets of the heavenly Jerusalem, are wide as the poles from
any fluid or material substance from which the stars were made upon the
fourth day. Of such a fluid the Scriptures know quite as little, as of the nebu-
lar theory of La Place, which, notwithstanding the bright spots in Mars and
the inferior density of Jupiter, Saturn, and other planets, is still enveloped
in a mist which no astronomy will ever disperse. If the waters above the fir-
mament were the elementary matter of which the stars were made, the waters
beneath must be the elementary matter of which the earth was formed ; for
the waters were one and the same before the creation of the firmament.
But the earth was not formed from the waters beneath ; on the contrary,
these waters were merely Bpread upon the earth and then gathered together
into one place, and this place is called Sea. The earth, which appeared as
dry land after the accumulation of the waters in the sea, was created in the
beginning along with the heavens ; but until the separation of land and
water on the third day, it was so completely enveloped in water, that nothing
could be seen but " the deep," or " the waters" (ver. 2). If, therefore, in
the course of the work of creation, the heaven with its stars, and the earth
with its vegetation and living creatures, came forth from this deep, or, to
speak more correctly, if they appeared as well-ordered, and in a certain
sense as finished worlds ; it would be a complete misunderstanding of the
account of the creation to suppose it to teach, that the water formed the
elementary matter, out of which the heaven and the earth were made with
all their hosts. Had this been the meaning of the writer, he would have
mentioned water as the first creation, and not the heaven and the earth.
How irreconcilable the idea of the waters above the firmament being
ethereal waters is with the biblical representation of the opening of the
windows of heaven when it rains, is evident from the way in which Keerl,
the latest supporter of this theory, sets aside this difficulty, viz. by the bold
assertion, that the mass of water which came through the windows of
heaven at the flood was different from the rain which falls from the clouds ;
in direct opposition to the text of the Scriptures, which speaks of it not
merely as rain (vii. 12), but as the water of the clouds. Vid. ch. ix. 12 sqq.,
where it is said that when God brings a cloud over the earth, Ho will set
the rainbow in the cloud, as a sign that the water (of the clouds collected
above the earth) shall not become a flood to destroy the earth again.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
54 THE FIBST BOOK OF MOSES.
terrestrial atmosphere, but the waters which float in the at-
mosphere, and are separated by it from those upon the earth,
the waters which accumulate in clouds, and then bursting' these
their bottles, pour down as rain upon the earth. For, accord-
ing to the Old Testament representation, whenever it rains
heavily, the doors or windows of heaven are opened (ch. vii.
11, 12; Ps. lxxviii. 23, cf. 2 Kings vii. 2, 19 ; Isa. xxiv. 18).
It is in (or with) the upper waters that God layeth the beams
of His chambers, from which He watereth the hills (Ps. civ. 3,
13), and the clouds are His tabernacle (Job xxxvi. 29). If,
therefore, according to this conception, looking from an earthly
point of view, the mass of water which flows upon the earth in
showers of rain is shut up in heaven (cf . viii. 2), it is evident that
it must be regarded as above the vault which spans the earth, or,
according to the words of Ps. cxlviii. 4, " above the heavens." 1
Vers. 9-13. The Third Day. — The work of this day was
twofold, yet closely connected. At first the waters beneath the
heavens, i.e. those upon the surface of the earth, were gathered
together, so that the dry ( i1 j?'3! i !), the solid ground) appeared.
In what way the gathering of the earthly waters in the sea and
the appearance of the dry land were effected, whether by the
sinking or deepening of places in the body of the globe, into
which the water was drawn off, or by the elevation of the solid
ground, the record does not inform us, since it never describes
\ the process by which effects are produced. It is probable, how-
J-iever, that the separation was caused both by depression and
''T elevation. With the dry land the mountains naturally arose as
I the headlands of the mainland. But of this we have no physi-
cal explanations, either in the account before ns, or in the
poetical description of the creation in Ps. civ. Even if we
render Ps. civ. 8, " the mountains arise, and they (the waters)
1 In ver. 8 the LXX. interpolate xa\ ttiu £ @ti( on x«Xo'» (and God
saw that it was good), and transfer the words " and it was so" from the
end of ver. 7 to the close of ver. 6. Two apparent improvements, but in
reality two arbitrary changes. The transposition is copied from vers. 9,
15, 24 ; and in making the interpolation, the author of the gloss has not
observed that the division of the waters was not complete till the separa-
tion of the dry land from the water had taken place, and therefore the
proper place for the expression of approval is at the close of the work of
the third day.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. I. 9-18. 55
descend into the valleys, to the place which Thou (Jehovah)
hast founded for them," we have no proof, in this poetical ac-
count, of the elevation-theory of geology, since the psalmist is
not speaking as a naturalist, but as a sacred poet describing the
creation on the basis of Gen. i. " The dry" God called Earth,
and " the gathering of the waters" i.e. the place into which the
■waters were collected, He called Sea. D'B', an intensi ve rather
th an a n u merical plural, is the great ocea n, which surrounds tne
mainland on all sides, so that the earth - appears to be founded
upon seas (Ps. xxiv. 2). Earth and sea are the two constituents
of the globe, by the separation of which its formation was com-
pleted. The "seas" include the rivers which flow into the
ocean, and the lakes which are as it were "detached fragments"
of the ocean, though they are not specially mentioned here. By
the divine act of naming the two constituents of the globe, and
the divine approval which follows, this work is stamped with
permanency ; and the second act of the third day, the clothing
of the earth with vegetation, is immediately connected with it.
At the command of God " the eart/i brought forth green (KEH),
teed yielding herb (pfe$), and fruit-bearing fruit-trees (*")B YVJ."
These three classes embrace all the productions of the vegetable
kingdom. KCH, lit. the young, tender green, which shoots up
after rain and covers the meadows and downs (2 Sam. xxiii. 4 ;
Job xxxviii. 27 ; Joel ii. 22 ; Ps. xxiii. 2), is a generic name for
all grasses and cryptogamous plants. 2|?y, with the epithet
JHJ Fl:??, yielding or forming seed, is used as a generic term for
all herbaceous plants, com, vegetables, and other plants by which
seed-pods are formed, na yy : not only fruit-trees, but all trees
and shrubs, bearing fruit in which there is a seed according to
its kind, i.e. fruit with kernels. rjKT) ?y (upon the earth) is not
to be joined to " fruit-tree," as though indicating the superior
size of the trees which bear seed above the earth, in distinction
from vegetables which propagate their species upon or in the
ground ; for even the latter bear their seed above the earth. It
is appended to Kg^n, as a more minute explanation : the earth
is to bring forth grass, herb, and trees, upon or above the
ground, as an ornament or covering for it. faw (after its
kind), from T? species, which is not only repeated in ver. 12 in
its old form ^J'w in the case of the fruit-tree, but is also ap-
pended to the herb. It indicates that the herbs and trees sprang
Digitized by VjOOQlC
56 THE FIKST BOOK OF MOSES.
out of the earth according to their kinds, and received, together
with power to bear seed and fruit, the capacity to propagate
and multiply their own kind. In the case of the grass there is
no reference either to different kinds, or to the production of
seed, inasmuch as in the young green grass neither the one nor
the other is apparent to the eye. Moreover, we must not picture
the work of creation as consisting of the production of the first
tender germs which were gradually developed into herbs, shrubs,
and trees ; on the contrary, we must regard it as one element in
the miracle of creation itself, that at the word of God not only
tender grasses, but herbs, shrubs, and trees, sprang out of the
earth, each ripe for the formation of blossom and the bearing
of seed and fruit, without the necessity of waiting for years
before the vegetation created was ready to blossom and bear
fruit. Even if the earth was employed as a medium in the
creation of the plants, since it was God who caused it to bring
them forth, they were not the product of the powers of nature,
generatio ceguivoca in the ordinary sense of the word, but a work
of divine omnipotence, by which the trees came into existence
before their seed, and their fruit was produced in full develop-
ment, without expanding gradually under the influence of sun-
shine and rain.
Vers. 14—19. The Fourth Day. — After the earth had
been clothed with vegetation, and fitted to be the abode of
living beings, there were created on the fourth day the sun,
moon, and stars, heavenly bodies in which the elementary light
was concentrated, in order that its influence upon the earthly
globe might be sufficiently modified and regulated for living
beings to exist and thrive beneath its rays, in the water, in the
air, and upon the dry land. At the creative word of God the
bodies of light came into existence in the firmament, as lamps.
On W, the singular of the predicate before the plural of the
subject, in ver. 14, v. 23, ix. 29, etc., vid. Gesenius, Heb. Gr.
§ 147. n'liKD, bodies of light, light-bearers, then lamps. These
bodies of light received a threefold appointment : (1) They were
" to divide between the day and the night," or, according to ver.
18, between the light and the darkness, in other words, to regu-
late from that time forward the difference, which had existed
ever since the creation of light, between the night and the day.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. I. M-l». 57
(2) They were to be (or serve : vrr\ after an imperative has the
force of a command), — (a) for signs (se. for the earth), partly as
portents of extraordinary events (Matt. ii. 2 ; Luke xxi. 25) and
divine judgments (Joel ii. 30 ; Jer. x. 2 ; Matt. xxiv. 29), partly
as showing the different quarters of the heavens, and as prog-
nosticating the changes in the weather ; — (b) for seasons, or for
fixed, definite times (OHjJto, from IV to fix, establish), — not for
festal seasons merely, bnt " to regulate definite points and periods
of time, by virtue of their periodical influence npon agriculture,
navigation, and other human occupations, as well as upon the
course of human, animal, and vegetable life (e.g. the breeding
time of animals, and the migrations of birds, Jer. viii. 7, etc.) ; —
(c) for days and years, i.e. for the division and calculation of
days and years. The grammatical construction will not allow
the clause to be rendered as a Hendiadys, viz. " as signs for
definite times and for days and years," or as signs both for the
times and also for days and years. (3.) They were to serve as
lamps upon the earth, i.e. to pour out their light, which is in-
dispensable to the growth and health of every creature. That
this, the primary object of the lights, should be mentioned last,
is correctly explained by Delitzsck : " From the astrological and
chronological utility of the heavenly bodies, the record ascends
to their universal utility which arises from the necessity of light
for the growth and continuance of everything earthly." This
applies especially to the two great lights which were created by
God and placed in the firmament ; the greater to rule the day,
the lesser to rule the night. "The great" and u Uie small" in
correlative clauses are to be understood as used comparatively
(cf. Gesenius, § 119, 1). That the sun and moon were intended,
was too obvious to need to be specially mentioned. It might
appear strange, however, that these lights should not receive
names from God, like the works of the first three days. This
cannot be attributed to forgetfulness on the part of the author,
as Tuch supposes. As a rule, the names were given by God
only to the greater sections into which the universe was divided,
and not to individual bodies (either plants or animals). The
man and the woman are the only exceptions (chap. v. 2). The
sun and moon are called great, not in comparison with the earth,
but in contrast with the stars, according to the amount of light
which shines from them upon the earth and determines their
PENT. — VOL. I. 15
Digitized by VjOOQlC
^
58 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
rule over the day and night ; not so much with reference to the
fact, that the stronger light of the sun produces the daylight,
and the weaker light of the moon illumines the night, as to the
influence which their light exerts by day and night upon all
nature, both organic and inorganic — an influence generally ad-
mitted, but by no means fully understood. In this respect the
sun and moon are the two great lights, the stars small bodies of
light ; the former exerting great, the latter but little, influence
upon the earth and its inhabitants.
This truth, which arises from the relative magnitude of the
heavenly bodies, or rather their apparent size as seen from the
earth, is not affected by the fact that from the standpoint of
natural science many of the stars far surpass both sun and
moon in magnitude. Nor does the fact, that in our account,
which was written for inhabitants of the earth and for religious
purposes, it is only the utility of the sun, moon, and stars to the
inhabitants of the earth that is mentioned, preclude the possibi-
lity of each by itself, and all combined, fulfilling other purposes
in the universe of God. And not only is our record silent, but
God Himself made no direct revelation to man on this subject ;
because astronomy and physical science, generally, neither lead
to godliness, nor promise peace and salvation to the soul. Belief
in the truth of this account as a divine revelation could only be
shaken, if the facts which science has discovered as indisputably
true, with regard to the number, size, and movements of the
heavenly bodies, were irreconcilable with the biblical account of
the creation. But neither the innumerable host nor the im-
measurable size of many of the heavenly bodies, nor the almost
infinite distance of the fixed stars from our earth and the solar
system, warrants any such assumption. Who can set bounds to
the divine omnipotence, and determine what and how much it
can create in a moment 1 The objection, that the creation of
the innumerable and immeasurably great and distant heavenly
bodies in one day, is so disproportioned to the creation of this one
little globe in six days, as to be irreconcilable with our notions
of divine omnipotence and wisdom, does not affect the Bible,
but shows that the account of the creation has been misunder-
stood. We are not taught here that on one day, viz. the fourth,
I God created all the heavenly bodies out of nothing, and in a
i perfect condition ; on the contrary, we are told that in the begin-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. L H-19. 59
ning God created the heaven and the earth, and on the fourth
day that He made the sun, the moon, and the stars (planets,
comets, and fixed stars) in the firmament, to be lights for the
earth. According to these distinct words, the primary material,
not only of the earth, but also of the heaven and the heavenly
bodies, was created in the beginning. If, therefore, the heavenly
bodies were first made or created on the fourth day, as lights for
the earth, in the firmament of heaven ; the words can have no
other meaning than that their creation was completed on the
fourth day, just as the creative formation of our globe was
finished on the third ; that the creation of the heavenly bodies
therefore proceeded side by side, and probably by similar stages,
with that of the earth, so that the heaven with its stars was com-
pleted on the fourth day. Is this representation of the work of
creation, which follows in the simplest way from the word of
God, at variance with correct ideas of the omnipotence and wis-
dom of God ? Could not the Almighty create the innumerable
host of heaven at the same time as the earthly globe t Or would
Omnipotence require more time for the creation of the moon,
the planets, and the sun, or of Orion, Sirius, the Pleiades, and
other heavenly bodies whose magnitude has not yet been ascer-
tained, than for the creation of the earth itself ? Let us beware
of measuring the works of Divine Omnipotence by the standard
of human power. The fact, that in our account the gradual
formation of the heavenly bodies is not described with the same
minuteness as that of the earth ; but that, after the general
statement in ver. 1 as to the creation of the heavens, all that is
mentioned is their completion on the fourth day, when for the
first time they assumed, or were placed in, such a position with
regard to the earth as to influence its development ; may be ex-
plained on the simple ground that it was the intention of the
sacred historian to describe the work of creation from the stand-
point of the globe : in other words, as it would have appeared to
an observer from the earth, if there had been one in existence
at the time. For only from such a standpoint could this work
of God be made intelligible to all men, uneducated as well as
learned, and the account of it be made subservient to the reli-
gious wants of all. 1
1 Host of the objections to the historical character of our account, which
hare been founded upon the work of the fourth day, rest upon a miscon-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
60 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
Vers. 20-23. The Fifth Day.—" God said : Let die waters
swarm with swarms, with living beings, and let birds fly above the
earth in the face (the front, i.e. the side turned towards the earth)
of the firmament." W"ie» and ItfJP are imperative. Earlier
translators, on the contrary, have rendered the latter as a rela-
tive clause, after the irerewhireroiteva of the LXX., " and with
birds that fly ;" thus making the birds to spring out of the water,
in opposition to chap. ii. 19. Even with regard to the element
out of which the water animals were created the text is silent ;
for the assertion that pB> is to be understood " with a causative
colouring" is erroneous, and is not sustained by Ex. viii. 3 or
Ps. cv. 30. The construction with the accusative is common to
all verbs of multitude. pE*, from pff, to creep and swarm , is
applied, " without regard to size, to those animals which congre-
gate together in great numbers, and move about among one
another." njn tpu, anima viva, living soul, animated beings
(yid. ii. 7), is in apposition to pt?, " swarms consisting of living
beings." The expression applies not only to fishes, but to all
water animals from the greatest to the least, including reptiles,
etc. In carrying out His word, God created (ver. 21) the great
" (gaaiajm," — Kfc the long-stretched, from ??n, to stretch, — whales,
crocodiles, and other sea-monsters ; and " all moving living beings
with which the waters swarm after their kind, and all (every)
winged fowl after its kind." That the water animals and birds of
every kind were created on the same day, and before the land
animals, cannot be explained on the ground assigned by early
writers, that there is a similarity between the air and the water,
and a consequent correspondence between the two classes of ani-
mals. For in the light of natural history the birds are at all
events quite as near to the mammalia as to the fishes ; and the
supposed resemblance between the fins of fishes and the wings of
birds, is counterbalanced by the no less striking resemblance be-
tween birds and land animals, viz. that both have feet. The
ception of the proper point of view from -which it should be studied. And.
in addition to that, the conjectures of astronomers as to the immeasurable
distance of most of the fixed stars, and the time which a ray of light would
require to reach the earth, are accepted as indisputable mathematical proof ;
whereas these approximative estimates of distance rest upon the unsubstan-
tiated supposition, that everything which has been ascertained with regard
to the nature and motion of light in our solar system, must be equally true
of the light of the fixed stars.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. L 20-81. 61
real reason is rather this, that the creation proceeds throughout
from the lower to the higher ; and in this ascending scale the fishes
occupy to a great extent a lower place in the animal economy
than birds, and both water animals and birds a lower place than
land animals, more especially the mammalia. Again, it is not
stated that only a single pair was created of each kind ; on the
contrary, the words, " let the waters swarm with living beings,"
seem rather to indicate that the animals were created, not only
in a rich variety of genera and species, but in large numbers of
individuals. The fact that but one human being was created at
first, by no means warrants the conclusion that the animals were
created singly also ; for the unity of the human race has a very
different signification from that of the so-called animal species.
— (Ver. 22). As animated beings, the water animals and fowls
are endowed, through the divine blessing, with the power to be
fruitful and multiply. The word of blessing was the actual com-
munication of the capacity to propagate and increase in numbers.
Vers. 24-31. The Sixth Day. — Sea and air are filled
with living creatures ; and the word of God now goes forth to
the earth, to produce living beings after their kind. These are
divided into three classes, nona, cattle, from ona, mutum, brututn
esse, generally denotes the larger domesticated quadrupeds (e.g.
chap, xlvii. 18 ; Ex. xiii. 12, etc.), but occasionally the larger
land animals as a whole, few (the creeping) embraces the smaller
land animals, which move either without feet, or with feet that
are scarcely perceptible, viz. reptiles, insects, and worms. In
ver. 25 they are distinguished from the race of water reptiles by
the term nciNn. jnt* irpn (the old form of the construct state,
for )"iKn n>n), the beast of the earth, i.e. the freely roving wild ani-
mals. — " After its kind:" this refers to all three classes of living
creatures, each of which had its peculiar species ; consequently
in ver. 25, where the word of God is fulfilled, it is repeated with
every class. This act of creation, too, like all that precede it, is
shown by the divine word " good" to be in accordance with the
will of God. But the blessing pronounced is omitted, the author
hastening to the account of the creation of man, in which the
work of creation culminated. The creation of man does not
take place through a word addressed by God to the earth, but as
the result of the divine decree, " We will make man in Our
Digitized by VjOOQlC
62 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
•
image, after our likeness," which proclaims at the very outset the
distinction and pre-eminence of man above all the other crea-
tures of the earth. Tli g plnrnl " W e" was regarded by the
fathers and earlier theologians almost unanimously as indicative
of the Trinity : modern commentators, on the contrary, regard it
either as pluralis majestatis ; or as an address by God to Himself,
the subject and object being identical ; or as communicative, an
address to the spirits or angels who stand around the Deity and
constitute His council. The last is Philo's explanation : SiaXe-
<yerai 6 r&v S\cov irp.rrjp rot? eavrov hwdfie<nv (8w<£/i«s=angels).
But although such passages as 1 Kings xxii. 19 sqq., Ps. lxxxix.
8, and Dan. x., show that God, as King and Judge of the world,
is surrounded by heavenly hosts, who stand around His throne
and execute His commands, the last interpretation founders
upon this rock: either it assumes without sufficient scriptural
authority, and in fact in opposition to such distinct passages as
chap. ii. 7, 22, Isa. xl. 13 seq., xliv. 24, that the spirits took part
in the creation of man ; or it reduces the plural to an empty
phrase, inasmuch as God is made to summon the angels to co-
operate in the creation of man, and then, instead of employing
them, is represented as carrying out the work alone. Moreover,
this view is irreconcilable with the words " in our image, after
our likeness;" since man was created in the image of God alone
(ver. 27, chap. v. 1), and not in the image of either the angels,
or God and the angels. A likeness to the angels cannot be in-
ferred from Heb. ii. 7, or from Luke xx. 36. Just as little
ground is there for regarding the plural here and in other pas-
sages (iii. 22, xi. 7 ; Isa. vi. 8, xli. 22) as reflective, an appeal to
self ; since the singular is employed in such cases as these, even
where God Himself is preparing for any particular work (cf . ii.
18 ; Ps. xii. 5 ; Isa. xxxiii. 10). No other explanation is left,
therefore, than to regard it as pluralis majestatis, — an interpre-
tation which comprehends in its deepest and most intensive form
(God speaking of Himself and with Himself in the plural num-
ber, not reverentice caw><>. but with reference to the fulness of tho
divine powers and essences which He possesses) the truth that
lies at the foundation of the trinitarian view, viz. that the poten-
cies concentrated in the absolute Divine Being are something
more than powers and attributes of God ; that they are hypo-
stases, which in the farther course of the revelation of God in
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. I. 24-M. 63
His kingdom appeared with more and more distinctness as per-
sons of the Divine Being. On the words " in our image, after
our likeness" modern commentators have correctly observed, that
there is no foundation for the distinction drawn by the Greek,
and after them by many of the Latin Fathers, betwen el/ccov
(imago) and 6/xoiWnj (similitudo), the former of which they sap-
posed to represent the physical aspect of the likeness to God, the
latter the ethical ; but that, on the contrary, the older Lutheran
theologians were correct in stating that the two words are syno-
nymous, and are merely combined to add intensity to the thought:
" an image which is like Us" (Luther) ; since it is no more pos-
sible to discover a sharp or well-defined distinction in the ordinary
use of the words between D7V and iron, than between 3 and 3.
D7V, from «, lit. a shadow, hence sketch, outline, differs no more
from JHD^, likeness, portrait, copy, than the German words Vmriss
or Abriss (outline or sketch) from Bild or Abbild (likeness, copy).
3 and 3 are also equally interchangeable, as we may see from a
comparison of this verse with chap. v. 1 and 3. (Compare also
Lev. vi. 4 with Lev. xxvii. 12, and for the use of 3 to denote a
norm, or sample, Ex. xxv. 40, xxx. 32, 37, etc.). There is more
difficulty in deciding in what the likeness to God consisted. Cer-
tainly not in the bodily form, the upright position, or command-
ing aspect of the man, since God has no bodily form, and the
man's body was formed from the dust of the ground ; nor in the
dominion of man over nature, for this is unquestionably ascribed
to man simply as the consequence or effluence of his likeness to
God. M &n is the image of God by virtue of his spiritua l nature,
of the breath ot God by wmch the being, formed from the dust
of the earth, became a living soul. 1 The image of God consists,
therefore, in the spiritual personality of man, though not merely
in unity of self-consciousness and self-determination, or in the
fact that man was created a consciously free Ego ; for personality
1 " The breath of God became the soul of man ; the soul of man there-
fore is nothing but the breath of God. The rest of the world exists through
the word of God ; man through His own peculiar breath. This breath is the
seal and pledge of our relation to God, of our godlike dignity; whereas the
breath breathed into the animals is nothing but the common breath, the
life-wind of nature, which is moving everywhere, and only appears in the
animal fixed and bound into a certain independence and individuality, so
that the animal soul is nothing but a nature-soul individualized into cer- |
tain, though still material spirituality." — Ziegler.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
64 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSEfe
is merely the basis and form of the divine likeness, not its real
essence. This consists rather in the fact, that the man endowed
with free self-conscious personality possesses, in his spiritual as
well as corporeal nature, a creaturely copy of the holiness and
blessedness of the divine life. This concrete essence of the
divine likeness was shattered by sin ; and it is only through
Christ, the brightness of the glory of God and the expression
of His essence (Heb. i. 3), that our nature is transformed into
the image of God again (Col. iii. 10 ; Eph. iv. 24). — " And tliey
(D"iN, a generic term for men) shall have dominion over the fish,"
etc. There is something striking in the introduction of the ex-
pression " and over all the earth," after the different races of
animals have been mentioned, especially as the list of races
appears to be proceeded with afterwards. If this appearance
were actually the fact, it would be impossible to escape the'con-
clusion that the text is faulty, and that Tvn has fallen out ; so
that the reading should be, " and over all the wild beasts of the
earth," as the Syriac has it. But as the identity of "every
creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth" (pKn) with "every
thing that creepeth upon the ground" (iiDIKn) in ver. 25 is not
absolutely certain; on the contrary, the change in expression
indicates a difference of meaning ; and as the Masoretic text is
supported by the oldest critical authorities (LXX., Sam., Onk.),
the Syriac rendering must be dismissed as nothing more than a
conjecture, and the Masoretic text be understood in the follow-
ing manner. The author passes on from the cattle to the entire
earth, and embraces all the animal creation in the expression,
" every moving thing (feiyirrio) that moveth upon the earth,"
just as in ver. 28, " every living thing ntoin upon the earth."
According to this, God determined to give to the man about to be
created in His likeness the supremacy, not only over the animal
world, but over the earth itself ; and this agrees with the blessing
in ver. 28, where the newly created man is exhorted to replenish
the earth and subdue it; whereas, according to the conjecture
of the Syriac, the subjugation of the earth by man would be
omitted from the divine decree. — Ver. 27. In the account of the
accomplishment of the divine purpose the words swell into a
jubilant song, so that we meet here for the first time with a
parallelismus membrorum, the creation of man being celebrated
in three parallel clauses. The distinction drawn between intt (in
Digitized by VjOOQlC
/
CHAP. I. 24-81. 65
the image of God created He him) and otik (as man and woman
created He them) must not be overlooked. The word D£IK,
which indicates that God created the man and woman as two
human beings, completely overthrows the idea that man was at
first androgynous (cf. chap. ii. 18 sqq.). By the blessing in
ver. 28, God not only confers upon man the power to multiply
and fill the earth, as upon the beasts in ver. 22, but also gives
him dominion over the earth and every beast. In conclusion,
the food of both man and beast is pointed out in vers. 29, 30,
exclusively from the vegetable kingdom. Man is to eat of
" every seed-bearing herb on the face of all the earth, and every
tree on which there are fruits containing seed," consequently of the
productions of both field and tree, in other words, of corn and
fruit ; the animals are to eat of " every green herb" i.e. of vege-
tables or green plants, and grass.
From this it follows, that, accor ding to the c reative will of
God, men were not to slaughter animals for food, nor were
animals to prey upon one another ; consequently, that the fact
which now prevails universally in nature and the order of the
world, the violent and often painful destruction of life, is not
a primary law of nature, nor a divine institution founded in
the creation itself, but entered the world along with death at
the fall of man, and became a necessity of nature through the
curse of sin. It was not till after the flood, that men received
authority from God to employ the flesh of animals as well as^r^
the~ green herb as food (ix. 3) ; and the fact that, according to
the biblical view, no carnivorous animals existed at the first,
may be inferred from the prophetic announcements in Isa. xi.
6-8, lxv. 25, where the cessation of sin and the complete trans-
formation of the world into the kingdom of God are described
as being accompanied by the cessation of slaughter and the eat-
ing of flesh, even in the case of the animal kingdom. With
this the legends of the heathen world respecting the golden age
of the past, and its return at the end of time, also correspond
(cf. Gesenius on Isa. xi. 6-8). It is true that objections have
been raised by natural historians to this testimony of Scrip-
ture, but without scientific ground. For although at the pre-
sent time man is fitted by his teeth and alimentary canal for
the combination of vegetable and animal food ; and although
the law of mutual destruction so thoroughly pervades the whole
Digitized by VjOOQlC
I
t>6 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
animal kingdom, that not only is the life of one sustained by
the death of another, but " as the graminivorous animals check
the overgrowth of the vegetable kingdom, so the excessive in-
crease of the former is restricted by the beasts of prey, and of
these again by the destructive implements of man;" and al-
though, again, not only beasts of prey, but evident symptoms of
disease are met with among the fossil remains of the aboriginal
animals : all these facts furnish no proof that the human and
animal races were originally constituted for death and destruc-
tion, or that disease and slaughter are older than the fall. For,
to reply to the last objection first, geology has offered no con-
clusive evidence of its doctrine, that the fossil remains of beasts
of prey and bones with marks of disease belong to a pre- Adamite
period, but has merely inferred it from the hypothesis already
mentioned (pp. 41, 42) of successive periods of creation. Again,
as even in the present order of nature the excessive increase of
the vegetable kingdom is restrained, not merely by the grami-
nivorous animals, but also by the death of the plants themselves
through the exhaustion of their vital powers ; so the wisdom of
the Creator could easily have set bounds to the excessive in-
crease of the animal world, without requiring the help of hunts-
men and beasts of prey, since many animals even now lose their
lives by natural means, without being slain by men or eaten by
beasts of prey. The teaching of Scripture, that death entered
the world through sin, merely proves that the human race was
created for eternal life, but by no means necessitates the as-
sumption that the animals were also created for endless exist-
ence. As the earth produced them at the creative word of God,
the different individuals and generations would also have passed
away and returned to the bosom of the earth, without violent
destruction by the claws of animals or the hand of man, as soon
as they had fulfilled the purpose of their existence. The decay
of animals is a law of nature established in the creation itself,
and not a consequence of sin, or an effect of the death brought
into the world by the sin of man. At the same time, it was so
far involved in the effects of the fall, that the natural decay of
the different animals was changed into a painful death or violent
end. Although in the animal kingdom, as it at present exists,
many varieties are so organized that they live exclusively upon
the flesh of other animals, which they kill and devour : this by
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. IL 1-8. 67
no means necessitates the conclusion, that the carnivorous beasts
of prey were created after the fall, or the assumption that they
were originally intended to feed upon flesh, and organized ac-
cordingly. If, in consequence of the curse pronounced upon
the earth after the sin of man, who was appointed head and
lord of nature, the whole creation was subjected to vanity and
the bondage of corruption (Rom. viii. 20 sqq.) ; this subjection
might have been accompanied by a change in the organization
of the animals, though natural science, which is based upon the
observation and combination of things empirically discovered,
could neither demonstrate the fact nor explain the process. And
if natural science cannot boast that in any one of its many
branches it has discovered all the phenomena connected with
the animal and human organism of the existing world, how
could it pretend to determine or limit the changes through
which this organism may have passed in the course of thousands
of years ?
The creation of man and his installation as ruler on the
earth brought the creation of all earthly beings to a close (ver.
31). God saw His work, and behold it was all very good; i.e.
everything perfect in its kind, so that every creature might reach
the goal appointed by the Creator, and accomplish the purpose
of its existence. By the application of the term "good" to
everything that God made, and the repetition of the word with
the emphasis "very" at the close of the whole creation, the
existence of anything evil in the creation of God is absolutely
denied, and the hypothesis entirely refuted, that the six days'
work merely subdued and fettered an ungodly, evil principle,
which had already forced its way into it. The sixth day, as
being the last, is distinguished above all the rest by the article—
V&n Di> « a day, the sixth" (Gesenius, § 111, 2a).
Chap. ii. 1-3. The Sabbath op Creation. — " Thug the
heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them." N3X
here denotes the totality of the beings that fill the heaven and
the earth: in other places (see especially Neh. ix. 6) it is applied
to the host of heaven, i.e. the stars (Deut. iv. 19, xvii. 3), and
according to a still later representation, to the angels also (1
Kings xxii. 19 ; Isa. xxiv. 21 ; Neh. ix. 6 ; Ps. cxlviii. 2). These
words of ver. 1 introduce the completion of the work of crea-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
68 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
tion, and give a greater definiteness to the announcement in
vers. 2, 3, that on the seventh day God ended the work which
He had made, by ceasing to create, and blessing the day and
sanctifying it. The completion or finishing ( n ??) of the work
of creation on the seventh day (not on the sixth, as the LXX.,
Sam., and Syr. erroneously render it) can only be understood
by regarding the clauses vers. 26 and 3, which are connected
with hy*\ by ) consec. as containing the actual completion, i.e. by
supposing the completion to consist, negatively in the cessation
of the work of creation, and positively in the blessing and sanc-
tifying of the seventh day. The cessation itself formed part of
the completion of the work (for this meaning of n?B> vid. chap,
vm. 22, Job xxxii. 1, etc.). As a human artificer completes his
work just when he has brought it up to his ideal and ceases to
work upon it, so in an infinitely higher sense, God completed
the creation of the world with all its inhabitants by ceasing to
produce anything new, and entering into the rest of His all-
sufficient eternal Being, from which He had come forth, as it
were, at and in the creation of a world distinct from His own
essence. Hence ceasing to create is called resting (TO) in Ex.
xx. 11, and being refreshed (&$?) in Ex. xxxi. 17. The rest
into which God entered after the creation was complete, had its
own reality " in the reality of the work of creation, in contrast
with which the preservation of the world, when once created,
had the appearance of rest, though really a continuous crea-
tion" (Ziegler, p. 27). This rest of the Creator was indeed
" the consequence of His self-satisfaction in the now united and
harmonious, though manifold whole - " but this self-satisfaction
of God in His creation, which we call His pleasure in His work,
was also a spiritual power, which streamed forth as a blessing
upon the creation itself, bringing it into the blessedness of the
rest of God and filling it with His peace. This constitutes the
positive element in the completion which God gave to the work
of creation, by blessing and sanctifying the seventh day, be-
cause on it He found rest from the work which He by making
(JliiPJJ? faciendo : cf . Ewald, § 280d) had created. The divine
act of blessing was a real communication of powers of salvation,
grace, and peace; and sanctifying was not merely declaring
holy, but " communicating the attribute of holy," " placing in a
living relation to God, the Holy One, raising to a participation
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. II. 1-8. 69
in the pure clear light of the holiness of God." On B^iJ see
Ex. xix. 6. The blessing and sanctifying of the seventh day had
regard, no doubt, to the Sabbath, which Israel as the people of
God was afterwards to keep ; but we are not to suppose that the
theocratic Sabbath was instituted here, or that the institution of
that Sabbath was transferred to the history of the creation. On
the contrary, the Sabbath of the Israelites had a deeper mean-
ing, founded in the nature and development of the created
world, not for Israel only, but for all mankind, or rather for the
whole creation. As the whole earthly creation is subject to the
changes of time and the law of temporal motion and develop-
ment; so all creatures not only stand in need of definite re-
curring periods of rest, for the sake of recruiting their strength
and gaining new power for further development, but they also
look forward to a time when all restlessness shall give place to
the blessed rest of the perfect consummation. To this rest thel
resting of God {$ Karairavcni) points forward ; and to this rest, \
this divine o-aySySaTW/io? (Heb. iv. 9), shall the whole world,
especially man, the head of the earthly creation, eventually come.
For this God ended His work by blessing and sanctifying the
day when the whole creation was complete. In connection with
Heb. iv., some of the fathers have called attention to the fact,
that the account of the seventh day is not summed up, like the
others, with the formula "evening was and morning was ;" thus,
e.g., Augustine writes at the close of his confessions : dies septimus
sine vespera est nee kabet occasum, quia sanctificasti eum ad per-
mansionem sempiternam. But true as it is that the Sabbath of
God has no evening, and that the aafifiaTicrnos, to which the
creature is to attain at the end of his course, will be bounded by
no evening, but last for ever; we must not, without further
ground, introduce this true and profound idea into the seventh
creation-day. We could only be warranted in adopting such
an interpretation, and understanding by the concluding day
of the work of creation a period of endless duration, on the
supposition that the six preceding days were so many periods in
the world's history, which embraced the time from the begin-
ning of the creation to the final completion of its development.
But as the six creation-days, according to the words of the text,
were earthly days of ordinary duration, we must understand the
seventh in the same way ; and that all the more, because in every
Digitized by VjOOQlC
70 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
passage, in which it is mentioned as the foundation of the theo-
cratic Sabbath, it is regarded as an ordinary day (Ex. xx. 11,
xxxi. 17). We mast conclude, therefore, that on the seventh
day, on which God rested from His work, the world also, with
all its inhabitants, attained to the sacred rest of God ; that the
Kardirav<TK and <ra/3/3aTur/idt of God were made a rest and
sabbatic festival for His creatures, especially for man ; and that
this day of rest of the new created world, which the forefathers
of oar race observed in paradise, as long as they continued in a
state of innocence and lived in blessed peace with their God
and Creator, was the beginning and type of the rest to which
the creation, after it had fallen from fellowship with God
through the sin of man, received a promise that it should once
more be restored through redemption, at its final consummation.
I. HISTORY OP THE HEAVENS AND THE EARTH.
Chap. ii. 4-iv. 26.
Contents and Heading.
The historical account of the world, which commences at the
completion of the work of creation, is introduced as the " His-
tory of the heavens and the earth," and treats in three sections,
(a) of the original condition of man in paradise (chap. ii. 5-
25) ; (b) of the fall (chap. iii. ) ; (c) of the division of the human
race into two widely different families, so far as concerns their
relation to God (chap. iv.). — The words, " these are the iholedoHi
of the heavens and the earth when they were created" form the
heading to what follows. This would never have been disputed,
had not preconceived opinions as to the composition of Genesis
obscured the vision of commentators. The fact that in every
other passage, in which the formula " these (and these) are the
tholedoth" occurs (viz. ten times in Genesis; also in Num. iii. 1,
Ruth iv. 18, 1 Chron. i. 29), it is used as a heading, and that in
this passage the true meaning of nnWi precludes the possibility
of its being an appendix to what precedes, fully decides the
question. The word rtrhv\, which is only used in the plural,
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. II. 4. 71
t suffixes,
i genera -
of these *th_
listory of I
and never occurs except in the construct state or with suffixes,
is a Hiphil n yiir fa"" TTirij and signifies literally the genera -
tion or post erity of any one, then the development of the
g enerations or of his descenda nts ; in other words, the history
those who are begotten, or the account of what happened to them
and what they performed. In no instance whatever is it the
history of the birth or origin of the person named in the geni-
tive, out always the account of his family and life. According
to this use of the word, we cannot underst and by the tholedoth
of the he avens and the earth the accounTof the origin of the
universe, since according to the biblical view the different things
which make up the heavens and the earth can neither be re-
garded as generations or products of cosmogonic and geogonic
evolutions, nor be classed together as the posterity of the
heavens and the earth. All the creatures in the heavens and on
earth were made by God, and called into being by His word,
notwithstanding the fact that He caused some of them to come
forth from the earth. Again, as the completion of the heavens
and the earth with all their host has already been described in
chap. ii. 1-3, we cannot understand by " the heavens and the
earth," in ver. 4, the primary material of the universe in its
elementary condition (in which case the literal meaning of
Ivin would be completely relinquished, and the " tholedoth of
the heavens and the earth" be regarded as indicating this chaotic
beginning as the first stage in a series of productions), but the
universe itself after the completion of the creation, at the com-
mencement of the historical development which is subsequently
described. This places its resemblance to the other sections,
commencing with " these are the generations," beyond dispute.
Jujst_ as the thole doth of Noah 2 forjgxample, do not mention his
birth, but contain hisTiistory and the birth of his sons ; so the
th oledoth of the he ayehs"and the earth do not describe the origin"
of the universe, but what Tiappened to the "heavens and" the
«ftrf,}i ftftjer riiBir r.rp^tioTi . Dtoana "does not preclude this,
though we cannot render it " after they were created." For
even if it were grammatically allowable to resolve the participle
into a pluperfect, the parallel expressions in chap. v. 1, 2,
would prevent our doing so. As " the day of their creation "
mentioned there, is not a day after the creation of Adam, but
the day on which he was created ; the same words, when occur-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
72 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
ring lure, must also refer to a time when the heavens and the
earth were already created : and just as in chap. v. 1 the crea-
tion of the universe forms the starting-point to the account
of the development of the human race through the generations
of Adam, and is recapitulated for that reason ; so here the
creation of the universe is mentioned as the starting-point to the
account of its historical development, because this account looks
back to particular points in the creation itself, and describes
them more minutely as the preliminaries to the subsequent
course of the world. Dtfian is explained by the clause, " in the
day that Jehovah God created ike earth and tJie heavens" Al-
though this clause is closely related to what follows, the sim-
plicity of the account prevents our regarding it as the protasis
of a period, the apodosis of which does not follow till ver. 5 or
even ver. 7. The former is grammatically impossible, because
in ver. 5 the noun stands first, and not the verb, as we should
expect in such a case (cf. iii. 5). The latter is grammatically
tenable indeed, since vers. 5, 6, might be introduced into the
main sentence as conditional clauses ; but it is not probable, in-
asmuch as we should then have a parenthesis of most unnatural
length. The clause must therefore be regarded as forming part
of the heading. There are two points here that are worthy of
notice: first, the unusual combination, "earth and heaven,"
which only occurs in Ps. cxlviii. 13, and shows that the earth is
the scene of the history about to commence, which was of such
momentous importance to the whole world ; and secondly, the
introduction of the name Jehovah in connection with Elohim.
That the hypothesis, which traces the interchange in the two
names in Genesis to different documents, does not suffice to
explain the occurrence of Jehovah Elohim in chap. ii. 4— iii. 24,
even the supporters of this hypothesis cannot possibly deny.
I Not only is God called Elohim alone in the middle of this sec-
■ tion, viz. in the address to the serpent, a clear proof that the
interchange of the names has reference to their different signi-
; fications ; but the use of the double name, which occurs here
twenty times though rarely met with elsewhere, is always signi-
ficant. In the Pentateuch we only find it in Ex. ix. 30 ; in the
other books of the Old Testament, in 2 Sam. vii. 22, 25; 1
. Chron. xvii. 16, 17 ; 2 Chron. vi. 41, 42 ; Ps. lxxxiv. 8, 11 ; and
I Ps. 1. 1, where the order is reversed ; and in every instance it is
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. n. 4. 73
nsed with peculiar emphasis, to give prominence to the fact that
Jehovah is truly Elohim, whilst in Ps. 1. 1 the Psalmist advances
from the general name El and Elohim to Jehovah, as the personal
name of the God of Israel. In this section the combination
Jehovah Elohim is expressive of the fact, that Jehovah is God, or
one with Elohim. Hence Elohim is placed after Jehovah. For
the constant use of the double name is not intended to teach that
Elohim who created the world was Jehovah, but that Jehovah,
who visited man in paradise, who punished him for the trans-
gression of His command, but gave him a promise of victory-
over the tempter, was Elohim, the same God, who created the
heavens and the earth.
The two names may be distinguishe d thu s : Elohim, the
plural of ?rt7K, wmch is only 11354 In the lottier style of poetry, is
an infinitive noun from W to fear, and signifies awe, fear, then
the object of fear, the highest Being to be feared, like ina, which
is used interchangeably with it in chap. xxxi. 42, 53, and tniD in
Ps. lxxvi. 12 (cf. Isa. viii. 12, 13). The plural is not used for
the abstract, in the sense of divinity, but to express the notion of
God in the fulness and multiplicity of the divine powers. It is
employed both in a numerical, and also in an intensive sense, so
that Elohim is applied to the (many) gods of the heathen as well
as to the one true God, in whom the highest and absolute ful-
ness of the divine essence is contained. In this intensive sense
Elohim depicts the one true God as the infinitely great and ex-
alted One, who created the heavens and the earth, and who pre-
serves and governs every creature. According to its derivation,
however, it is object rather than subject, so that in the plural
form the concrete unity of the personal God falls back behind
the wealth of the divine potencies which His being contains. In
this sense, indeed, both in Genesis and the later, poetical, books,
Elohim is used without the article, as a proper name for the true
God, even in the mouth of heathen (1 Sam. iv. 7) ; but in other
places, and here and there in Genesis, it occurs as an appellative
with the article, by which prominence is given to the absolute-
ness or personality of God (chap. v. 22, vi. 9, etc.). — The name
Jehovah, on the other hand, was originally a proper name, and
according to the explanation given by God Himself to Moses
(Ex. iii. 14, 15), was formed from the imperfect of the verb
mn = rrn. God calls Himself rvrnt nefc rr<n», then more briefly
PENT. — VOT. T. F
Digitized by VjOOQlC
^* IT
74 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
■TiiK, and then again, by changing the first person into the third,
mrr. From the derivation of this name from the imperfect,
it follows that it was either pronounced nvfl or nw, and had
come down from the pre-Mosaic age ; for the form nw had been
forced out of the spoken language by njn even in Moses' time.
The Masoretic pointing nj<T belongs to a time when the Jews
had long been afraid to utter this name at all, and substituted
'J^K, the vowels of which therefore were placed as Keri, the word
to be read, under the Kethib m.T, unless nw stood in apposition
to ^"W, in which case the word was read Bv>* and pointed rrtrr
(a pure monstrosity). 1 This custom, which sprang from a mis-
interpretation of Lev. xxiv. 16, appears to have originated
shortly after the captivity. Even in the canonical writings of
this age the name Jehovah was less and less employed, and in
the Apocrypha and the Septuagint version 6 Kvpux; (the Lord)
is invariably substituted, a custom in which the New Testament
writers follow the LXX. (yid. Oehler). — If we seek for the
meaning of mrv, the expression rwitt "itW rwut, in Ex. iii. 14, is
neither to be rendered eao/tac o? ecrofiai (Aq. } Theodt.), "I
shall be that I shall be " (Lutiier), nor " I shall be that which
I will or am to be" (M. Baumgarten). Nor does it mean, " He
who will be because He is Himself, the God of the future"
(Hofmann). For in names formed from the third person im-
perfect, the imperfect is not a future, but an aorist. According
to the fundamental signification of the imperfect, names so
formed point out a person as distinguished by a frequently or
constantly manifested quality, in other words, they express a dis-
tinctive characteristic (yid. Ewald, § 136 ; chap. xxv. 26, xxvii.
36, also xvi. 11 and xxi. 6). The Vulgate gives it correctly:
ego sum qui sum, "I am who I am." u The repetition of the verb
in the same form, and connected only by the relative, signifies
that the being or act of the subject expressed in the verb is de-
1 For a fuller discussion of the meaning and pronunciation of the name
Jehovah vid. Hengstenberg, Dissertations on the Pentateuch i. p. 218 sqq. ;
Oehler in Herzog's Cyclopaedia ; and Hblemann in his Bibelstudien. The last,
in common with Stier and others, decides in favour of the Masoretic pointing
rtf IT as giving the original pronunciation, chiefly on the ground of Rev. i. 4
and 5, 8 ; but the theological expansion 6 at x»l i ij» xmk i if%i(*nt{ cannot be
regarded as a philological proof of the formation of mn by the fusion of
mn, ntfl, VP into one word.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. II 4 75
termined only by the subject itself" (Hofmann). The verb nnj
signifies "to be, to happen, to become;" but as neither happen-
ing nor becoming is applicable to God, the unchangeable, since
the pantheistic idea of a becoming God is altogether foreign
to the Scriptures, we must retain the meaning "to be;" not
forgetting, however, that as the Divine Being is not a resting,
or, so to speak, a dead being, but is essentially living, displaying
itself as living, working upon creation, and moving in the world,
the formation of m:T from the imperfect precludes the idea of
abstract existence, and points out the Divine Being as moving,
pervading history, and manifesting Himself in the world. So
far then as the words rrriK ib>k rrrm are condensed into a proper
name in iw, and God, therefore, " is He who is," inasmuch as
in His being, as historically manifested, He is the self-deter-
mining one, the name Jehovah, which we have retained as
being naturalized in the ecclesiastical phraseology, though we
are quite in ignorance of its correct pronunciation, "includes
both the absolute independence of God in His historical move-
ments," and " the absolute constancy of God, or the fact that
in everything, in both words and deeds, He is essentially in
harmony with Himself, remaining always consistent" (Oehler).
The " 1 am who am," therefore, is the absolute I, the absolute
personality, moving with unlimited freedom ; and in distinction
from Elohim (the Being to be feared), He is the personal God
in His historical manifestation, in which the fulness of the
Divine Being unfolds itself to the world. This movement of
the personal God in history, however, has reference to the re-
alization of the great purpose of the creation, viz. the salvation
of man. Jehovah therefore is the God of the history of sal--i—
vation. This is not shown in the etymology of the name, but *
in its historical expansion. It was as Jehovah that God mani-
fested Himself to Abram (xv. 7), when He made the covenant
with him; and as this name was neither derived from an attribute
of God, nor from a divine manifestation, we must trace its origin
to a revelation from God, and seek it in the declaration to Abram,
"I am Jehovah." Just as Jehovah here revealed Himself to
Abram as the God who led him out of Ur of the Chaldees. to
give him the land of Canaan for a' possession, and thereby de-
scribed Himself as the author of all "he promises which Abram
received at his call, and which were renewed to him and to his
Digitized by VjOOQlC
76 THE FIRST BOOK OF HOSES.
descendants, Isaac and Jacob; so did He reveal Himself to
Moses (Ex. iii.) as the God of his fathers, to fulfil His promise
to their seed, the people of Israel. Through these revelations
Jehovah became a proper name for the God, who was working
out the salvation of fallen humanity; and in this sense, not only
is it used proleptically at the call of Abram (chap, xii.), but trans-
ferred to the primeval times, and applied to all the manifesta-
tions and acts of God which had for their object the rescue of
the human race from its fall, as well as to the special plan in-
augurated in the call of Abram. The preparation commenced
in paradise. To show this, Moses has introduced the name
Jehovah into the history in the present chapter, and has indi-
cated the identity of Jehovah with Elohim, not only by the
constant association of the two names, but also by the fact that
in the heading (ver. 4ft) he speaks of the creation described in
chap. i. as the work of Jehovah Elohim.
PARADISE. — CHAP. II. 6-26.
The account in vers. 5-25 is not a second, complete and
independent history of We creation, nor does it contain mere
appendices to the account in chap. i. ; but i t describes the com-
mencement of t he history of the human race! This commencfr-
ment includes not only a complete account of the creation of
the first human pair, but a description of the place which God
prepared for their abode, the latter being of the highest impor-
tance in relation to the self-determination of man, with its mo-
mentous consequences to both earth and heaven. Even in the
history of the creation man takes precedence of all other crea-
tures, as being created in the image of God and appointed lord
of all the earth, though he is simply mentioned there as the last
and highest link in the creation. To this our present account
is attached, describing with greater minuteness the position of
man in the creation, and explaining the circumstances which
exerted the greatest influence upon his subsequent career.
These circumstances were — the formation of man from the dust
of the earth and the divine breath of life ; the tree of knowledge
in paradise ; the formation of the woman, and the relation of
the woman to the man. Of these three elements, the first
forms the substratum to the other two. Hence the more exact
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. II. 5, 6. 77
account of the creation of Adam is subordinated to, and in-
serted in, the description of paradise (ver. 7). In vers. 5 and 6,
with which the narrative commences, there is an evident allusion
to paradise : " And as yet there was (arose, grew) no shrub of
Hie field upon the earth, and no herb of the field sprouted; for
Jehovah El had not caused it to rain upon the eartli, and there
teas no man to till the ground; and a mist arose from the earth
and watered the whole surface of the ground." njn in parallelism
with noy means to become, to arise, to proceed. Although the
growth of the shrubs and sprouting of the herbs are repre-
sented here as dependent upon the rain and the cultivation of
the earth by man, we must not understand the words as mean-
ing that there was neither shrub nor herb before the rain and
dew, or before the creation of man, and so draw the conclusion
that the creation of the plants occurred either after or con-
temporaneously with the creation of man, in direct contradic-
tion to chap. i. 11, 12. The creation of the plants is not alluded
to here at all, but simply the planting of the garden in Eden.
The growing of the shrubs and sprouting of the herbs is
different from the creation or first production of the vegetable
kingdom, and relates to the growing and sprouting of the plants
and germs which were called into existence by the creation, the
natural development of the plants as it had steadily proceeded
ever since the creation. This was dependent upon rain and
human culture; their creation was not. Moreover, the shrub
and herb of the field do not embrace the whole of the vegetable
productions of the earth. It is not a fact that " the field is
used in the second section in the same sense as the earth in the
first." n"ife> is not " the widespread plain of the earth, the broad
expanse of land," but a field of arable land, soil fit for cultiva-
tion, which forms only a part of the "earth" or "ground-"
Even the "beast of the field" in ver. 19 and iii. 1 is not
synonymous with the " beast of the earth" in chap. i. 24, 25,
but is a more restricted term, denoting only such animals as
live upon the field and are supported by its produce, whereas
the " beast of the earth" denotes all wild beasts as distinguished
from tame cattle and reptiles. In the same way, the " shrub of
the field" consists of such shrubs and tree-like productions of
the cultivated land as man raises for the sake of their fruit, and
the "herb of the field," all seed-producing plants, both corn
Digitized by VjOOQlC
78 THE FIBST BOOK OF MOSES.
and vegetables, which serve as food for man and beast. — The
mist (IN, vapour, which falls as rain, Job xxxvi. 27) is cor-
rectly regarded by Delitzech as the creative beginning of the
rain ("W3Dn) itself, from which we may infer, therefore, that it
rained before the flood.
Ver. 7. " Then Jehovah God formed man from dust of the
ground? "IBB is the accusative of the material employed (Ewald
and Gesenius). The Vav consec. imperf. in vers. 7, 8, 9, does not
indicate the order of time, or of thought ; so that the meaning
is not that God planted the garden in Eden after He had
created Adam, nor that He caused the trees to grow after He
had planted the garden and placed the man there. The latter
is opposed to ver. 15 ; the former is utterly improbable. The
process of man's creation is described minutely here, because it
serves to explain his relation to God and to the surrounding
world. He was formed from dust (not de limo terra, from a
clod of the earth, for idj? is not a solid mass, but the finest part
of the material of the earth), and into his nostril a breath of
life was breathed, by which he became an animated being.
Hence the nature of man consists of a material substance and
an immaterial principle of life. " The breath of life" ue. breath
producing life, does not denote the spirit by which man is dis
tinguished from the animals, or the soul of man from that
of the beasts, but only the life-breath (vid. 1 Kings xvii. 17).
It is true, TOOT generally signifies the human soul, but in
chap. vii. 22 D^n rnvnDBJi is used of men and animals both ;
and should any one explain this, on the ground that the allusion
is chiefly to men, and the animals are connected per zeugma,
or should he press the ruach attached, and deduce from this
the use of neshamah in relation to men and animals, there are
several passages in which neshamah is synonymous with ruach
(e.g. Isa. xlii. 5 ; Job xxxii. 8, xxxiii. 4), or D«n rm applied to
animals (chap. vi. 17, vii. 15), or again neshamah used as equi-
valent to nephesh (e.g. Josh. x. 40, cf. vers. 28, 30, 32). For
neshamah, the breathing, woq, is " the ruach in action" (Auber-
len). Beside this, the man formed from the dust became,
through the breathing of the " breath of life," a n»n eks, an
animated, and as such a living being ; an expression which is
also applied to fishes, birds, and land animals (i. 20, 21, 24, 30),
and there is no proof of pre-eminence on the part of man. As
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. II. 7. 79
njn B'W, -^vyr) ftSxra, does not refer to the soul merely, but to
the whole man as an animated being, so not?3 does not denote
the spirit of man as distinguished from body and soul. On the
relation of the soul to the spirit of man nothing can be gathered
from this passage; the words, correctly interpreted, neither
show that the soul is an emanation, an exhalation of the human
spirit, nor that the soul was created before the spirit and merely
received its life from the latter. The formation of man from
dust and the breathing of the breath of life we must not under-
stand in a mechanical sense, as if God first of all constructed a
human figure from dust, and then, by breathing His breath of
life into the clod of earth which he had shaped into the form of
a man, made it into a living being. The words are to be under-
stood 8eoTrpe7T(o<i. By an act of divine omnipotence man arose
from the dust ; and in the same moment in which the dust, by
virtue of creative omnipotence, shaped itself into a human form,
it was pervaded by the divine breath of life, and created a living
being, so that we cannot say the body was earlier than the soul.
The dust of the earth is merely the earthly substratum, which
was formed by the breath of life from God into an animated,
living, self-existent being. When it is said, "God breathed
into his nostril the breath of life," it is evident that this descrip-
tion merely gives prominence to the peculiar sign of life, viz.
breathing; since it is obvious, that what God breathed into
man could not be the air which man breathes ; for it is not
that which breathes, but simply that which is breathed. Conse-
quently, breathing into the nostril can only mean, that " God,
through His own breath, produced and combined with the
bodily form that principle of life, which was the origin of all
human life, and which constantly manifests its existence in the
breath inhaled and exhaled through the nose" (Delitesch, Psychol.
p. 62). Breathing, however, is common both to man and beast ;
so that this cannot be the sensuous analogon of the supersensuous
spiritual life, but simply the principle of the physical life of the
soul. Nevertheless the vital principle in man is different from
that in the animal, and the human soul from the soul of the
beast. This difference is indicated by the way in which man
received the breath of life from God, and so became a living
soul. " The beasts arose at the creative word of God, and no
communication of the spirit is mentioned even in ch. ii. 19 ; the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
80 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
origin of their soul was coincident with that of their corporeality,
and their life was merely the individualization of the universal
life, with which all matter was filled in the beginning by the
Spirit of God. On the other hand, the human spirit is not a
mere individualization of the divine breath which breathed upon
the material of the world, or of the universal spirit of nature ;
nor is his body merely a production of the earth when stimu-
lated by the creative word of God. The earth does not bring
forth his body, but God Himself puts His hand to the work and
forms him ; nor does the life already imparted to the world by
the Spirit of God individualize itself in him, but God breathes
directly into the nostrils of the one man, in the whole fulness of
His personality, the breath of life, that in a manner correspond-
ing to the personality of God he may become a living soul"
(DelitzscK). This was the foundation of the pre-eminence of
man, of his likeness to God and his immortality ; for by this
he was formed into a personal being, whose immaterial part was
not merely soul, but a soul breathed entirely by God, since
spirit and soul were created together through the inspiration of
God. As the spiritual nature of man is described simply by
the act of breathing, which is discernible by the senses, so the
name which God gives him (chap. v. 2) is founded upon the
earthly side of his being : Adah, from nolK (adamah), earth,
the earthly element, like homo from humus, or from x a f u h
\afud, yafiaBev, to guard him from self-exaltation, not from the
red colour of his body, since this is not a distinctive character-
istic of man, but common to him and to many other creatures.
The name man (Mensch), on the other hand, from the Sanskrit
mdnu8cha, manusckja, from man to think, manas — mens, ex-
presses the spiritual inwardness of our nature.
Ver. 8. The abode, which God prepared for the first man,
was a " garden in Eden" also called " the garden of Eden" (ver.
15, chap. ili. 23, 24 ; Joel ii. 3), or Eden (Isa. li. 3 ; Ezek. xxviii.
13, xxxi. 9). Eden (JV!.> *'•«• delight) is the proper name of a
particular district, the situation of which is described in vers. 10
sqq. ; but it must not be confounded with the Eden of Assyria
(2 Kings xix. 12, etc.) and Ooelesyria (Amos i. 5), which is writ-
ten with double seghol. The garden (lit. a place hedged round)
was to the east, i.e. in the eastern portion, and is generally called
Paradise from the Septuagint version, in which the word is ren-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. IL 10-H. 81
dered irapaSeuros. This word, according to Spiegel, was derived
from the Zendic pairi-daiza, a hedging round, and passed into
the Hebrew in the form DT|B (Cant. iv. 13 ; Eccl. ii. 5 ; Neh.
ii. 8), a park, probably through the commercial relations which /
Solomon established with distant countries. In the garden itself
God caused all kinds of trees to grow out of the earth ; and
among them were two, which were called " the tree of life" and
" the tree of knowledge of good and evil," on account of their
peculiar significance in relation to man (see ver. 16 and chap. iii.
22). Din?, an infinitive, as Jer. xxii. 16 shows, has the article
here because the phrase jm 3U3 njn is regarded as one word, and
in Jeremiah from the nature of the predicate. — Ver. 10. "And,
there was a river going out of Eden, to water the garden ; and from
thence it divided itself, and became four heads ;" i.e. the stream
took its rise in Eden, flowed through the garden to water it, and
on leaving the garden was divided into four heads or beginnings
of rivers, that is, into four arms or separate streams. For this
meaning of DWi see Ezek. xvi. 25, Lam. ii. 19. Of the four
rivers whose names are given to show the geographical situa-
tion of paradise, the last two are unquestionably Tigris and
Euphrates. Hiddekel occurs in Dan. x. 4 as the Hebrew name
for Tigris ; in the inscriptions of Darius it is called Tigrd (or the
arrow, according to Strabo, Pliny, and Curtms), from the Zendic
tighra, pointed, sharp, from which probably the meaning stormy
(rapidus Tigris, Hor. Carm. 4, 14, 46) was derived. It flows
before (JIDIJ?), in front of, Assyria, not to the east of Assyria ;
for the province of Assyria, which must be intended here, was
on the eastern side of the Tigris : moreover, neither the mean-
ing, " to the east of," nor the identity of nonp and mpD has
been, or can be, established from chap. iv. 16, 1 Sam. xiii. 5,
or Ezek. xxxix. 11, which are the only other passages in which
the word occurs, as JEwald himself acknowledges. P'rath, which
was not more minutely described because it was so generally
known, is the Euphrates ; in old Persian, Ufrdta, according to
Delitzsch, or the good and fertile stream ; Ufrdtu, according to
Spiegler, or the well-progressing stream. According to the
present condition of the soil, the sources of the Euphrates and
Tigris are not so closely connected that they could be regarded
as the commencements of a common stream which has ceased to
exist. The main sources of the Tigris, it is true, are only 2000
Digitized by VjOOQlC
82 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES. •
paces from the Euphrates, but they are to the north of Diar-
bekr, in a range of mountains which is skirted on three sides by
the upper course of the Euphrates, and separates them from
this river. We must also look in the same country, the high-
lands of Armenia, for the other two rivers, if the description of
paradise actually rests upon an ancient tradition, and is to be
regarded as something more than a mythical invention of the
fancy. The name Phishon sounds like the PJiasis of the an-
cients, with which Belaud supposed it to be identical ; and Cha-
vilah like Colchis, the well-known gold country of the ancients.
But the $oo-« o Kokxps (Herod. 4, 37, 45) takes its rise in the
Caucasus, and not in Armenia. A more probable conjecture,
therefore, points to the Cyrus of the ancients, which rises in
Armenia, flows northwards to a point not far from the eastern
border of Colchis, and then turns eastward in Iberia, from which
it flows in a south-easterly direction to the Caspian Sea. The
expression, "which compasseth the whole land of ChavUah," would
apply very well to the course of this river from the eastern bor-
der of Colchis ; for 33D does not necessarily signify to surround,
but to pass through with different turns, or to skirt in a semi-
circular form, and Chavilali may have been larger than modern
Colchis. It is not a valid objection to this explanation, that in
every other place Chavilah is a district of Southern Arabia.
The identity of this Chavilah with the Chavilah of the Jok-
tanites (chap. x. 29, xxv. 18 ; 1 Sam. xv. 7) or of the Cushites
(chap. x. 7 ; 1 Chron. i. 9) is disproved not only by the article
used here, which distinguishes it from the other, but also by the
description of it as land where gold, bdolach, and the shoham-
stone are found ; a description neither requisite nor suitable in
the case of the Arabian Chavilah, since these productions are
not to be met with there. This characteristic evidently shows
that the Chavilah mentioned here was entirely distinct from the
other, and a land altogether unknown to the Israelites. — What
we are to understand by n?"i3n is uncertain. There is no certain
ground for the meaning "pearls" given in Saad. and the later
Kabbins, and adopted by Bochart and others. The rendering
fi&eXka or fiSeWiov, bdellium, a vegetable gum, of which Dio-
scorus says, ol Be fiaSeXtcov ol he fio\j^6v KaKovai, and Pliny, " aUi
brochon appellant, alii malacham, alii maldacon," is favoured by
the similarity in the name ; but, on the other side, there is the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. II. 10-14. 83
fact that Ptiny describes this gum as nigrum and hadrobolon,
and Dioscorus as vtrvK&aov (blackish), which does not agree
with Num. xi. 7, where the appearance of the white grains of
the manna is compared to that of bdolack. — The stone thoham,
according to most of the early versions, is probably the beryl,
which is most likely the stone intended by the LXX. (d Xtflos
6 irpatrtvo<:, the leek-green stone), as Pliny, when speaking of
beryls, describes those as probatiseimi, qui viriditatem puri maris
imitantur ; but according to others it is the onyx or sardonyx
(vid. Ges. 8. v.). 1 The Gihon (from rw to break forth) is the
Araxes, which rises in the neighbourhood of the Euphrates,
flows from west to east, joins the Cyrus, and falls with it into
the Caspian Sea. The name corresponds to the Arabic Jaihun,
a name given by the Arabians and Persians to several large
rivers. The land of Cush cannot, of course, be the later Cush,
or Ethiopia, but must be connected with the Asiatic Koaaaia,
which reached to the Caucasus, and to which the Jews (of Shir-
wan) still give this name. But even though these four streams
do not now spring from one source, but on the contrary their
souroes are separated by mountain ranges, this fact does not
prove that the narrative before us is a myth. Along with or
since the disappearance of paradise, that part of the earth may
have undergone such changes that the precise locality can no
longer be determined with certainty. 2
1 The two productions furnish no proof that the Phishon is to be sought
for in India. The assertion that the name bdolach is Indian, is quite un-
founded, for it cannot be proved that maddlaha in Sanscrit is a vegetable
gum ; nor has this been proved of maddra, which is possibly related to it
(of. Lassen's indische Alchk. 1, 290 note). Moreover, Pliny speaks of Bac-
triana as the land " in qua Bdellium est nominalissimum" although he adds,
" nasciiur et in Arabia Indiaque, et Media ac Babylone ;" and Isidorus says
of the Bdella which comes from India, " Sordida est et nigra et majori
gleba" which, again, does not agree with Num. xi. 7. — The sholiam-stone
also is not necessarily associated with India ; for although Pliny says of the
beryls, "India eos gignit, raro alibi repertos," he also observes, " in nostra
orbe aliquando circa Pontum inveniri putantur."
* That the continents of our globe have undergone great changes since
the creation of the human race, is a truth sustained by the facts of natural
history and the earliest national traditions, and admitted by the most cele-
brated naturalists. (See the collection of proofs made by Kesri.") These
changes must not be all attributed to the flood ; many may have occurred
before and many after, like the catastrophe in which the Dead Sea origin-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
84 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
Vers. 15-17. After the preparation of the garden in Eden
God placed the man there, to dress it and to keep it. 'rovr not
merely expresses removal thither, but the fact that the man was
placed there to lead a life of repose, not indeed in inactivity,
but in fulfilment of the coarse assigned him, which was very
different from the trouble and restlessness of the weary toil into
which he was plunged by sin. In paradise he was to dress
(colere) the garden ; for the earth was meant to be tended and
cultivated by man, so that without human culture, plants and
even the different varieties of corn degenerate and grow wild.
Cultivation therefore preserved (lDC* to keep) the divine planta-
tion, not merely from injury on the part of any evil power,
either penetrating into, or already existing in the creation, but
also from running wild through natural degeneracy. As nature
was created for man, it was his vocation not only to ennoble it
by his work, to make it subservient to himself, but also to raise
it into the sphere of the spirit and further its glorification.
This applied not merely to the soil beyond the limits of paradise,
but to the garden itself, which, although the most perfect portion
of the terrestrial creation, was nevertheless susceptible of de-
velopment, and which was allotted to man, in order that by his
care and culture he might make it into a transparent mirror of
the glory of the Creator. — Here too the man was to commence
his own spiritual development. To this end God had planted
two trees in the midst of the garden of Eden ; the one to tra in
bis spirit thr ough the exercise of obedience to the worcTofZGod,
the other to transform his earthly nature into the spiritual
essence of eternal Me. These trees received their names from
their relation to man, that is to say, from the effect which the
eating of their fruit was destined to produce upon human life
and its development. The fruit of the tree of life conferred the
power of eternal, immortal life ; and the tree of knowledge was
planted, to lead men to the knowledge of good and evil. The
knowledge of good and evil was no mere experience of good and
ill, but a moral element in that spiritual development, through
ated, without being recorded in history as this has been. Still less most we
interpret chap. xi. 1 (compared with x. 26), as Fabri and Keerl have done,
as indicating a complete revolution of the globe, or a geogonic process, by
which the continents of the old world were divided, and assumed their pre-
sent physiognomy,
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. IL 15-17. 85
which the man created in the image of God was to attain to the
filling out of that nature, which had already been planned in the
likeness of God. For not to know what good and evil are, is a
sign of either the immaturity of infancy (Deut. i. 39), or the
imbecility of age (2 Sam. xix. 35) ; whereas the power to dis-
tinguish good and evil is commended as the gift of a king (1
Kings iii. 9) and the wisdom of angels (2 Sam. xiv. 17), and in
the highest sense is ascribed to God Himself (chap. iii. 5, 22).
Why then did God prohibit man from eating of the tree of the
knowledge of good and evil, with the threat that, as soon as he
ate thereof, he would surely die! (The inf. abs. before the
finite verb intensifies the latter : vid. Ewald, § 312a). Are we
to regard the tree as poisonous, and suppose that some fatal pro-
perty resided in the fruit ? A supposition which so completely
ignores the ethical nature of sin is neither warranted by the
antithesis, nor by what is said in chap. iii. 22 of the tree of
life, nor by the fact that the eating of the forbidden fruit was
actually the cause of death. Even in the case of the tree of
life, the power is not to be sought in the physical character of
the fruit. No earthly fruit possesses the power to give immor-
tality to the life which it helps to sustain. Life is not rooted
in man's corporeal nature ; it was in his spiritual nature that it
had its origin, and from this it derives its stability and per-
manence also. It may, indeed, be brought to an end through
the destruction of the body ; but it cannot be exalted to per-
petual duration, i.e. to immortality, through its preservation and
sustenance. And this applies quite as much to the original
nature of man, as to man after the fall. A body formed from
earthly materials could not be essentially immortal : it would of
necessity either be turned to earth, and fall into dust again, or
be transformed by the spirit into the immortality of the soul.
The power which transforms corporeality into immortality is
spiritual in its nature, and could only be imparted to the earthly
tree or its fruit through the word of God, through a special
operation of the Spirit of God, an operation which we can only
picture to ourselves as sacramental in its character, rendering
earthly elements the receptacles and vehicles of celestial powers.
God had given such a sacramental nature and significance to the
two trees in the midst of the garden, that their fruit could and
would produce supersensual, mental, and spiritual effects upon
Digitized by VjOOQlC
86 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
. the nature of the first human pair. The tree of life was to im-
/ J part the power of transformation into eternal life. The tree of
/ / knowledge was to lead man to the knowledge of good and evil ;
~T" and, according to the divine intention, this was to be attained
I through his not eating of its fruit. This end was to be accom-
plished, not only by his discerning in the limit imposed by the
prohibition the difference between that which accorded with the
will of God and that which opposed it, but also by his coming
eventually, through obedience to the prohibition, to recognise
the fact that all that is opposed to the will of God is an evil to
be avoided, and, through voluntary resistance to such evil, to the
full development of the freedom of choice originally imparted
to him into the actual freedom of a deliberate and self-conscious
choice of good. By obedience to the divine will he would have
attained to a godlike knowledge of good and evil, i.e. to one in
accordance with his own likeness to God. He would have de-
tected the evil in the approaching tempter; but instead of yield-
ing to it, he would have resisted it, and thus have made good
his own property acquired with consciousness and of his own
free-will, and in this way by proper self-determination would
gradually have advanced to the possession of the truest liberty.
But as he failed to keep this divinely appointed way, and ate
the forbidden fruit in opposition to the command of God, the
power imparted by God to the fruit was manifested in a dif-
ferent way. He learned the difference between good and evil
from his own guilty experience, and by receiving the evil into
his own soul, fell a victim to the threatened death. Thus
through his own fault the tree, which should have helped him
to attain true freedom, brought nothing but the sham liberty of
sin, and with it death, and that without any demoniacal power
of destruction being conjured into the tree itself, or any fatal
poison being hidden in its fruit.
Vers. 18-25. Creation of the Woman. — As the creation
cf man is introduced in chap. i. 26, 27, with a divine decree, so
here that of the woman is preceded by the divine declaration,
It is not good that the man should be alone ; I will make' him
ilM3 1JV, a help of his like : " i.e. a helping being, in which, as
soon as he sees it, he may recognise himself " (Delitzsch). Of such
a help the man stood in need, in order that he might fulfil his
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. II. 18-25. 87
calling, not only to perpetuate and multiply his race, but to cul-
tivate and govern the earth. To indicate this, the general word
TU33 n?P is chosen, in which there is an allusioc to the relation
of the sexes. To call out this want, God brought the larger
quadrupeds and birds to the man, " to see what he would call
them (tf> lit. each one) ; and whatsoever the man might call evert/
living being should be its name." The time when this took place
must have been the sixth day, on which, according to chap. i. 27,
the man and woman were created : and there is no difficulty in this,
since it would not have required much time to bring the animals
to Adam to see what he would call them, as the animals of
paradise are all we have to think of ; and the deep sleep into
which God caused the man to fall, till he had formed the woman
from his rib, need not have continued long. In chap. i. 27 the
creation of the woman is linked with that of the man ; but here
the order of sequence is given, because the creation of the woman
formed a chronological incident in the history of the human
race, which commences with the creation of Adam. The circum-
stance that in ver. 19 the formation of the beasts and birds is
connected with the creation of Adam by the imperf. c. 1 consec,
constitutes no objection to the plan of creation given in chap. i.
The arrangement may be explained on the supposition, that the
writer, who was about to describe the relation of man to the
beasts, went back to their creation, in the simple method of the
early Semitic historians, and placed this first instead of making
it subordinate ; so that our modern style of expressing the same
thought would be simply this : " God brought to Adam the
beasts which He had formed." 1 Moreover, the allusion is not
1 A striking example of this style of narrative we find in 1 Kings vii.
13. First of all, the building and completion of the temple are noticed
several times in chap, vi., and the last time in connection with the year
and month (chap. vi. 9, 14, 37, 38) ; after that, the fact is stated, that
the royal palace was thirteen years in building ; and then the writer pro-
ceeds thus : " And king Solomon sent and fetched Hiram from Tyre ....
and he came to king Solomon, and did all his work ; and made the two pil-
lars," etc. Now, if we were to understand the historical preterite with 1 con-
tec, here, as giving the order of sequence, Solomon would be made to send
for the Tyrian artist, thirteen years after the temple was finished, to come
and prepare the pillars for the porch, and all the vessels needed for the
temple. But the writer merely expresses in Semitic style the simple
thought, that " Hiram, whom Solomon fetched from Tyre, made the ves»
■ek," etc. Another instance we find in Jndg. ii. 6.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
88 THE FIRST BOOK OF HOSES.
to the creation of all the beasts, but simply to that of the beasts
living in the field (game and tame cattle), and of the fowls of
the air, — to beasts, therefore, which had been formed like man
from the earth, and thus stood in a closer relation to him than
water animals or reptiles. For God brought the animals to
Adam, to show him the creatures which were formed to serve
him, that He might see what he would call them. Calling
or naming presupposes acquaintance. Adam is to become
acquainted with the creatures, to learn their relation to him, and
by giving them names to prove himself their lord. God does
not order him to name them ; but by bringing the beasts He
gives him an opportunity of developing that intellectual capacity
which constitutes his superiority to the animal world. " The
man sees the animals, and thinks of what they are and how they
^. -look ; and these thoughts, in themselves already inward words,
take the form involuntarily of audible names, which he utters
to the beasts, and by which he places the impersonal creatures
in the first spiritual relation to himself, the personal being"
\ (Delitzscli). Language, as W. v. Humboldt says, is " the organ
-Hh©f the inner being, or rather the inner being itself as it gradually
""| attains to inward knowledge and expression." It is merely
* thought cast into articulate sounds or words. The thoughts of
Adam with regard to the animals, to which he gave expression
in the names that he gave them, we are not to regard as the mere
results of reflection, or of abstraction from merely outward pe-
culiarities which affected the senses ; but as a deep and direct
mental insight into the nature of the animals, which penetrated
far deeper than such knowledge as is the simple result of reflect-
ing and abstracting thought. The naming of the animals, there-
fore, led to this result, that there was not found a help meet
for man. Before the creation of the woman we must regard
the man (Adam) as being " neither male, in the sense of com-
plete sexual distinction, nor androgynous as though both sexes
were combined in the one individual created at the first, but
as created in anticipation of the future, with a preponderant
tendency, a male in simple potentiality, out of which state he
passed, the moment the woman stood by his side, when the mere
potentia became an actual antithesis" (Ziegler). — Then God
caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man (ver. 21). florin, a
deep sleep, in which all consciousness of the outer world and
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. II. 18-25. 89
of one's own existence vanishes. Sleep is an essential element in
the nature of man as ordained by God, and is quite as neces-
sary for man as the interchange of day and night for all nature
besides. But this deep sleep was different from natural sleep,
and God caused it to fall upon the man by day, that He might
create the woman out of him. " Everything out of^which
something new is to spring, sinks first of all into such a sleep "
(Ziegler). y?? meansThe sidey and, *s a p or tion of -the- human
body, the rib. The correctness of this meaning, which is given
by all the ancient versions, is evident from the words, " God
took one of his n\)ht" which show that the man had several of
them. " And closed up flesh in the place thereof;" i.e. closed the
gap which had been made, with flesh which He put in the place
of the rib. The woman was created, not of dust of the earth, but
from a rib of Adam, because she was formed for an inseparable
unity and fellowship of life with the man, and the mode of her
creation was to lay the actual foundation for the moral ordi-
nance of marriage. As the moral idea of the unity of the human
race required that man should not be created as a genus or
plurality, 1 so the moral relation of the two persons establishing
the unity of the race required that man should be created first,
and then the woman from the body of the man. By this the
priority and superiority of the man, and the dependence of the
woman upon the man, are established as an ordinance of divine
creation. This ordinance of God forms the root of that tender
1 Natural science can only demonstrate the unity of the human race,
not the descent of all men from one pair, though many naturalists question
and deny even the former, but without any warrant from anthropological
facta. For every thorough investigation leads to the conclusion arrived at
by the latest inquirer in this department, Th. Waitz, that not only are
there no facts in natural history which preclude the unity of the various
races of men, and fewer difficulties in the way of this assumption than in
that of the opposite theory of specific diversities ; but even in mental re-
spects there are no specific differences within the limits of the race. Delitzsch
has given an admirable summary of the proofs of unity. " That the races
of men," he says, " are not species of one genus, but varieties of one species,
is confirmed by the agreement in the physiological and pathological pheno-
mena in them all, by the similarity in the anatomical structure, in the fun-
damental powers and traits of the mind, in the limits to the duration of
life, in the normal temperature of the body and the average rate of pulsa-
tion, in the duration of pregnancy, and in the unrestricted fruitfulness of
marriages between the various races."
PENT. — VOL. I. O
Digitized by VjOOQlC
90 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
love with which the man loves the woman as himself, and by
which marriage becomes a type of the fellowship of love and life,
which exists between the Lord and His Church (Eph. vi. 32).
If the fact that the woman was formed from a rib, and not from
any other part of the man, is significant ; all that we can find in
this is, that the woman was made to stand as a helpmate by the
side of the man, not that there was any allusion to conjugal love
as founded in the heart ; for the text does not speak of the rib
as one which was next the heart. The word fU3 is worthy of
note : from the rib of the man God builds the female, through
whom the human race is to be built up by the male (chap. xvi. 2,
xxx. 3). — Vers. 23, 24. The design of God in the creation of
the woman is perceived by Adam, as soon as he awakes, when
the woman is brought to him by God. Without a revelation
from God, he discovers in the woman bone of kia bones and flesh
of his flesh!' The words, " this is now (W^n lit. this time) bone
of my bones," etc., are expressive of joyous astonishment at the
suitable helpmate, whose relation to himself he describes in the
words, u she shall be called Woman, for she is taken out of man."
fiBta is well rendered by Luther, u Mdnnm" (a female man),
like the old Latin vira from vir. The words which follow,
1 " therefore shall a man leave hit father and his mother, and shall
: cleave unto his wife, and they shall become one flesh," are not to
; be regarded as Adam's, first on account of the ??"v?, which is
always used in Genesis, with the exception of chap. xx. 6, xlii. 21,
to introduce remarks of the writer, either of an archaeological
•or of a historical character, and secondly, because, even if
Adam on seeing the woman had given prophetic utterance to
his perception of the mystery of marriage, he could not with
propriety have spoken of father and mother. They are the
words_fltMoses, written to bring out the truth embodied in the
fact recorded as a divinely appointed result, to exhibit marriage
as the deepest corporeal and spiritual unity of man and woman,
and to hold up monogamy before the eyes of the people of Israel
as the form of marriage ordained by God. But as the words of
Moses, they are the utterance of divine revelation ; and Christ
could quote them, therefore, as the word of God (Matt. xix. 5).
By the leaving of father and mother, which applies to the woman
as well as to the man, the conjugal union is shown to be a spiritual
oneness, a vital communion of heart as well as of body, in which
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. III. 91
it finds its consummation. This union is of a totally different
nature from that of parents and children ; hence marriage be-
tween parents and children is entirely opposed to the ordinance
of God. Marriage itself, notwithstanding the fact that it de-
mands the leaving of father and mother, is a holy appointment
of God ; hence celibacy is not a higher or holier state, and the
relation of the sexes for a pure and holy man is a pure and
holy relation. This is shown in ver. 25 : " They were both
naked (B^" 1 ^, with dagesh in the e, is an abbreviated form of
Dnyi\g iii. 7, from -\y to strip), the man and hie toife, and were not
ashamed? Their bodies were sanctified by the spirit, which
animated them. Shame entered first with sin, which destroyed
the normal relation of the spirit to the body, exciting tenden-
cies and lusts which warred against the squl, and turning the
sacred ordinance of God into sensual impulses and the lust of
the flesh
THE FALL. — CHAP. HI.
The man, whom God had app ointed lord of the earth and its
i nhabitan ts, was jendowed_ with eyei^Hng_reguisite_ for the de^
vel opment of his nature and the fulfilment of his destiny. In
the fruit of the trees of the garden he had food for the susten-
ance of his life ; in the care of the garden itself, a field of labour
for the exercise of his physical strength ; in the animal and vege-
table kingdom, a capacious region for the expansion of his
intellect; in the tree of knowledge, a positive law for the train-
ing of his moral nature ; and in the woman associated with him,
a suitable companion and help. In such circumstances as these
he might have developed both his physical and spiritual nature
in accordance with the will of God. But a tempter approached
him from the midst of the animal world, and he yielded to the
temptation to break the command of God. The serpent is said
to have been the tempter. But to any one who reads the narra-
tive carefully in connection with the previous history of the
creation, and bears in mind that man is there described as exalted
far above all the rest of the animal world, not only by the fact
of his having been created in the image of God and invested
with dominion over all the creatures of the earth, but also because
God breathed into him the breath of life, and no help meet for
Digitized by VjOOQlC
92 THE FIBST BOOK OF MOSES.
him was found among the beasts of the field, and also that this
superiority was manifest in the gift of speech, which enabled
him to give names to all the rest — a thing which they, as speech-
less, were unable to perform, — it must be at once apparent that
it was not from the serpent, as a sagacious and crafty animal,
that the temptation proceeded, but that the serpent was simply
the tool of that evil spirit, who is met with in the further course
of the world's history under the name of Satan (the opponent),
or the Devil (o Sta^SoXo?, the slanderer or accuser). 1 When
the serpent, therefore, is introduced as speaking, and that just as
if it had been entrusted with the thoughts of God Himself, the
speaking must have emanated, not from the serpent, but from a
superior spirit, which had taken possession of the serpent for the
sake of seducing man. This fact, indeed, is not distinctly stat ed
in the canonical books of the Old Testament ; but that is simply
for, the same educational reason which led Moses to transcribe
the account exactly as it had been handedTownTln'the pure
objective form of an outward and visible occurrence, and with-
out any allusion to the causality which underlay the external
phenomenon, viz. not so much to oppose the tendency of con-
temporaries to heathen superstition and habits of intercourse
with the kingdom of demons, as to avoid encouraging the dispo-
sition to transfer the blame to the evil spirit whichjtejnptedjnan,
and thus reduce sin to a mere act of weakness. But we find the
fact distinctly alluded to in the book of Wisdom ii. 24 ; and not
only is it constantly noticed in the rabbinical writings, where
the prince of the evil spirits is called the old serpent, or the ser-
pent, with evident reference to this account, but it was introduced
at a very early period into Parsism also. It is also attested by
Christ and His apostles (John viii. 44; 2 Cor. xi. 3 and 14;
Rom. xvi. 20 ; Rev. xii. 9, xx. 2), and confirmed by the tempta-
1 There was a fall, therefore, in the higher spiritual world before the fall
of man ; and this is not only plainly taught in 2 Pet. ii. 4 and Jude 6, but
assumed in everything that the Scriptures say of Satan. But this event in
the world of spirits neither compels us to place the fall of Satan before the
six days' work of creation, nor to assume that the days represent long periods.
For as man did not continue long in communion with God, so the angel-
prince may have rebelled against God shortly after his creation, and not only
have involved a host of angels in his apostasy and fall, but have proceeded
immediately to tempt the men, who were created in the image of God, to
abuse their liberty by transgressing the divine command.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. III. 93
tion of our Lord. Thejtemptation of Christ is the counterpart
of that of Ad am. Christ was tempted by the devil, not only
like Adam, but because Adam had been tempted and overcome,
in order that by overcoming the tempter He might wrest from
the devil that dominion over the whole race which he had secured
by his victory over the first human pair. The tempter approached
the Saviour openly ; to the first man he came in disguise. The
serpent is not a merely symbolical term applied to Satan ; nor
was it only the form which Satan assumed ; but it was a real
s erpen t, perverted by Satan to be the instrument of his tempta-
tion (vers. 1 and 14). The possibility of such a perversion, or of
the evil spirit using an animal for his own purposes, is not to be
explained merely on the ground of the supremacy of spirit over
nature, but also from the connection established in the creation
itself between heaven and earth ; and still more, from the posi-
tion originally assigned by the Creator to the spirits of heaven
in relation to the creatures of earth. The origin, force, and limits
of this relation it is impossible to determine a priori, or in any
other way than from such hints as are given in the Scriptures ;
so that there is no reasonable ground for disputing the possibility
of such an influence. Notwithstanding his self-willed opposition
to God, Satan is still a creature of God, and was created a good
spirit ; although, in proud self-exaltation, he abused the freedom
essential to the nature of a superior spirit to purposes of rebellion
against his Maker. He cannot therefore entirely shake off his
dependence upon God. And this dependence may possibly ex-
plain the reason, why he did not come " disguised as an angel of
light" to tempt our first parents to disobedience, but was obliged
to seek the instrument of his wickedness among the beasts of the
field. The trial of our first progenitors was ordained by God,
because probation was essential to their spiritual development ^1/
and self-determination. But as Hejlid not desire that they
shoujdjje tempted to their fall, He would not suffer Satan to
tempt them in a way which should surpass their human capacity.
The tempted might therefore have resisted the tempter. If,
instead of approaching them in the form of a celestial being, in
the likeness of God, he came in that of a creature, not only far
inferior to God, but far below themselves, they could have no
excuse for allowing a mere animal to persuade them to break the
commandment of God. For they had been made to have do-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
94
THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
minion over the beasts, and not to take their own law from them.
Moreover, the fact that an evil spirit was approaching them in
the serpent, could hardly be concealed fromihem^ Its speaking
alone must have suggested that ; for Adam had already become
acquainted with the nature of the beasts, and had not found one
among them resembling himself — not one, therefore, endowed
with reason and speech. The substance of the address, too, was
enough to prove that it was no good spirit which spake through
the serpent, but one at enmity with God. Hence, when they
paid attention to what he said, they were altogether without
excuse.
Vers. 1-8. " The serpent was more subtle than all the beasts
of the field, which Jehovah God Jiad made" — The serpent is here
described not only as a beast, but also as a creature of God ; it
must therefore have been good, like everything else that He
had made. S ubtiltyw as a natural characteristic of the serpent
(Matt. x. 16), which led the evil one to select it as his instru-
ment. Nevertheless the predicate Dnj> is not used here in the
good sense of (ftpovi/w; (LXX.), prudens, but in the bad sense of
iravovpyos, callidus. For its subtiUy was manifested as the craft
of a tempter to evil, in the simple fact that it was to the weaker
woman that it turned ; and cunning was also displayed in what
it said : " Hath God indeed said, Ye shall not eat of all the trees of
the garden!" 'SJK is an interrogative expressing surprise (as in
1 Sam. xxiii. 3, 2 Sam. iv. 11) : "Is it really the fact that God
has prohibited you from eating of all the trees of the garden t "
The Hebrew may, indeed, bear the meaning, "hath God said,
ye shall not eat of every tree?" but from the context, and espe-
cially the conjunction, it is obvious that the meaning is, " ye
shall not eat of any tree." The_ serpent calls God hy the name
o f Elohim alone, and the woman does the same. In this more
general and indefinite name the personality of the living God
is obscured. To attain his end, the tempter felt it necessary to
change the living personal God into a merely general numen
divinum, and to exaggerate the prohibition, in the hope of excit
ing in the woman's mini partly distrust of God Himself, and
partly a doubt as to the truth of His word. And his words
were listened to. Instead of turning away, the woman replied,
" We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden; but of the
fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said,
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. IIL 1-8. 95
Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die." She
was aware of the prohibition, therefore, and fully understood its
meaning ; but she added, " neither shall ye touch it," and proved
by this very ex agge ration that it appeared too sfrringpnt. pyp.n to
her, and therefore that her love and confidence towards God
were already beginning to waver. Here was the beginning of
her fall: " for doubt is the father of sin, and skepsis the mother
of all transgression ; aricTin this father and this mother, all our
present knowledge has a common origin with sin" (Ziegler).
From doubt, the tempter advances to a direct denial of the truth
of the divine threat, and to a malicious suspicion of the divine
love (vers. 4, 5). " Ye wiU bji no means die" (gfr is placed be-
fore_the infinitive absolute, as in Ps. xlix. 8 and Amos be. 8 ;
for the meaning is not, " ye will not die;" but, ye will positively
not die). " But 1 God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof ^
your eyes will be opened,* and ye will be like God, knowing good
and evil." That is to say, it is not because the fruit of the tree
will injure you that God has forbidden you to eat it, but from
ill-will and envy, because He does not wish you to be like Him-
self. " A truly satanicjfouWe entendre, in which a certain agree-
ment between truth and untruth is secured ! " By eating the
fruit, man did obtain the knowledge of good and evil, and in this
respect became like God (vers. 7 and 22). This was the truth
which covered the falsehood " ye shall not die," and turned the
whole statement into a lie, exhibiting its author as the father of
lies, who abides not in the truth (John viii. 44). For the know-
ledge of good and evil, which man obtains by going into evil, is
as far removed from the true likeness of God, which he would
have attained by avoiding it, as the imaginary liberty of a sinner,
which leads into bondage to sin and ends in death, is from the
true liberty of a life of fellowship with God. — Ver. 6. The
illusive hope of being like God excited a longing for the for-
bidden fruit. " The woman saw that the tree was good for food,
and that it was a pleasure to the eyes, and to be desired to make
one wise (fty*} signifies to gain or show discernment or insight) ;
and she took of its fruit and ate, and gave to her husband by her
(who was present), and he did eat." As distrust of God's com-
1 <3 used to establish a denial.
2 VlpOJl perfect c. l consec. See Gesenivt, § 126, Note 1.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
% THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
mand leads to a disregard of it, so the longing for a false inde-
pendence excites a desire for the seeming good that has been
prohibited ; and this desire is fostered by the senses, until it
brings forth sin. Doub^ unbelief, and pride were the r oots of
the sin of our first parents, as they have been of all.the sins of
their^osterity. The more trifling the object of their sin seems
to have been, the greater and more difficult does the sin itself
appear ; especially when we consider that the first men u stood
in a more direct relation to God, their Creator, than any other
man has ever done, that their hearts were pure, their discern-
ment clear, their intercourse with God direct, that they were
surrounded by gifts just bestowed by Him, and could not excuse
themselves on the ground of any misunderstanding of the divine
prohibition, which threatened them with the loss of life in the
event of disobedience " (DeliUsch). Yet not only did the woman
yield to the seductive wiles of the serpent, but even the man
allowed himself to be tempted by the woman. — Vers. 7, 8.
" Then the eyes of them both were opened" (as the serpent had
foretold : but what did they see ?), " and tliey knew that they were
naked." They had lost " that blessed blindness, the ignorance
of innocence, which knows nothing of nakedness" (Ziegler).
The discovery of their„nakedness excited shame, which they
sought to conceal by an outward covering. " They sewed Jig-
leaves together, and made themselves aprons? The word njRn
always denotes the fig-tree, not the pisang (Musa paradisiaca),
nor the Indian banana, whose leaves are twelve feet long and two
feet broad, for there would have been no necessity to sew them
together at all. rnJ0> irept^mftaTO, are aprons, worn round the
hips. It was here that the consciousness of nakedness first
suggested the need of covering, not because the fruit had poi-
soned the fountain of human life, and through some inherent
quality had immediately corrupted the reproductive powers of
the body (as Hoffmann and Baumgarten suppose), nor because
any physical change ensued in consequence of the fall ; but
I because, with the destruction of the normal connection between
\ soul and body through sin, the body ceased to be thejrare abode
N^of. a spirit in fellowship with God, and in the purely natural
state of the body the consciousness was produced not merely of
the distinction of the sexes, but still more of the worthlessness
of the flesh ; so that the man and woman stood ashamed in each
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. III. 9-18.
97
other's presence, and endeavoured to hide the disgrace of their
spiritual nakedness, by covering those parts of the body through
which the impurities of nature are removed. That the natural
feeling of shame, the origin of which is recorded here, had its
root, not in sensuality or any physical corruption, but in the
consciousness of guilt or shame before God, and consequently
that it was the conscience which was really at work, is evident
from the fact that the man and his wife hid themselves from
Jehovah God among the trees of the garden, as soon as they
heard the sound of His footsteps, nftp Mp (the voice of Jeho-
vah, ver. 8) is not the voice of God speaking or calling, but
the sound of God walking, as in 2 Sam. v. 24, 1 Kings xiv.
6, etc. — In the cool of the day (lit. in the wind of the day), i.e.
towards the evening, when a cooling wind generally blows.
The__m en hav e broken away from God, but God will not and
cannot leavethem alone. He comes to them as one man to
another. This was the earliest form of divine revelation. God
conversed with the first man in a visible shape, as the Father
7-
and Instructor of His children. He did not adopt this mode for
the first time after the fall, but employed it as far back as the ' f**** . '' '
period when He brought the beasts to Adam, and gave him the J- i ' *■'
woman to be his wife (chap. ii. 19, 22). This human mode of
intercourse between man and God is not a mere figure of speech,
but a reality, having its foundation in the nature of humanity, or
rather in the fact that man was created in the image of God, but
not in the sense supposed by Jakobi, that " God theomorphised
when creating man, and man therefore necessarily anthropomor-
phises when he thinks of God." T he anth ropomorphies of
Gadjbaye their real foundation in the divinecondescension
which culminated in the incarnation of God in Christ. They
are to be understood, however, as implying, not That corporeality,
or a bodily shape, is an essential characteristic of God, but that
God having given man a bodily shape, when He created him
in His own image, revealed Himself in a manner suited to his
bodily senses, that He might thus preserve him in living com-
munion with Himself.
Vers. 9-15. The man could not hide himself from God. "Je-
hovah God called unto Adam, and said unto him, Where art thou ?"
Not that He was ignorant of his hiding-place, but to bring him
to a confession of his sin. And when Adam said that he had
Digitized by
Google
98
THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
t:
hidden himself through fear of his nakedness, and thus sought
to hide the sin behind its consequences, his disobedience behind
the feeling of shame ; this is not to be regarded as a sign of pe-
culiar obduracy, but easily admits of a psychological explanation,
viz. that at the time he actually thought more of his nakedness
and shame than of his transgression of the divine command, and
his consciousness of the effects of his sin was keener than his
sense of the sin itself. Toawaken the Latter God .said, " Who
toMdlies. that thou wast naked V and asked him whether he had
broken His command. He could not deny that he had, but
sought to excuse himself by saying, that the woman whom God
gave to be with him had given him of the tree. When the
woman was questioned, she pleaded as her excuse, that the ser-
pent had beguiled her (or rather deceived her, itjairarrjaev, 2 Cor.
xi. 3). In offering these excuses, neither of them denied the
fact. But the fault in both was, that they did not at once smite
upon their breasts. " It is so still ; the sinner first of all endea-
vours to throw the blame upon others as tempters, and then upon
circumstances which God has ordained." — Vers. 14, 15. The sen-
tence follows the examination, and is pronounced first of all upon
the serpent as the tempter : " Because thou hast done this, thou art
cursed before all cattle, and before every beast of the field." 10. liter - '
al ly out of the beasts, separate from them (Deut. xiv. 2 ; Judg. v.
24), is not a comparative signifyi ng more tha n, nor does it mean
by : for the curse did not proceed from the beasts, but from God,
and was not pronounced upon all the beasts, but upon the serpent
alone. The Kriam, it is true, including the whole animal crea-
tion, has been " made subject to vanity" and " the bondage of
corruption," in consequence of the sin of man (Bom. viii. 20, 21);
yet this subjection is not to be regarded as the effect of the
; curse, which was pronounced upon the serpent, having fallen
upon the whole animal world, but as the consequence of death
passing from man into the rest of the creation, and thoroughly
•pervading the whole. Tfee_ creation was drawn into the fall of
jman, and compelled to share its consequences, because the whole
bf the irrational creation was made for man, and made subject
to him as its head ; consequently the ground was cursed for
man's sake, but not the animal world for the serpent's sake, or
even along with the serpent. The curse fell upon the serpent
for having tempted the woman, according to the same law by
LC;
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. HI. 9-15. 99
which not only a beast which had injured a man was ordered to
be put to death (chap. ix. 5 ; Ex. xxi. 28, 29), but any beast
which had been the instrument of an unnatural crime was to be
slain along with the man (Lev. xx. 15, 16) ; not as though the
beast were an accountable creature, but in consequence of its
having been made subject to man, not to injure his body or his
life, or to be the instrument of his sin, but to subserve the great
purpose of his life. " Just as a loving father," as Chrysostom
says, " when punishing the murderer of his son, might snap in~ s.
two the sword or dagger with which the murder had been com-
mitted." The proof, therefore, that the serpent was merely the
instrument of an evil spirit, does not lie in the. punishment itself,
but in the manner in which the sentence was pronounced. When
God addressed the animal, and pronounced a curse upon it, this
presupposed that the curse had regard not so much to the irra-
tional beast as to the spiritual tempter, and that the punishment
which fell upon the serpent was merely a symbol of his own.
The punishment of the serpent corresponded to the crime. It
had exalted itself above the man ; therefore upon its belly it
should go, and dust it should eat all the days of its life. If these
words are not to be robbed of their entire meaning, they cannot
be understood in any other way than as denoting that the_form
and moyements_of the serpent were altered, and that its present
repulsive shape is the effect of the curse pronounced upon it,
though we cannot form any accurate idea of its original appear-
ance. Going upon the belly (= creeping, Lev. xi. 42) was a
mark of the deepest degradation ; also the eating of dust, which
is not to be understood as meaning that dust was to be its only
food, but that while crawling in the dust it would also swallow
dust (cf. Micah vii. 17 ; Isa. xlix. 23). Although this punish-
ment fell literally upon the serpent, it also affected the tempter
in a figurative or symbolical sense. He became the object of
the utmost contempt and abhorrence ; and the serpent still keeps
the revolting image of Satan perpetually before the eye. This
degradation was to be perpetual. " While all the rest of crea-
tion shall be delivered from the fate into which the fall has
plunged it, according to Isa. lxv. 25, the instrument of man 's
temptation is to remain sentenced to perpetual degradation in
fulfilment of the sentence, ' all the days of thy life,' a nd th us to
preligure the~?ate of the real tempter, for whom there is no
Digitized by VjOOQlC
V
>
100 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
deliverance" (Hengstenberg, Christology i. 15). — The presump-
tion of the tempter was punished with the deepest degradation ;
and in like manner his sympathy with the woman was to be
turned into eternal hostility (ver. 15) God established perpe-
tual enmity, not only between the serpent and the woman, but
also between the serpent's and the woman's seed, i.e. between the
human and the serpent race. The seed of the woman would
crush the serpent's head, and the serpent crush the heel of the
woman's seed. The meaning, terere, conterere, is thoroughly
established by the Chald., Syr., and Rabb. authorities, and we
have therefore retained it, in harmony with the word awrpLfieiv
in Rom. xvi. 20, and because it accords better and more easily
with all the other passages in which the word occurs, than the
rendering inhiare, to regard with enmity, which is obtained from
the combination of *\W with 'INt?. The verb is construed with a
double accusative, the second giving greater precision to the first
(vid. Ges. § 139, note, and Ewald, § 281). The same word is used
in connection with botli head and heel, to show that on both
sides the intention is to destroy the opponent ; at the same time,
the expressions head and heel denote a majus and minus, or, as
Calvin says, superiut et inferius. This contrast arises from the
nature of the foes. The serpent can only seize the heel of the
man, who walks upright ; whereas the man can crush the head
of the serpent, that crawls in the dust. But this difference is
itself the result of the curse pronounced upon the serpent, and
its crawling in the dust is a sign that it will be defeated in its
conflict with man. However pernicious may be the bite of a
serpent in the heel when the poison circulates throughout the
body (chap. xlix. 17), it is not immediately fatal and utterly
incurable, like the crushing of a serpent's head.
But even in this sentence there is an unmistakeable allusion
to the evil and hostile being concealed behind the serpent. That
the human race should triumph over the serpent, was a neces-
sary consequence of the original subjection of the animals to
man. When, therefore, God not merely confines the serpent
within the limits assigned to the animals, but puts enmity
between it and the woman, this in itself points to a higher,
spiritual power, which may oppose and attack the human race
through the serpent, but will eventually be overcome. Observe,
too, that although in the first clause the seed of the serpent is
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. IL 9-15. 101
opposed to the seed of the woman, in the second it is not over
the seed of the serpent hut over the serpent itself that the
victory is said to Be_gained. It, i.e. the seed of the woman,
will crush thy head, and thou (not thy seed) wilt crush its heel.
Thus the seed of the serpent is hidden behind the unity of the
serpent, or rather of the foe who, through the serpent, has done
such injury to man. This foe is Satan, who incessantly opposes
the seed of the woman and bruises its heel, but is eventually to
be trodden under its feet. It does not follow from this, how-
ever, apart from other considerations, that by the seed of the
woman we are to understand one solitary person, one individual
only. As the woman is the mother of all living (ver. 20), her
s eed, to w hich the victory over the serpent and its seed is pro-
mised, m ust be the h uman race. But if a direct and exclusive
reference to Christ appears to be exegetically untenable, the
allusion in the word to Christ is by no means precluded in con-
sequence. In itself the idea of jnj, the seed, is an indefinite one,
since the posterity of a man may consist of a whole tribe or of
one son only (iv. 25, xxi. 12, 13), and on the other hand, an
entire tribe may be reduced to one single descendant and be-
come extinct in him. The question, therefore, who is to be
understood by the " seed " which is to crush the serpent's head,
can only be answered from the history of the human race. But
a point of much greater importance comes into consideration
here. Against the natural serpent the conflict may be carried
on by the whole human race, by all who are born of woman,
but not against Satan. As he is a foe who can only be met
with spiritual weapons, none can encounter him successfully but
such as possess and make use of spiritual arms. Hence the idea
of the " seed " is modified by the nature of the foe. If we look
at the natural development of the human race, Eve bore three
sons, but only one of them, viz. Seth, was really the seed by
whom the human family was preserved through the flood and
perpetuated in Noah: so, again, of the three sons of Noah, Shern,
the blessed of Jehovah, from whom Abraham descended, was
the only one in whose seed all nations were to be blessed, and
that not through Ishmael, but through Isaac alone. Through
these constantly repeated acts of divine selection, which were
not arbitrary exclusions, but were rendered necessary by differ-
ences in the spiritual condition of the individuals concerned, the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
102 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
"seed," to which the victory over Satan was promised, was
spiritually or ethically determined, and ceased to be co-extensive
with physical descent. This spiritual seed culminated in "Christ,
in whom the Adamitic family terminated, henceforward to be
renewed by Christ as the second Adam, and restored by Him
to its original exaltation and likeness to God. In thi s sense
r!hrigf. fc the, wd of fjiR woman, who tramples Satan under His
feet, not as an individual, but as the head both of the posterity
of the'woman which kept the promise and maintained the con-
flict with the old serpent before His advent, and also of all those
who are gathered out of all nations, are united to Him by faith,
and formed into one body of which He is the head (Rom. xvi.
20). On the other hand, all who have n ot regarde d and pre-
serifid_tbe_promise, have fallen into the~power of the old serpent,
and are to be regarded as the s eed of the serpent, whose head
will be trodden under foot (Matt, xxiii. 33 ; John viii. 44 ; 1
John iii. 8). If then the promise culminates in Christ, the fact
that the victory over the serpent is promised to the posterity of
the woman, not of the man, acquires this deeper significance,
that as it was through the woman that the craft of the devil
brought sin and death into the world, so it is also through the
woman that the grace of God will give to the fallen human race
the conqueror of sin, of death, and of the devil. And even if
the words had reference first of all to the fact that the woman
had been led astray by the serpent, yet in the fact that the
destroyer of the serpent was born of a woman (without a human
father) they were fulfilled in a way which showed that the pro-
mise must have proceeded from that Being, who secured its
fulfilment not only in its essential force, but even in its ap-
parently casual form.
Vers. 16-19. It was not till the prospect of victory had been
presented, that a sentence of punishment was pronounced upon
both the man and the woman on account of their sin. The
woman, who had broken the divine command for the sake of
earthly enjoyment, was punished in consequence with the
sorrows and pains of pregnancy and childbirth. " / will greatly
multiply (pSV\ is the inf. abs. for Win, which had become an
adverb: vid. JEwald, § 240c, as in chap. xvi. 10 and xxii. 17)
thy sorrow and thy pregnancy : in sorrow thou shall bring forth
children." As the increase of conceptions, regarded as the ful-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. III. 17-19. 103
filment of the blessing to " be fruitful and multiply " (i. 28),
could be no punishment, ^\}} must be understood as in apposi-
tion to 1^3XP thy sorrow (i.e. the sorrows peculiar to a woman's
life), and indeed (or more especially) thy pregnancy (i.e. the
sorrows attendant upon that condition). The sentence is not
rendered more lucid by the assumption of a hendiadys. " That
the woman should bear children was the original will of God ;
butit was a punishment that henceforth she was to bear them
i n sorrow , i.e. with pains which threatened her own life as well
as that of the child" (Delitzsch). The punishment consisted in
an enfeebling of nature, in consequence of sin, which disturbed
the normal relation between body and soul. — The woman had
also broken through her divinely appointed subordination to
the man ; she had not only emancipated herself from the man
to listen to the serpent, but had led the man into sin. For that,
she was punished with a desire bordering upon disease (n^efa
from pg? to run, to have a violent craving for a thing), and
with subjection to the man. "And he shall rule over thee"
Created for the man, the woman was made subordinate to him
ftQBk-thfijvery first ; but the supremacy of the man was not in-
tended to become a despotic rule, crushing the woman into a
slave, which has been the rule in ancient and modern Heathenism,
and even in Mahometanism also, — a rule which was first softened
by the sin-destroying grace of the Gospel, and changed into a
form more in harmony with the original relation, viz. that of a
rule on the one hand, and subordination on the other, which
have their roots in mutual esteem and love.
Vers. ^^-19. " And unto Adam:" the noun is here used for
the first time as a proper name without the article. Tn chap.
i. 26 and ii. 5, 20, the noun is appellative, and there are sub-
stantial reasons for the omission of the article. The sentenc e
upon Adam includes a twofold punishment : first the_cursing j>f
t he gro und, and secondly "death, "which affects the woman as
well, on account of their common guilt. By listening to his
wife, when deceived by the serpent, Adam had repudiated his
superiority to the rest of creation. As a punishment, therefore,
nature would henceforth offer resistance to his will. By break-
ing the divine command, he had set himself above his Maker ,
death would therefore show him the worthlessness of his own
nature. " Cursed be the ground for thy sake ; in sorrow shall
Digitized by VjOOQlC
<Us<4
104 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES
thou eat it (the ground by synecdoche for its produce, as in Isa.
i. 7) all the days of thy life : tlwrns and thistles sliall it bring
forth to thee, and thou shah eat the herb of tlie field." The curse
pronounced on man's account upon the soil created for him,
consisted in the fact, that the earth no longer yielded spon-
: y) j taneou sly the fruits requisite for his maintenance, but the man
i \ k was obliged to force out the necessaries of life by labour and
-j, strenuous exertion. The herb of the field is in contrast with
the trees of the garden, and sorrow with the easy dressing of
the garden. We are not to understand, however, that because
1 man failed to guard the good creation of God from the invasion
of the evil one, a host of demoniacal powers forced their way
; - into the material world to lay it waste and offer resistance to
man ; but because man himself had fallen into the power of the
- 1 "' evil one, therefore God cursed the earth, not merely withdraw-
ing the divine powers of life which pervaded Eden, but chang-
ing its relation to man. As Luther says, " primum in eo, quod
ilia bona non fert quae tulisset, si homo non esset lapsus, deinde
in eo quoque, quod multa noxia fert quae non tulisset, sicut sunt
infelix lolium, steriles arena, zizania, urticas, spince, tribuli, adde
venena, noxias bestiolas, et si qua sunt alia hujus generis." But
the curse reached much further, and the writer has merely
noticed the most obvious aspect. 1 The disturbance and distor-
tion of the original harmony of body and soul, which sin intro-
duced into the nature of man, and by which the flesh gained
the mastery over the spirit, and the body, instead of being more
and more transformed into the life of the spirit, became a prey
1 "Non omnia incommoda enumerat Moses, quibus se homo per peccatum
implicuit: constat enim ex eodem prodiisse fonte omnes prmsentis vitse asrumnas,
quas experientia innumeras esse ostendit. ASris intemperies, gelu, tonitrua,
pluvue intempcstivm, uredo, grandines et quicquid inordinatum est in mundo,
peccati sunt fruclus. Nee alia morborum prima est causa: idque poeticis
fabulis celebratumfuit: haud dubie quod per manus a patribus traditum esset.
Unde illud Horatii :
Post ignem wtherta domo
Subductmn, modes et novafebrium
Terris incubuii cohort:
Semoiiijw prius tarda necasilas
Lethi corripuit gradum.
Sed Moses qui brevitati studet, suo more pro communi vulgi captu attingere
contentus fuit quod magis apparuit : ut sub exemplo uno discamus, hominis vitio
inversion fuisse totum naturtt ordinem" — Calvin.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. III. 17-19. 105
to death, spread over the whole material world ; so that every-
where on earth there were to be seen wild and rugged wastes,
desolation and rain, death and corruption, or fuvraUfrrfi and
<p6opd (Bom. viii. 20, 21). Everything injurio us to man in the
o rganic , vegetable and animal creation, is the effect of the curse
pronounced upon the earth for Adam's sin, however little we
may be able to explain the manner in which the curse was
carried into effect; since our view of the causal connection
between sin and evil even in human life is very imperfect, and
the connection between spirit and matter in nature generally is
altogether unknown. In this causal link between sin and the
evils in the world, the wrath of God on account of sin was
revealed ; since, as soon as the creation (iraaa f) /cruris, Horn. viii.
22) had been wrested through man from its vital connection
with its Maker, He gave it up to its own ungodly nature, so
that whilst, on the one hand, it has been abused by man for the
gratification of his own sinful lusts and desires, on the other, it
has turned against man, and consequently many things in the
world and nature, which in themselves and without sin would
have been good for him, or at all events harmless, have become
poisonous and destructive since his fall. For in the sweat of
his face man is to eat his bread (DTO the bread-corn which
springs from the earth, as in Job xxviii. 5 ; Psa. civ. 14) until
he return to the ground. Formed out of the dust, he shall re-
turn to dust again. This was the fulfilment of the threat, " In
the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die," which began
to take effect immediately after the breach of the divine com-
mand ; for not only did man then become mortal, but he also
actually came under the power of death, received into his nature
the germ of death, the maturity of which produced its eventual
dissolution into dust. The reason why the life of the man did
not come to an end immediately after the eating of the for-
bidden fruit, was not that "the woman had been created be-
tween the threat and the fall, and consequently the fountain
of human life had been divided, the life originally concentrated
in one Adam shared between man and woman, by which the
destructive influence of the fruit was modified or weakened "
(v. Hoffmann), but that the mercy and long-suffering of God
afforded space for repentance, and so controlled and ordered the
sin of men and the punishment of sin, as to render them sub-
PENT. — VOL. I. H
Digitized by VjOOQlC
106 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
servient to the accomplishment of His original purpose and the
glorification of His name.
Vers. 20-24. As justice and mercy were combined in the
divine sentence ; justice in the fact that God cursed the tempter
alone, and only punished the tempted with labour and mortality,
mercy in the promise of eventual triumph over the serpent : so
God also displayed His mercy to the fallen, before carrying
the sentence into effect. It was through the power of divine
grace that Adam believed the promise with regard to the
woman's seed, and manifested his faith in the name which he
gave to his wife, njn Eve, an old form of njn, signifying life
(fyrf), LXX.), or life-spring, is a substantive, and not a feminine
adjective meaning " the living one," nor an abbreviated form of
iTjnp, from njn = njn (xix. 32, 34), the lif e-receiving one. This
name was given by Adam to his wife, "because," as the writer
explains with the historica l fulfilment before his mind, " she be-
came the mother of all living? i.e. because the continuance and
life of his race were guaranteed to the man through the woman.
God also displayed His mercy by clothing the two with coats
of skin, i.e. the skins of beasts. The words, " God made
coats," are not to be interpreted with such bare literality, as that
God sewed the coats with His own fingers ; they merely affirm
" that man's first clothing was the work of God, who gave the
necessary d'r** 4 '""" and ability " (Delitssch). By this clothing,
God imparted to the feeling of shame the visible sign of an
awakened conscience, and to the consequent necessity for a cover-
ing to the bodily nakedness, the higher work of a suitable disci-
pline for the sinner. By selecting the skins of beasts for the
clothing of the first men, and therefore causing the death or
slaughter of beasts for that purpose, He showed them how they
might use the sovereignty they possessed over the animals for
their own good, and even sacrifice animal life for the preservation
of human ; so that this act of God laid the foundation for the
sacrifices, even if the first clothing did not prefigure our ulti-
mate "clothing upon " (2 Cor. v. 4), nor the coats of skins the
robe of righteousness. — Vers. 22, 23. Clothed in this sign of
mercy, the man was driven out of paradise, to bear the punish-
ment of his sin. The words of Jehovah, " The man is become as
one of Us, to know good and evil," contain no irony, as though
man had exalted himself to a position of autonomy resembling
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. IlL 20-24. 107
that of God ; for " irony at the expense of a wretched tempted
soul might well befit Satan, bnt not the Lord." Likeness to
God is predicated only with regard to the knowledge of good and
evil, in which the man really had become like God. In order
that, after the germ of death had penetrated into his nature
along with sin, he might not "take also of the tree of life, and eat
and live for ever (*n contracted from *n = n*n, as in chap. v. 5 ;
1 Sam. xx. 31), God sent him forth from the garden ofJEden."
With Viw^ (sent him forth) the narrative passes over from the
words to the actions of God. From the Dj (also) it follows that
the man had not yet eaten of the tree of life. Had he con-
tinned in fellowship with God by obedience to the command
of God, he might have eaten of it, for he was created for
eternal life. Bat after he had fallen through sin into the power
of death, the fruit which produced immortality could only do
him harm. For immortality in a state of sin is not the £an?
auovux;, which God designed for man, but endless misery, which
the Scriptures call " the second death" (Rev. ii. 11, xx. 6, 14,
xxi. 8). The expulsion from paradise, therefore, was a punish-
ment inflicted for man's good^ intended, while exposing him to
temporal death, to preserve him from eternal death. To keep
the approach to the tree of life, " God caused cherubim to dwell
(to encamp) at the east (on the eastern side) of the garden, and
the (ue. with the) flame of the sword turning to and fro" (rOBTirio,
moving rapidly). The word 3V3 cherub has no suitable etymo-
logy in the Semitic, but is unquestionably derived from the same
root as the Greek ypvyjr or ypvires, and has been handed down
from the forefathers of our race, though the primary meaning
can no longer be discovered. The cherubim, however, are crea-
tures of a higher world, which are represented as surrounding
the throne of God, both in the visions of Ezekiel (i. 22 sqq.,
x. 1) and the Revelation of John (chap. iv. 6) ; not, however, as
throne-bearers or throne-holders, or as forming the chariot of
the throne, but as occupying the highest place as living beings
(Jli»n, £Sa) in the realm of spirits, standing by the side of God
as the heavenly King when He comes to judgment, and proclaim-
ing the majesty of the Judge of the world. In this character
God stationed them on the eastern side of paradise, not " to in-
habit the garden as the temporary representatives of man," but
u to keep the way of the tree of life," t.e. to render it impossible
Digitized by VjOOQlC
108 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
for man to return to paradise, and eat of the tree of life. Hence
there appeared by their side the flame of a sword, apparently in
constant motion, cutting hither and thither, representing the de-
vouring fire of the divine wrath, and showing the cherubim to
be ministers of judgment. With the expulsion of man from
the garden of Eden, paradise itself vanished from the earth.
God did not withdraw from the tree of life its supernatural
power, nor did He destroy the garden before their eyes, but
simply prevented their return, to show that it should be pre-
served until the time of the end, when sin should be rooted out
by the judgment, and death abolished by the Conqueror of the
serpent (1 Cor. xv. 26), and when upon the new earth the tree
of life should flourish again in the heavenly Jerusalem, and bear
fruit for the redeemed (Rev. xx. and xxi.).
THE SONS OP THE FIRST MAN. — CHAP. IV.
Vers. 1-8. The propagation of the human race did not com-
mence till after the expulsion from paradise. Generation in man
is an act of personal free-will, not a blind impulse of nature, and
rests upon a moral self-determination. It flows from the divine
institution of marriage, and is therefore knowing (JHJ) the wife.
— At the birth of the first son Eve exclaimed with joy, " I have
gotten (w:p) a man with Jehovah ;" wherefore the child received
the name Cain (1$ from pp=fUj3, ktooBoi). So far as the gram-
mar is concerned, the expression nJrTTiK might be_rendered, as
h in apposition to B"l*, " a man, the Lord" (Luther), but the sense
would not allow it. For even if we could suppose the faith
of Eve in the promised conqueror of the serpent to have been
. sufficiently alive for this, the promise of God hadjiot^giyenjier
the slightest reason to expectthat the promised seed would be of
divine nature, and might be Jehovah, so as to lead her to believe
that she had given birth to Jehovah now. n$*js a preposition
in the sense of helpful association, as in chap. xxi. 20, xxxix. 2,
21, etc. That she sees in the birth of this son the commence-
ment of the fulfilment of the promise, and thankfully acknow
ledges the divine help in this display of mercy, is evident from
the name Jehovah, the God of salvation. The use of this name
is significant. Although it cannot be supposed thaLEye herself
knew and uttered this name, since it was not till a later period
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. IV. 1-8. 109
that it was made known to man, and it really belongs to the
Hebrew, which was not formed till after the division of tongues,
yet it expresses the feeling of Eve on receiving this proof of the
gracious help of God. — Ver. 2. But her joy was soon overcome
by the discovery of the vanity of this earthly life. This is ex-
pressecTin the name Abel, which was given to the second son
(?an, in pause «n, t'.e. nothingness, vanity), whether it indicated
generally a feeling of sorrow on account of his weakness, or was
a prophetic presentiment of his untimely death. The occupation
of the sons is noticed on account of what follows. u Abel was a
keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground." Adam had,
no doubt, already commenced both occupations, and the sons
selected each a different department. God Himself had pointed
out both to Adam, — the tilling of the ground by the employment
assigned him in Eden, which had to be changed into agriculture
after his expulsion ; and the keeping of cattle in the clothing
that He gave him (iii. 21). Moreover, agriculture can never be
entirely separated from the rearing of cattle ; for a man not only
requires food, but clothing, which is procured directly from the
hides and wool of tame animals. In addition to this, sheep do
not thrive without human protection and care, and therefore
were probably associated with man from the very first. The
different occupations of the brothers, therefore, are not to be
regarded as a proof of the difference in their dispositions. This
comes out first in the sacrifice, which they offered after a time
to God, each one from the produce of his vocation. — u In process
of time" (lit. at the end of days, i.e. after a considerable lapse of
time : for this use of D'pj cf . chap. xl. 4 ; Num. ix. 2) Cain
brought of the fruit of tJie ground a gift (p™$) to the Lord; and
Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock, andjndeedjvay
in an explanatory sense, vid. Ges. § 155, 1) of their fat," i.e. the
f attest of the firstlings, and not merely the first good one that
came to hancL~ D s 35n are not the fat portions of the animals, as in
the Levitical law of sacrifice. This is evident from the fact, that
the sacrifice was not connected with a sacrificial meal, and ani-
mal food was not eaten at this time. That the usage of the
Mosaic law cannot determine the meaning of this passage, is evi-
dent from the word minchah, which is applied in Leviticus to
bloodless sacrifices only, whereas it is used here in connection
with Abel's sacrifice. " And JehovaJi looked upon Abel and his
Digitized by VjOOQlC
I
\ 1 1
110 THE FIRST BOOK OP MOSES.
gift ; and upon Cain and his gift He did not look." The look of
Jehovah was in any case a visible sign of satisfaction. It is a
common and ancient opinion that fire consumed Abel's sacrifice,
and thus showed that it was graciously accepted. Theodotion
explains the words by xal hetrvpurev 6 Oeo?. But whilst this
explanation has the analogy of Lev. ix. 24 and Judg. vi. 21 in
its favour, it does not suit the words, " upon Abel_andhis^gift."
The reason for the different reception of the .two^fiffe rings w as
the state of m ind towards G od with which t hey were brought,
ancTwhich manifested itself in the selection of the gifts. Not,
indeed, in the fact that Abel brought a bleeding sacrifice and
Cain a bloodless one ; for this difference arose from the differ-
ence in their callings, and each necessarily took his gift from the
produce of his own occupation. It was rather in the fact that
r V * 1 Abel offered the fattest firstlings of his flock, the best that he
could bring"; whilst Cain only brought a portion of the jfrjiit of
thejjround, but not the first-fruits. By this choice Abel brought
irkeiova QvvUwjita^h Kaiv, and manifested_jhat_disposition
whicKTTclesignated faith (Trjar}i) in Heb. xi. 4. The nature of
this disposition^ however, can only be determined from the mean-
ing of the offering itself.
The sacrifices offered by Adam's sons, and that not in con-
sequence of a divine command, but from the free impulse of
their nature as determined by God, were the first sacrifices of the
human race. The origin of sacrifice, therefore, is neither to be
traced to a positive command, nor to be regarded as a human
invention. To form an accurate conception of the idea which
lies at the foundation of all sacrificial worship, we must bear in
mind that the first sacrifices were offered a fter ..the fall, and
therefore presupposed the spiritual separation of_man from God,
and were designed to satisfy the need of the heartfor fellowship
with God. This need existed in the case of Cain, as well as in
that of Abel ; otherwise he would have offered no sacrifice at all,
since there was no command to render it compulsory. Yet it
was not the wish for forgiveness of sin which led Adam's sons to
offer sacrifice; for there is no mention of expiation, and the
notion that Abel, by slaughtering the animal, confessed that
he deserved death on account of sin, is transferred to this
passage from the expiatory sacrifices of the Mosaic law. The
offerings were expressive of gratitude to God, to whom they owed
Digitized by VjOOQlC
rf J-'
fc
*>*■*"
' l 1 U
■ V
-Jk
J
. C- '
1
,
u
\- ,
CHAP. IV. 1-ft. Ill
all that they had ; and were associated also with the desire to
secure the divine favour and blessing, so that they are to be
regarded not merely as th ank-offerings , but as supplicatory sacri-
fices^and as propitiatory also, in the wider sense oFthe word. In
this the two offerings are alike. The reason why they were not
equally acceptable to God is not to be sought, as Hofmann thinks,
in the fact that Gain merely offered thanks " for the preservation
of this present life," whereas Abel offered thanks " for the for-
giveness of sins," or " for the sin-forgiving clothing received by
man from the hand of God." To take the nourishment of the
body literally and the clothing symbolically in this manner, is an
arbitrary procedure, by which the Scriptures might be made to
mean anything we chose. The reason is to be found rather in
the fact, that AieJ^sJh^nltS-iSinejrjjm the. depth, pf^his heart,
whilst Cain merely offered his to keep on good terms with God, —
a difference that was"fflanifested in the choice of the gifts, which
each one brought from the produce of his occupation. This
choice shows clearly " that it was the pious feeling, through
which the worshipper put his heart as it were into the gift, which
made the offering acceptable to God" (Oehler) ; that the essence
of the sacrifice was not the presentation of a. gift to God, but
that the offering was intended to shadow forth the dedication of
the heart to God. At the same time, the desire of the wor-
shipper, by the dedication of the best of his possessions to secure
afresh the favour of God, contained the germ of that substitu-
tionary meaning of sacrifice, which was afterwards expanded in
connection with the deepening and heightening of the feeling of
sin into a desire for forgiveness, and led to the development of
the idea of expiatory sacrifice. — On account of the preference
shown to Abel, " it burned Cain sore (the subject, ' wrath,' is
wanting, as it frequently is in the case of rvin, cf . chap, xviii. 30,
32, xxxi. 36, etc.), and his countenance fell" (an indication of his
discontent and anger: cf. Jer. iii. 12; Job xxix. 24). God
warned him of giving way to this, and directed his attention
to the cause and consequences of his wrath. " Why art thou
wroth, and why is thy countenance fallen t" The answer to this
is given in the further question, " Is there not, if thou art good,
a lifting up" (*c. o f the countenance) ? It is evident from the
context^and the antithesis ofTalling and lifting up (Vsa and NCW),
that CJS must be supplied after Jigb. "Rj fjn'a dr^ g-aw him to
^RY OF r^x
ffS UNION ^ N \
;( V THEOLOGICAL c 11
112 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
understand that his look was indicative of evil thoughts and in-
tentions ; for the lifting up of the countenance, i.e. a free, open
look, is the mark of a good conscience (Joh xi. 15). " But if
thou art not good, sin lieth before the door, and its desire is to thee
(directed towards thee) ; but thou shouldst rule over t£" The
' fern. riKtsn is construed as a masculine, because, with evident
/ allusion to the serpent, sin is personified as a wild beast, lurking
/ at the door of the human heart, and eagerly desiring to devour
his soul (1 Pet. v. 8). ^D'n, to make good, signifies here not
good action, the performance of good in work and deed, but
making the disposition good, i.e. directing the heart to what is
good. Cain is to rule over the sin which is greedily desiring
him, by giving up his wrath, not indeed that sin may cease to
lurk for him, but that the lurking evil foe may obtain no entrance
into his heart. There is no need to regard the sentence as in-
terrogative, "Wilt thou, indeed, be able to rule over it?" (Ewald),
nor to deny the allusion in ia to the lurking^ ^a^aa_JDeUizsch
does. The words do not command the suppression of an inward
temptation, but resistance to the power of evil as pressing from
J : ; v i without, by hearkening to the word which God addressed to Cain
in person, and addresses to us through the Scriptures. There is
;■ ■ . ' r nothing said here about God appearing visibly ; but this does not
warrant us in interpreting either this or the following conversa-
',- ' tion as a simple process that took place in the heart and con-
science of Cain. It is evident from vers. 14 and 16 that God
did not withdraw His personal presence and visible intercourse
from men, as soon as He had expelled them from the garden of
Eden. " God talks to Cain as to a wilful child, and draws out
of him what is sleeping in his heart, and lurking like a wild
beast before his door. And what He did to Cain He does to
every one who will but observe his own heart, and listen to the
voice of God" (Herder). But Cain paid no heed to the divine
warning. Ver. 8. He u said to his brother Abel." What he said
I is not stated. We may either supply^ i<," viz. what God had
just said to him, which would be grammatically admissible, since
"ion is sometimes followed by a simple accusative (xxii. 3, xliv.
16), and this accusative has to be supplied from the context (as in
Ex. xix. 25) ; or we may supply from what follows some such
^ expressions as " let us go into the field" as the LXX., Sam.,
Jonathan, and others have done. This is also allowable, sothat
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. IV. 9-15. 113
we need not imagine a gap in the text, bat may explain the con-
struction as in chap. iii. 22, 23, by supposing that the writer has-
tened on to describe the carrying out of what was said, without
stopping to set down the words themselves. This supposition is
preferable to the former, since it is psychologically most improb-
able that Cain should have related a warning to his brother which
produced so Httte" impression upon his own mind. In the field
" Cairrrosritp-affainstAbeTKis brother, and slew him." Thus
the sin of Adam had grown into fratricide in his son. The
writer intentionally re peats again and again the words " his
b rother£ _to bring clearly outthe horror of the sin. Cain was
the first man who let sin reign in him ; he was " of the wicked
one" (1 John iii. 12). In him the seed of the woman had
already become the seed of the serpent ; and in his deed the real
nature of the wicked one, as " a murderer from the beginning,"
had come openly to light : so that already there had sprung up
that contrast of two distinct seeds within the human race,~which
runs through the entire history of humanity.
Vers. 9-15. Defiance grows with sin, and punishment keeps
pace with guilt. Adam and Eve fear before God, and acknow-
ledge their sin ; Cain boldly denies it, and in reply to the
question, " Wliere is Abel thy brother?" declares, " I know not,
am I my brothers keeper?" God therefore charges him with his
crime : " What hast thou done ! voice of Hiy brother's blood crying
to Me from the earth." The verb u crying" refers to the u blood,"
since this is the principal word, and the voice merely expresses
the adverbial idea of "aloud," or "listen" {Ewald, § Zlld). DW
(drops of blood) is sometimes used to denote natural hemorrhage
(Lev. xii. 4, 5, xx. 18) ; but is chiefly applied to blood shed un-
naturally, i.e. to murder. " Innocent blood has no voice, it may
be, that is discernible by human ears, but it has one that reaches
God, as the cry of a wicked deed demanding vengeance"
(Delitzsch). Murder is one of the sins that cry to heaven.
u Primum ostendit Deus se de factis hominum cognoscere utcunque
nullus queratur vel accuset; deinde sibi magis cliaram esse homi-
num vitam quam ut sanguinem innoxium impune effundi sinat .
tertio curam sibi piorum esse non solum quamdiu vivunt sed etiam
post mortem" (Calvin). AhgLwas the firstofjhfi^saiots^whose
blood is precious_in_the^ight of God (Ps. cxvi. 15) ; and by
virtuel)? histaith, he being dead yet speaketh through his blood
Digitized by VjOOQlC
114 THE FIBST BOOK OF MOSES
which cried unto God (Heb. xi. 4). — Vers. 11, 12. " And now
(sc. because thou hast done this) be cursed from the earth."
From: i.e. eith er awa y from the. earth, driven forth so that it
shall.no longer afford a. quiet, resting-place {Gerlach, DeUtzsch,
etc.), or out of the earth, through its withdrawing its strength,
I and thus securing the fulfilment Jjf perpetual wandering (Baum-
garten, etc.). It is difficult to choose between the two ; but the
clause, "which hath opened her mouth? etc., seems rather to
favour the latter. Because the earth has been compelled to
drink innocent blood, it rebels against the murderer, and when
he tills it, withdraws its strength, so that the soil yields no pro-
duce ; just as the land of Canaan is said to have spued out the
Canaanites, on account of their abominations (Lev. xviii. 28).
In any case, the idea that " the soil, through drinking innocent
blood, became an accomplice in the sin of murder," has no bibli-
cal support, and is not confirmed by Isa. xxvi. 21 or Num. xxxv.
33. The suffering of irrational creatures through the sin of man
is very different from their participating in his sin. " A fugi-
, tive and vagabond (*UV M, i.e. banished and homeless) shalt thou
be in the earth." Cain is *o affected by this curse, that his ob-
duracy is turned into desjfciir. " My sin " he says in ver. 13, "is
greater than can be IwH&S |il> NBO signifies to take away and
bear sin or guilt, a^»' is used with reference both to God and
man. God takes guilt away by forgiving it (Ex. xxxiv. 7) ;
man carries it awayand bears it, by enduringjts__pnnishment
(cf. Num. v. 31). Tjuiker, following the ancient versions, has
adopted the first meaning ; but the context sustains the second :
for Cain_after\vards complains, not of the_greatness of the sin,
but only of the severity of the punishment. " Behold, Thou hast
driven me out this day from the face of the earth, and from Thy
face shall I be hid; . . . and it shall come to pass that every one
that findeth me shall slay me." T he adama h, from the face of
which the curse of Jehovah had driven Cain, w as Ed en (cf . ver.
-16), where he had carried on his agricultural pursuits, and where
God had revealed His face, i.e. His presence, to the men after
their expulsion from the garden ; so that henceforth Cain had to
wander about upon the wide world, homeless and far from the
presence of God, and was afraid lest any one who found him
might slay him. By "tvery one that findeth me" we are not to
understand omnis creatura, sis though Cain had excited the hos-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
.***
CHAP. IV. 10-84. 115
tility of all creatures, but every man ; not in the sense, however,
of such as existed apart from the family of Adam, but such as
were aware of his crime, and knew him to be a murderer. For
Gainjs evidently afraid of revenge on the part of relatives of
the slain, that is to say, of descendants of Adam, who were
either already in existence, or yet to be born. Though Adam
might not at this time have had " many grandsons and great-
grandsons," yet according to ver. j7 and chap. v. 4, he had un-
doubtedly_other children, who might increase in number, and
sooner or later might avenge Abel's death. For, that blood shed
demands blood in return, " is a principle of equity written in the
heart of every man ; and that Cain should see the earth full of
avengers is just like a murderer, who sees avenging spirits
('Eptpve?) ready to torture him on every hand." — Ver. 15.
Although Cain expressed not penitence, but fear of punishment,
God displayed His long-suffering and gave him the promise,
" Therefore (E» not in the sense of g &, but because it was the
case, and there was reason for his complaint) whosoever slayeth
Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold." J$ ^>r?3 is cos.
absolut. as in chap. ix. 6; and Dgn avenged, i.e. resented, punished,
as Ex. xxi. 20, 21. The mark which God put upon Cain is
n ot to be regarded as a mark upon his body, as the Rabbins
and others supposed, but as a certain sign which protected him
from vengeance, though of what kind it is impossible to deter-
mine. God granted him continuance of life, not because
banishment from the place of God's presence was the greatest
possible punishment, or because the preservation of the human
race required at that time that the lives of individuals should be
spared, — for God afterwards destroyed the whole human race,
with the exception of one family, — but partly because the tares
were to grow with the wheat, and sin develop itself to its utmost
extent, partly also because from the very first God determined to
take punishment into His own hands, and protect human life
from the passion and wilfulness of human vengeance.
Vers. 16-24. The family of the Cainites.— Ver. 16. The
geographical situation of the land of Nod, in the front of Eden
(nonp, see chap. ii. 14), where Cain settled after his departure
from the place or the land of the revealed presence of God (cf .
Jonah i. 3), cannot be determined. The name iVflrf_denotes a
l and of flight and ba nishment, in contract with Eden, the land
Digitized by VjOOQlC
116 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
of delight, where Jehovah walked with men. There Cain knew
his wife. The text assumes it as self-evident that she accom-
panied him in his exile ; also, that she was a daughter of Adam,
and consequently a sister of Cain. The marriage of brothers
and sisters was inevitable in the case ofthe children oT the first
men, if the human race was actually to descend from a single
pair, and may therefore be justified in the face of the Mosaic
prohibition of such marriages, on the ground that the sons and
daughters of Adam represented not. rppmly the fam ily bu t the
gpfliis^ and that it was not till after the rise of several families
mat the bands of fraternal and conjugal love became distinct
from one another, and assumed fixed and mutually exclusive
forms, the violation of which is sin. (Comp. Lev. xviii.) His
son he named Hanoch (consecration), because he regarded his
birth as a pledge of the renovation of his life. For this reason
he also gave the same name to the city which he built, inasmuch
as its erection was another phase in the development of his family.
The construction of a city by Cain will cease to surprise us, if
we consider that at the commencement of its erection^centuries
had already passed since the creation of man, and Cain's descend-
ants may by this time have increased considerably in numbers ;
also, that T^does not necessariIy_pre*uppose_a Jarge_towji, but
simply an enclosed space with fortified dwellings, in contradis-
tinction to theTsdlated tents of shepherds ; and lastly, that the
words rob W» " be was building," merely indicate the com-
mencement and progress of the building, but not its termination.
It appears mora surprising that Cain^ who was^to be a fugitive
and a vagabond upon the earth, should have established himself
in the l and of Nod. This cannot be fully explained, either on
the ground that he carried on the pursuits of agriculture, which
lead to settled abodes, or that he strove against the curse. In
addition to both the facts referred to, there is also the circum-
stance, that the curse, " the ground shall not yield to thee her
strength," was so mollified by the grace of God, that Cain and
his descendants were enabled to obtain sufficient food in the land
of his settlement, though it was by dint of hard work and
strenuous effort ; unless, indeed, we follow Luther and under-
stand the curse, that he should be a fugitive upon the earth, as
relating to his expulsion from Eden, and his removal ad incertum
locum et opus, non addita ulla vel promtstione vel mandato t sieut
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. IV. 18-24. 117
avis qiice in Ubero coelo incerta vagatur. The fact that Cain
undertook the erection of a city, is also significant. Even if we
do not regard this city as <{ th e first foundation-stone of the
kingdom of the world, in which the spirit of the beast bears
sway," we cannot fail to detect the desire to neutralize the
curse of banishment, and create for his family a point of unity,
as a compensation for the loss of unity in fellowship with God,
as well as the inclination of the family of Cain for that which
was earthly. The powerful development of the worldly mind
and of ungodliness among the Cainites was openly displayed
in Lamech, in the sixth generation. Of the intermediate links,
the names only are given. (On the use of the passive with the
accusative of the object in the clause "to Hanoch was born (they
bore) Irad" see Ges. § 143, 1.) Some of these names resemble
those of the Sethite genealogy, viz. Irad and Jared, Mehujael
and Mahalaleel, Methusael and Methuselah, also Cain and
Cainan; and the names Enoch and Lamech occur in both
families. But neither the recurrence of similar names, nor even
of the same names, warrants the conclusion that the two genea-
bgical tables are simply different forms of one primary legend.
For the names, though similar in sound, are very different in
meaning . Irad probably signifies the townsman, Jered, descent,
or that which has descended; Mehujael, smitten of God, and
Mahalaleel, praise of God ; Methusael, man of prayer, and Me-
thuselah, man of the sword or of increase. The repetition of the
two names Enoch and Lamech even loses all significance, when
we consider the different places which they occupy in the re-
spective lines, and observe also that in the case of these very
names, the more precise descriptions which are given so
thoroughly establish the difference of character in the two indi-
viduals, as to preclude the possibility of their being the same,
not to mention the fact, that in the later history the same names
frea t uentlyjiccnr_ia- totally different families ; e.g. Korah in the
families of Levi (Ex. vi. 21) and Esau (chap, xxxvi. 5) ; Hanoch
in those of Reuben (chap. xlvi. 9) and Midian (chap. xxv. 4) ;
Kenaz in those of Judah (Num. xxxii. 12) and Esau (chap.
xxxvi. 11). The identity and similarity of names can prove j J,f :
no^njjmore_than_that the two branches of the human race did ;>
not keep entirely apart fro m each o ther ; a fact established by , : .* •
their subsequently intermarrying. — Lamech took two wives, and
Digitized by VjOOQlC
118 THE FIBSf BOOK OF MOSES.
Qv^xf Ahus was the first to prepare the way for polygamy, by which
j i ;/ ' ,, '6+^ the ethical aspect of marriage, as ordained by God, was turned
' " into the last of the eye and lust of the flesh. The names of the
women are indicative of sensual attractions : Adah, the adorned ;
and Zillah, either the shady or the tinkling. His tKreesons are
J A - the authors of inventions which show how the mind and efforts
. ' i «' of the Cainites were directed towards the beautifying and per-
, i " , • fecting of the earthly life. Jabal (probably =j ebul, p roduce)
became the father of inch as dwelt in tents, ue. of nomads who
lived in tents and with their flocks, getting their living by a
pastoral occupation, and possibly also introducing the use of
animal food, in disregard of the divine command (Gen. i. 29).
Jubal j(aonnd), the father of all such as handle the harp and
pipe, ue. the inventors of stringed and wind instruments, "fa? a
guitar or harp; 3W the shepherd's reed or bagpipe. Tiibal-Cain,
" hammering all kinds of cutting things (the verb is to~be con-
struedas neuter) in brass and iron ; " the inventor therefore of
all kinds of edge-tools for working in metals.: so that Cain, from
Ti? to Jorge, is probably to be regarded as the surname which
Tubal received on account of his inventions. The meaning of
Tubal is obscure ; for the Persian Tupal, iron-scoria, can throw
no light upon it, as it must be a much later word. The allusion
to the sister of Tubal-Cain is evidently to be attributed to her
name, Naamah, the lovely, or graceful, since it reflects the worldly
mind of the Cainites. In the arts, which owed their origin to
Lantech's sons, this disposition reached its culminating point ;
and it appears in the form of pride and defiant arrogance in the
song in which Lamech celebrates the inventions of Tubal-Cain
(vers. 23, 24) : "Adah and Zillah, hear my voice ; ye wives of
Lamech, hearken unto my speech : Men I slay for my wound, and
young men for my stripes. For sevenfold is Cain avenged, and
Lamech seven and seventy-fold." The perfect Wi is expressive
not of a deed accomplished, but of confident assurance (Ges. §
126, 4 ; Ewald, § 135c) ; and the suffixes in Wan and 'JttB
are to be taken in a passive sense. The idea is this : whoever
I inflicts a wound or stripe on me, whether man or youthpl will
4. put to death ; and for every injury done to my person, I will
I take ten times more vengeance than that with which God
1 promised to avenge the murder of my ancestor Cain. In this
' song, which contains in its rhythm, its strophic arrangement of
Digitized by VjOOQlC
;r
CHAP. IV. 25, 28. 119
the thoughts, and its poetic diction, th e germ of the later poetry,
we may detect " that Titanic arrogance, of which the~BIbTe says
that its power is its god (Hah. i. 11), and that it carries its god,
viz. its sword, in its hand (Job xii. 6) " (Delitzsch). — Accord-
ing to these accounts, the principal arts and manufactures were
invented by the Cainites, and carried out in an ungodly spirit ;
but they are not therefore to be attributed to the curse which
rested upon the family. They have their roots rather in the
mental powers with which man was endowed for the sovereignty
and subjugation of the earth, but which, like all the other powers
and tendencies of his nature, were pervaded by sin, and dese-
crated in its service. Hence these inventions have become the
common property of humanity, because they not only may pro-
mote its intended development, but are to be applied and conse-
crated to this purpose for the glory of God.
Vers. 25, 26. The character of the ungodly family of
Cainites was now fully developed in Lamech and his children.
The history, therefore, turns from them, to indicate briefly the
origi n_Qf the -g odly-race. After Abel's death a third son was
born to Adam, to whom his mother gave the name of Seth (nc?,
from JVB>, a j>resent participle, the appointecLone, the compensa-
tion) ; "for" she said, " Trod Tiaik ^appointed me another seed
(descendant) for Abel, because Cain slew him." The words
" because Cain slew him " are not to be regarded as an explana-
tory supplement, but as the words of Eve ; and *3 by virtue of
the previous nnn is to be understood in the sense of '3 nnn.
What Cain (human wickedness) took from her, that has Elohim
(divine omnipotence) restored. Because of this antithesis she
calkvthe giver Elohim instead of Jehovah, and not because her
hopes had been sadly depressed by her painful experience in
connection with the first-born. — Ver. 26. " To Seth, to him also
(ton DJ, intensive, vid. Ges. § 121, 3) there was born a son, and
he called his name Enosh." ^S, from W8 to be weak, faint,
frail, designates man from his frail and mortal condition "(Ps.
viii. 4, xc. 3, ciii. 15, etc.). In this name, therefore, the feeling
and knowledge of human weakness and frailty were expressed
(the opposite of the pride and arrogance displayed by the
Canaanitish family) ; and this_feeling led to God, to that in-
vocation of the name of Jehovah which commenced under Enos.
nirv DB^ trijJ, literally to call in (or by) the name of Jehovah, is
Digitized by VjOOQlC
120 THE FIBST BOOK 0* MOSES.
used for a solemn calling of the name of God. When applied
to men, it denotes invocation (here and chap. xii. 8, xiii. 4, etc.);
to God, calling out or proclaiming His name (Ex. xxxiii. 19,
xxxiv. 5). The name of God signifies in general " the whole
nature of God, by which He attests His personal presence in
v n the relation into which He has entered with man, the divine
self-manifestation, or the whole of that revealed side of the
divine nature, which is turned towards man" (Oehler). We
have here an account of the commencement of that worship of
God which consists in prajer, praise, and thanksgiving, or in
the acknowledgment and celebration of the mercy and help of
Jehovah. While the family of Cainites, by the erection of a city,
and the invention and development of worldly arts and business,
were laying the foundation for the kingdom of this world ; the
family of the Sethites began, by united invocation of the name of
the God of grace, to found and to erect the kingdom of God.
II. THE HISTORY OF ADAM.
Chap, v.-vi. 8.
generations from adam to noah.— chap. v.
The origin of the human race and the general character of
its development having been thus described, all that remained
of importance to universal or sacred history, in connection with
the progress of our race in the primeval age, was to record the
order of the families (chap, v.) and the, ultimate result of the
course which they pursued (chap. vi. 1-8). — First of all, we
have the genealogical table of Adam with the names of the first
ten patriarchs, who were at the head of that seed of the woman
by which the promise was preserved, viz. the posterity of the
first pair through Seth, from Adam to the flood. We have also
an account of the ages of these patriarchs before and after the
birth of those sons in whom the line was continued ; so that the
genealogy, which indicates the line of development, furnishes
at the same time a chronology of the primeval age. In the
genealogy of the Cainites no ages are given, since this family,
as t»eing accursed by God, had no future history. On the other
hand, the family of Sethites, which acknowledged God, began
from the time of Enos to call upon the name of the Lord, and
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. V.
121
was therefore preserved and sustained by God, in order that
under the training of mercy and judgment the human race
might eventually attain to the great purpose of its creation.
The genealogies of the primeval age, to quote the apt words of
M. Baumgarten, are " memorials, which bear testimony quite a^
much to the faithfulness of God in fulfilling His promise, as tor
the faith and patience of the fathers themselves." This testiy
mony is first placed in its true light by the numbers of the
years. The historian gives not merely the age of each patriarch
at the time of the birth of the first-born, by whom the line of
succession was continued, but the number of years that he lived
after that, and then the entire length of his life. Now if we
add togeth er t he age s at the birth of the several first-born -eons,
a n5 the hnn( hjgdyeariTb~5tweeii the birth of Shem and the flood,
we find that the duration of the first period in the world's
history was 1 656 yea rs. We obtain a different result, however,
from the numbers given by the LXX. and the Samaritan
version, which differ in almost every instance from the Hebrew
text, both in chap. v. and chap. xi. (from Shem to Terah), as
will appear from the following table : —
The Fathers
before the Flood. — <
}hap.
v.
Hebrew Text.
Samaritan Text
Septuagint.
a *
•S3
3.2
II
<a
<D
Hr
A
H P.
<&
A
5Wj
3Hj
Karnes.
o
1
3
11
<~5
2
o
J
3
o
22
3
I
3
J2
'o
Year of bir
oreation),
Tex
Yearofdea
creation),
Tex
Adam, . . .
130
800
930
130
800
930
230
700
930
1
930
Seth,. . . .
105
807
912
105
807
912
205
707
912
130
1042
Enos, . . .
90
815
905
90
815
905
190
715
905
235
1140
Oainan, . .
70
840
910
70
840
910
170
740
910
325
1235
Mahalaleel,
65
aso
895
65
830
895
165
730
895
395
1290
Jared, . . .
162
800
962
62
785
847
162
800
962
460
1422
Enoch, . . .
65
300
365
65
300
365
165
200
365
622
987
Methuselah,
187
782
969
67
653
720
167
(187)
802
|782)>
969
687
1656
Lamecb, . .
182
595
777
53
600
653
188
565
753
874
1651
Noah, . . .
500
450
950
500
450
950
500
450
950
1056
2066
To the flood,
Total, . . .
100
1656
100
100
1307
2242
1 The numbers in brackets are the reading of the Cod. Alexandrinus of
the LXX. In the genealogical table, chap. zi. 10 sqq., the Samaritan text
is the only one which gives the whole duration of life.
PENT. — VOL. I. I
Digitized by
Google
122
THE FIBST BOOK OF MOSE8.
The Fathers from the Flood to the call o/Abram. — Chap. xi. 10-26.
a *
S 2
$?*
If
Karnes.
Shorn, . .
Arphaxad,
(KttiVar),
Salah, .
Eber, .
Peleg, .
Regu, .
Serug, .
Nahor, .
Terah, .
Abram,
His call,
Total, .
Hebrew Text
Samaritan Text
U
a!
100
85
30
34
30
32
30
29
70
"75
365
500
403
403
430
209
207
200
119
135
■«1 o
600
438
438
464
289
239
230
148
205
100
185
130
134
130
182
180
79
70
'75
1015
500 600
803
303
270
109
107
100
69
76
438
433
404
239
239
230
148
145
Septuagint.
si
100
135
130
130
134
130
132
130
179
(79)
70
*75
1245
500
400
(430)
330
330
270
(370)
209
207
200
125
(129)
136
600
535
(565)
460
460
404
(504)
339
339
330
804
(208)
205
1556
1656
1691
1721
1755
1785
1817
1847
1876
1946
2021
a -a
(H§
2156
2094
2124
2185
1994
2024
2047
1995
2081
2121
The principal deviations from the Hehrew in the case of the
other two texts are these : in chap. v. the Samaritan places the
birth of the first-born of Jared, Methuselah, and Lamech 100
years earlier, whilst the Septuagint places the birth of the first-
born of all the other fathers (except Noah) 100 years later than
the Hebrew ; in chap. xi. the latter course is adopted in both
texts in the case of all the fathers except Shem and Terah. In
consequence of this, the interval from Adam to the flood is
shortened in the Samaritan text by 349 years as compared with
the Hebrew, and in the Septuagint is lengthened by 586 (Cod.
Alex. 606). The interval from the flood to Abram is lengthened
in both texts ; in the Sam. by 650 years, in the Sept. by 880
(Cod. Alex. 780). In the latter, Cainan is interpolated between
Arphaxad and Salah, which adds 130 years, and the age of the
first-born of Nahor is placed 150 years later than in the Hebrew,
whereas in the former the difference is only 50 years. With
regard to the other differences, the reason for reducing the lives
of Jared, Methuselah, and Lamech in the Samaritan text after
the birth of their sons, was evidently to bring their deaths within
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. V. 123
the time before the flood. The age of Methuselah, as given in
the Cod. Alex, of the LXX., is evidently to be accounted for on
the same ground, since, according to the numbers of the Vatican
text, Methuselah must have lived 14 years after the flood. In i
the other divergences of these two texts from the Hebrew, no/
definite purpose can be detected ; at the same time they are suffi-\
cient to show a twofold tendency, viz. to lengthen the interval! -
from the flood to Abram, and to reduce the ages of the fathers \
at the birth of their first-born to greater uniformity, and to take I
care that the age of Adam at the birth of Seth should not be ■
exceeded by that of any other of the patriarchs, especially in the
time before the flood. To effect this, the Sept. adds 100 years
to the ages of all the fathers, before and after the flood, whose
sons were born before their 100th year ; the Sam., on the other
hand, simply does this in the case of the fathers who lived after
the flood, whilst it deducts 100 years from the ages of all the
fathers before the flood who begot their first-born at a later
period of their life than Adam and Seth. The age of Noah
alone is left unaltered, because there were other data connected
with the flood which prevented any arbitrary alteration of the
text. That the principal divergences of both texts from the
Hebrew are intentional changes, based upon chronological theo-
ries or cycles, is sufficiently evident from their internal character,
viz. from the improbability of the statement, that whereas the
average duration of life after the flood was about half the length
that it was before, the time of life at which the fathers begot
their first-born after the flood was as late, and, according to the
Samaritan text, generally later than it had been before. No
such intention is discernible in the numbers of the Hebrew text ;
consequently every attack upon the historical character of its
numerical statements has entirely failed, and no tenable argu-
ment can be adduced against their correctness. The objection,
that such longevity as that recorded in our chapter is incon-
ceivable according to the existing condition of human nature,
loses all its force if we consider u that all the memorials of the I
oldjvorld contain evidence of gigantic power ; that Jhe climate, ],
the weather, ancTother natural conditions, were different from I _
thoseaftiFthelood; that life was much more simple and uni-
form ; and that the after-effects of the condition of man in para-
dise would not be immedTately exhausted" (Delitzsch). This '
Digitized by VjOOQlC
124 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
longevity, moreover, necessarily con tributed grearfy to the in-
cre ase of the human.race ; and the circumstance that the children
were not born till a comparatively advanced period of life, — that
is, until the corporeal and mental development of the parent was
perfectly complete, — necessarily favoured the ge neration o f a
powerful race. From both these circumstances, however, the
development of the race was sure to be characterized by peculiar
energy in evil as well as in good ; so that whilst in the godly por-
tion of the race, not only were the traditions of the fathers trans-
mitted faithfully and without adulteration from father to son, but
family characteristics, piety, discipline, and morals took deep
root, whilst in the ungodly portion time was given for sin to de-
velop itself with mighty power in its innumerable forms.
The heading in ver. 1 runs thus : "This is the book (sepher)
of the generations (tholedotK) of Adam." On tholedolh, see chap,
ii. 4. Sepker is a writing complete in itself, whether it consist
of one sheet or several, as for instance the "bill of divorce-
ment " in Deut. xxiv. 1,3. The addition of the clause, " t'n th e
day tliat God created man" etc., is analogous to chap, ii. 4 ; the
creation being mentioned again as the starting point, because all
the development and history of humanity was rooted there. —
Ver. 3. As Adam was created in the image of God, so did he
beget " in his own likeness, after his image ; " that is to say, he
transmitted the image of God in which he was created, not in
the purity in which it came direct from God, but in the form
given to it by his own self-determination, modified and cor-
rupted by sin. The begetting of the son by whom the line was
perpetuated (no doubt in every case the first-born), is followed
by an account of the number of years that Adam and the other
fathers lived after that, by the statement that each one begat
(other) sons and daughters, by the number of years that he
lived altogether, and lastly, by the assertion n&\ " and he di ed.''
This apparently superfluous announcement is " intended to in-
dicate byits constant recurrence that death reigned from Adam
downward^ as an unchangeable law (yid. Bom. v. 14). But
aglunst this background of universal death, the power of life was
still more conspicuous. For the man did not die till he had
propagated life, so that in the midst of the death of individuals
the life of the race was preserved, and the hope of the seed sus-
tained, by which the author of death should be overcome." In
Digitized by VjOOQlC
Ifi+l
CHAP. V. 125
the case of one of the fathers indeed, viz. Enoch (vers. 21
sqq.), life had not only a different issue, but also a different
form. Instead of the expression " and he lived," which intro-
duces in every other instance the length of life after the birth of
the first-born, we find in the case of Enoch this statement, " he
wal ked with God (E lohim) ; " and instead of the expression " and
he died," the announcement, "and he was not, for God (Elohim)
took him." The phra se " walked. ..wilh.Xtod,". which, is only
applied to E noch and Noah (chap. vi. 9), denotes the most
confidential intercourse, the closest communion with the personal
God, a"Wa1fcirig as it were by the side of God, who still continued
His visible intercourse with men (vid. in. 8). It must be distin-(
guished from "walking before God" (chap. xvii. 1, xxiv. 40, etc.),
and " walking after God " (Deut. xiii. 4), both which phrases
are used to indicate a pious, moral, blameless life under the law
according to the directions of the divine commands. The only
other passage in which this expression " walk with God " occurs
is Mai. n. 6, where it denotes not the piety of the godly Israelites
generally, but the conduct of the priests, who stood in a closer re-
lation to Jehovah under the Old Testament than the rest of the
faithful, being permitted to enter the Holy Place, and hold direct
intercourse with Him there, which the rest of the people could not
do. The article in DVrSwn gives prominence to the personality
of Elohim, and shows that" the expression cannot refer to inter
courser with the spiritual world. — In Enoch, the seventh from
Adam through Seth, godliness attained its highest point; whilst
ungodliness culminated in Lamech, the seventh from Adam
through Cain, who made his sword his god. Enoch, therefore,
like Elijah, was taken away by God, and carried into the
heavenly paradise, so that he did not see (experience) death
(Heb. xi. 5) ; i.e. he was taken up from this temporal life and
transfigured into life eternal, being exempted by God from the
law of death and of return to the dust, as those of the faithful
will be, who shall be alive at the coming of Christ to judgment,
and who in like manner shall not taste of death and corruption,
bat be changed in a moment. There is no foundation for the
opinion, that Enoch did not participate at his translation in the
glorification which awaits the righteous at the resurrection.
For, according to 1 Cor. xv. 20, 23, it is not in glorification,
but in the resurrection, that Christ is the first-fruits. Now the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
126 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
latter presupposes death. Whoever, therefore, through the grace
of God is exempted from death, cannot rise from the dead, but
reaches cuf>dap<rla, or the glorified state of perfection, through
being " changed " or " clothed upon " (2 Cor. v. 4). This does
not at all affect the truth of the statement in Rom. v. 12, 14.
For the same God who has appointed death as the wages of sin,
and given us, through Christ, the victory over death, possesses
the power to glorify into eternal life an Enoch and an Elijah,
and all who shall be alive at the coming of the Lord without
chaining their glorification to death and resurrection. Enoch
and Elijah were translated into eternal life with God without
passing through disease, death, and corruption, for the consola-
tion of believers, and to awaken the hope of a life after death.
Enoch's translation stands about half way between Adam and
the flood, in the 987th year after the creation of Adam. Seth,
Enos, Cainan, Mahalaleel, and Jared were still alive. His son
Methuselah and his grandson Lamech were also living, the latter
being 113 years old. Noah was not yet born, and Adam was
dead. His translation, in consequence of his walking with God,
was " an example of repentance to afl_generations, w as the son of
Sirach says^Ecclus. xliv. 16) ; and the apocryphal legend in the
book of Enoch i. 9 represents him as prophesying of the coming
of the Lord, to execute judgment upon the ungodly (Jude 14,
15). In comparison with the longevity of the other fathers,
Enoch was taken away young, before he had reached half the
ordinary age, as a sign that whilst long life, viewed as a time for
repentance and grace, is indeed a blessing from God, when the
ills which have entered the world through sin are considered, it
is also a burden and trouble which God shortens for His chosen.
That the patriarchs of the old world felt the ills of this earthly
life in all their severity, was attested by Lamech (vers. 28, 29),
when he gave his son, who was born 69 years after Enoch's
translation , the name of Noah, saying, " This same shall comfort
us concerning our work and the toil of our hands, because of the
ground which the Lord hath cursed." Noali, nfa from no to re st
and rpjn to bring rest, is explained by Dru to comfort, in the
sense of helpful and remedial consolation. Lamech not only
felt the burden of his work upon the ground which God had
cursed, but looked forward with a prophetic presentiment to the
time when the existing misery and corruption would terminate,
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. VI. 1-8. 127
and a change for the better, a redemption from the curse, would
come. This presentiment assumed the form of hope when his
son was born ; he therefore gave expression to it in his name.
But his hope was not realized, at least not in the way that he
desired. A change did indeed take place in the lifetime of
Noah. By the judgment of the flood the corrupt race was ex-
terminated, and in Noah, who was preserved because of his
blameless walk with God, the restoration of the human race was
secured ; but the effects of the curse, though mitigated, were
not removed ; whilst a covenant sign guaranteed the preservation
of the human race, and therewith, by implication, his hope of
the eventual removal of the curse (ix. 8—17). — The genealogical
table breaks off with Noah; all that is mentioned with reference
to him being the birth of his three sons, when he was 500 years
old (ver. 32 ; see chap. xi. 10), without any allusion to the re-
maining years of his life, — an indication of a later hand. " The
mention of three sons leads to the expectation, that whereas
hitherto the line has been perpetuated through one member
alone, in the future each of the three sons will form a new begin-
ning (yid. ix. 18, 19, x. 1)." — M. Baumgarten.
MARRIAGE OP THE SONS OP GOD AND THE DAUGHTERS OF
MEN. — OHAP. VI. 1-a
The genealogies in chap. iv. and v., which trace the develop-
ment of the human race through two fundamentally different lines,
headed by Cain and Seth, are accompanied by a description of
their moral development, and the statement that through mar-
riages between the " so ns of God" (Elokim) and the " daughters
of men," the wickedness became so great, that God determined to
destroy the men whom He had created. This description applies
to the whole human race, and presupposes the intercourse or
marriageof the Cainites with the Sethites. — Ver. 1 relates to the
increase of men generally {ETKfi, without any restriction), i.e. of
the whole human race ; and whilst the moral corruption is repre-
sented as universal, the whole human race, with the exception of
Noah, who found grace before God (ver. 8), is described as ripe
for destruction (vers. 3 and 5-8). To understand this section,
and appreciate the causes of this complete degeneracy of the race,
we must first obtain a correct interpretation of the expressions
Digitized by VjOOQlC
128 THE F1BST BOOK OF MOSES.
" sons of God" (ovifon ya) and " daughters of men" (mttn nun).
Th ree dif ferent views have been entertained from the very ear-
\ liest times : the w sons of God" being regarded as (a) the sons
of princes, (b) angels, (c) the Sethites or godly men; and" the
" daughters of men," as the Slaughters (a) of people of the lower
orders, (b) of mankind generally, (c) of the Cainites, or of the rest
of mankind as contrasted with the godly or the children of God.
/ A ikJjXA ^ these three views, the first, although it has become the tradi-
j/vW*T^ tional one in orthodox rabbinical Judaism, may be dismissed at
once as not warranted by the usages of the language, and as
altogether unscriptural. The second, on the contrary, may be
I J defended on two plausible grounds : first, the fact that the " sons
,. try ! of God," in Job i. 6; ii. 1, and xxxviii. 7, and in Dan. iii. 25, are
/ unquestionably angels (also DvK \n in Ps. xxix. 1 and lxxxix. 7) ;
and secondly, the antithesis, " sons of God" and " daughters
of men." Apart from the context and tenor of the passage,
these two points would lead us most naturally to regard the
"sons of God" as angels, in distinction from men and the
daughters of men. But this explanation, though the first to
suggest itself, can only lay claim to be received as the correct
one, provided the language itself admits of no other. Now that
is not the case. For it is not to angels only that the term " sons
^ of Elohim," or " sons of Elim," is applied ; but in Ps. lxxiii. 15,
in an address to Elohim, the godly are called " the generation of
Thy sons," i.e. sons of Elohim ; in Deut. xxxii. 5 the Israelites
are called His (God's) sons, and in Hos. i. 10, " sons of the living
God ;" and in Ps. lxxx. 17, Israel is spoken of as the son, whom
Elohim has made strong. These passages show that the expres-
sion " sons of God" cannot be elucidated by philological means,
but must be interpreted by theology alone. Moreover, even
when it is applied to the angels, it is questionable whether it is
to be understood in a physical or ethical sense. The notion that
" it is employed in a physical sense as nomen natures, instead of
angels as nomen officii, and presupposes generation of a physical
kind," we must reject as an unscriptural and gnostic error. Ac-
cording to the scriptural view, the heavenly spirits are creatures of
God, and not begotten from the divine essence. Moreover, all the
other terms applied to the angels are ethical in their character.
But if the title w sons of God" cannot involve the notion of phy-
sical generation, it cannot be restricted to celestial spirits, but is
Digitized by VjOOQlC
V
CHAP. VI. l-». 129
applicable to all beings which bear the image of God, or by virtue
of their likeness to God participate in the glory, power, and
blessedness of the divine life, — to men therefore as well as angels,
since God has caused man to " want but little of Elohim," or to
stand but a little behind Elohim (Ps. viii. 5), so that even ma-
gistrates are designated " Elohim, and sons of the Most High"
(Ps. lxxxii. 6). When Delitzsch objects to the application of the
expression " sons of Elohim" to pious men, because, " although
the idea of a child of God may indeed have pointed, even in the
O. T., beyond its theocratic limitation to Israel (Ex. iv. 22 ;
Deut. xiv. 1) towards a wider ethical signification (Ps. lxxiii. 15 ;
Prov. xiv. 26), yet this extension and expansion were not so
completed, that in historical prose the terms ' sons of God' (for
which 'sons of Jehovah' should have been used to prevent
mistake), and ' sons (or daughters) of men,' could be used to dis-
tinguish the children of God and the children of the world," —
this argument rests upon the er roneous supposition, that the ex \j-
pression " sons of God" was introduced by Jehovah for the first
time when He selected Israel to be the covenant nation. So
much is true, indeed, that before the adoption of Israel as the
first-born son of Jehovah (Ex. iv. 22), it would have been out of
place to speak of sons of Jehovah ; but the notion is false, or at
least incapable of proof, that there were not children of God in
the olden time, long before Abraham's call, and that, if there
were, they could not have been called " sons of Elohim." The
idea was not first introduced in connection with the theocracy,
and extended thence to a more universal signification. It had
its roots in the divine image, and therefore was general in its
application from the very first ; and it was not till God in the
character of Jehovah chose Abraham and his seed to be the
vehicles of salvation, and left the heathen nations to go their
own way, that the expression received the specifically theocratic
signification of " son of Jehovah," to be again liberated and
expanded into the more comprehensive idea of viodeala tow
Geov (i.e. Elohim, not tow icvpiov — Jehovah), at the coming of
Christ, the Saviour of all nations. If in the olden time there
were pious men who, like Enoch and Noah, walked with Elohim,
or who, even if they did not stand in this close priestly relation
to God, made the divine image a reality through their piety and
fear of God, then there were sons (children) of God, for whom
Digitized by VjOOQlC
130 THE FIBST BOOK OF MOSES
the only correct appellation was " sons of Elohim," since sonship
to Jehovah was introduced with the call of Israel, so that it
could only have been proleptically that the children of God in
the old world could be called " sons of Jehovah." But if it be
still argued, that in mere prose the term "sons of God" could
not have been applied to children of God, or pious men, this
would be equally applicable to " sons of Jehovah." On the
other hand, there is this objection to our applying it to angels,
that the pious, who walked with God and called upon the name
of the Lord, had been mentioned just before, whereas no allu-
sion had been made to angels, not even to their creation.
Again, the antithesis " sons of God" and " daughters of men"
does not prove that the former were angels. It by no means
follows, that because in ver. 1 D*1KH denotes man as a genus, i.e.
the whole human race, it must do the same in ver. 2, where the
expression " daughters of men" is determined by the antithesis
" sons of God." And with reasons existing for understanding
by the sons of God and the daughters of men two species of the
genus Dlttn, mentioned in ver. 1, no valid objection can be offered
to the restriction of mun, through the antithesis Elohim, to all
men with the exception of the sons of God ; since this mode of
expression is by no means unusual in Hebrew. " From the ex-
pression ' daughters of men,' " as Dettinger observes, " it by no
means follows that the sons of God were not men ; any more
than it follows from Jer. xxxii. 20, where it is said that God had
done miracles ' in Israel, and among men,' or from Isa. xliii. 4,
where God says He will give men for the Israelites, or from
Judg. xvi. 7, where Samson says, that if he is bound with seven
green withs he shall be as weak as a man, or from Ps. lxxiii. 5,
where it is said of the ungodly they are not in trouble as men,
that the Israelites, or Samson, or the ungodly, were not men at
all. In all these passages DIN (men) denotes the remainder of
mankind in distinction from those who are especially named."
Oases occur, too, even in simple prose, in which the same term
is used, first in a general, and then directly afterwards in a more
restricted sense. We need cite only one, which occurs in Judg.
xix.-xxi. In chap. xix. 30 reference is made to the coming of
the children of Israel (i.e. of the twelve tribes) out of Egypt ; and
directly afterwards (chap. xx. 1, 2) it is related that " all the
children of Israel," " all the tribes of Israel," assembled together
Digitized by VjOOQlC
If
tJT
CHAP. VL 1-8. 131
(to make war, as we learn from vers. 3 sqq., upon Benjamin) ;
and in the whole account of the war, chap. xx. and xxi., the
tribes of Israel are distinguished from the tribe of Benjamin :
so that the expression " tribes of Israel" really means the rest of
the tribes with the exception of Benjamin. And yet the Ben-
jamites were Israelites. Why then should the fact that the
sons of God are distinguished from the daughters of men prove
that the former could not be men t There is not force enough
in these two objections to compel us to adopt the conclusion that
the sons of God were angels.
The question whether the " sons of Elohim " were celestial / l*^*
or terrestrial sons of God (angels or pious men of the family of
Seth) can only be determined from the context, and from the
substance of the passage itself, that is to say, from what is re-
lated respectin g the co nd^fft "f thn tonn nf God and its results.
That The connection does not favour the idea of their being
nngels, is acknowledged even by those who adopt this view.
" It cannot be denied," says Delitzsch, " that the connection of
chap. vi. 1-8 with chap. iv. necessitates the assumption, that
such intermarriages (of the Sethite and Cainite families) did
take place about the time of the flood (cf. Matt. xxiv. 38 ; Luke
xvii. 27) ; and the prohibition of mixed marriages under the law
(Ex. xxxiv. 16 ; cf . Gen._ xxvii. 46, xxviii. 1 sqq.) also favours the
same idea^TJutthis " assumption " is placed beyond all doubt,
by what is here related of the sons of God. In ver. 2 it is
stated that " the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that
they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they
chose," i.e. of any with whose beauty they were charmed ; and
these wives bare children to them (ver. 4). Now nBta np? (to
take a wife) is a standing expression throughout the whole of
the Old Testament for the marriage relation established by God
at the creation, and is never applied to iropvela, or the simple
act of physical connection. This is quite sufficient of itself to
exclude any reference to angels. For Christ Himself distinctly
states that the angels cannot marry (Matt. xxii. 30 ; Mark xii.
25 ; cf. Luke xx. 34 sqq.). And when Kurtz endeavours to
weaken the force of these words of Christ, by arguing that they
do not prove that it is impossible for angels so to fall from their
original holiness as to sink into an unnatural state ; this phrase
has no meaning, unless by conclusive analogies, or the clear
Digitized by VjOOQlC
132 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
testimony of Scripture, 1 it can be proved that the angels either
possess by nature a material corporeality adequate to the con-
traction of a human marriage, or that by rebellion against their
Creator they can acquire it, or that there are some creatures in
heaven and on earth which, through sinful degeneracy, or by
sinking into an unnatural state, can become possessed of the
1 We cannot admit that there is any force in Hofmanris argument in
his Schriflbeweis I, p. 426, that "the begetting of children on the part of
angels is not more irreconcilable with a nature that is not organized, like
that of man, on the basis of sexual distinctions, than partaking of food is
with a nature that is altogether spiritual ; and yet food was eaten by the
angels who visited Abraham." For, in the first place, the eating in this
case was a miracle wrought through the condescending grace of the omni-
potent God, and furnishes no standard for judging what angels can do by
their own power in rebellion against God. And in the second place, there
is a considerable difference between the act of eating on the part of the
angels of God who appeared in human shape, and the taking of wives and
begetting of children on the part of sinning angels. We are quite unable
also to accept as historical testimony, the myths of the heathe n respecting
demigods, sons of gods, and the begetting of children on the part of their
gods, or the fables of the book of Enoch (chap. vi. sqq.) about the 200
angels, with their leaders, who lusted after the beautiful and delicate
daughters of men, and who came down from heaven and took to them-
selves wives, with whom they begat giants of 3000 (or according to one
MS. 800) cubits in height. Nor do 2 Pet. ii. 4 and Jude 6 furnish any
evidence of angel marriages. Peter is merely speaking of sinning angels in
general (ckyythei* AfiapmaaTuS) whom God did not spare, and not of any
particular sin on the part of a small number of angels ; and Jude describes
these angels as tov; f*% Tripr)t*»r*s ni* iavror dficA'i HOiA dvtikivonrtti to
iiia» cUnrvpior, those who kept not their princedom, their position as ruleis,
but left their own habitation. There is nothing here about marriages with
the daughters of men or the begetting of children, even if we refer the
word tovtoic in the clause to» Sftoion Twro/f Tpo«ro» exnropiitvoxaxi in ver. 7 to
the angels mentioned in ver. 6 ; for iKimptitn, the commission of fornication,
would be altogether different from marriage, that is to say, from a conjugal
bond that was permanent even though unnatural. But it is neither certain
nor probable that this is the connection of rovroi;. Huther, the latest com-
mentator upon this Epistle, who gives the preference to this explanation of
tcivtoii, and therefore cannot be accused of being biassed by doctrinal pre-
judices, says distinctly in the 2d Ed. of his commentary, "rovrcx; may be
grammatically construed as referring to Sodom and Gomorrah, or per synesin
to the inhabitants of these cities ; but in that case the sin of Sodom and
Gomorrah would only be mentioned indirectly." There is nothing in the
rules of syntax, therefore, to prevent our connecting the word with Sodom
and Gomorrah ; and it is not a fact, that " grammaticte et logic ss prtecepta
compel us to refer this word to the angels," as G. v. Zeschwiu says. But
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. VI. 1-ft 133
power, which they have not hy nature, of generating and pro-
pagating their species. As man could indeed destroy by sin
the nature which he had received from his Creator, but could
not by his own power restore it when destroyed, to say nothing
of implanting an organ or a power that was wanting before ; so
we cannot believe that angels, through apostasy from God, could
the very same reason which Hulher assigns for not connecting it with
Sodom and Gomorrah, may be also assigned for not connecting it with the
angels, namely, that in that case the sin of the angels would only be men-
tioned indirectly. We regard PhilippCs explanation (in his GlaubensUhre
iii. p. 803) as a possible one, viz. that the word rovroit refers back to the
Atiptnrtt Atihyui mentioned in ver. 4, and as by no means set aside by
De Wette's objection, that the thought of ver. 8 would be anticipated in that
case ; for this objection is fully met by the circumstance, that not only does
the word ovroi, which is repeated fire times from ver. 8 onwards, refer back
to these men, but even the word nvreii in ver. 14 also. On the other hand,
the reference of tovtqii to the angels is altogether precluded by the clause
x*l dxtXtovatu iietaa tjxpxo{ trip*;, which follows the word iitiropMvtrcuxi.
For fornication on the part of the angels could only consist in their going
after flesh, or, as Hofmann expresses it, " having to do with flesh, for which
they were not created," but not in their going after other, or foreign flesh.
There would be no sense in the word "trip*; unless those who were Uxop-
Hvcams were themselves possessed of dpi ; so that this is the only alter-
native, either we must attribute to the angels a dpi or fleshly body, or the
idea of referring rovrtti to the angels must be given up. When Kurtz
replies to this by saying that " to angels human bodies are quite as much a
trip* dpi, i.e. a means of sensual gratification opposed to their nature and
calling, as man can be to human man," he hides the difficulty, but does not
remove it, by the ambiguous expression " opposed to their nature and call-
ing." The 'trip* dpi must necessarily presuppose an til* dpi. — But it is
thought by some, that even if toirui in ver. 7 do not refer to the angels
in ver. 6, the words of Jude agree so thoroughly with the tradition of the
book of Enoch respecting the fall of the angels, that we must admit the
allusion to the Enoch legend, and so indirectly to Gen. vi., since Jude could
not have expressed himself more clearly to persons who possessed the book
of Enoch, or were acquainted with the tradition it contained. Now this
conclusion would certainly be irresistible, if the only sin of the angels
mentioned in the book of Enoch, as that for which they were kept in chains
of darknes still the judgment-day, had been their intercourse with human
wives. For the fact that Jude was acquainted with the legend of Enoch,
and took for granted that the readers of his Epistle were so too, is evident
from his introducing a prediction of Enoch in vers. 14, 15, which is to be
found in chap. i. 9 of Dillmann's edition of the book of Enoch. But it is
admitted by all critical writers upon this book, that in the book of Enoch
which has been edited by Dillmann, and is only to be found in an Ethiopia
version, there are contradictory legends concerning the fall and judgment
V
/
Digitized by VjOOQlC
134 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
acquire sexual power of which they had previously been desti-
tute.
Ver. 3. The sentence of God upon the " sons of God" is also
appropriate to men only. . " JehovaJi said : My spirit shall not
rule in men for ever ; in their wandering they are flesh" The
verb p , i=p. signifies to rule (hence ffw the ruler), and to judge,
of the angels ; that the book itself is composed of earlier and later materials ;
and that those very sections (chap, vi.-xvi. 106, etc.) in which the legend
of the angel marriages is given without ambiguity, belong to the so-called
book of Noah, i.e. to a later portion of the Enoch legend, which is opposed
in many passages to the earlier legend. The fall of the angels is certainly
often referred to in the earlier portions of the work ; but among all the
passages adduced by Dillmann in proof of this, there is only one (chap. xix.
1) which mentions the angels who had taken wives. In the others, the only
thing mentioned as the sin of the angels or of the hosts of Azazel, is the
fact that they were subject to Satan, and seduced those who dwelt on the
earth (chap. liv. 2-6), or that they came down from heaven to earth, and
revealed to the children of men what was hidden from them, and then led
them astray to the commission of sin (chap. lxiv. 2). There is nothing
at all here about their taking "wives. Moreover, in the earlier portions of
the book, besides the fall of the^&ngels, there is frequent reference made
to a fall, i.e. an act of sin, on th6\J>art of the stars of heaven and the
army of heaven, which transgressedrfce commandment of God before
they rose, by not appearing at their awointed time (vid. chap, xviii.
14, 15, xxi. S, xc. 21, 24, etc.) ; and their putehment and place of punish-
ment are described, in just the same manner a* * n the case of the wicked
angels, as a prison, a lofty and horrible place \} which the seven stars
of heaven lie bound like great mountains and helping with fire (chap,
xxi. 2, 3), as an abyss, narrow and deep, dreadfu\and dark, in which
the star which fell first from heaven is lying, bound 9j*nd and foot (chap,
lxxxviii. 1 , cf . xc. 24). From these passages it is quit* evident, that thu
legend concerning the fall of the angels and stars sprangV out of Isa. xxiv.
21, 22 (" And it shall come to pass in that day, that the L&rd shall visit the
host of the height (DVlon toy, the host of heaven, by which) star8 and angels
are to be understood) on high (i.e. the spiritual powers IP* t^ 6 heavens)
and the kings of the earth upon the earth, and they shall V 6 gathered to-
gether, bound in the dungeon, and shut up in prison, and aJ ter mxa y da/ 8
they shall be punished"), along with Isa. xiv. 12 (" How t rt ^° n fallen
from heaven, thou beautiful morning star I"), and that the icconnt of the
sons of God in Gen. vi., as interpreted by those who « *er it to the
angels, was afterwards combined and amalgamated with it. Now if these
different legends, describing the judgment upon the stars =*>** fe U fl0m
heaven, and the angels that followed Satan in seducing ma ", in just the
same manner as the judgment upon the angels who bego- ' giants from
women, were in circulation at the time when the Epistle of J nde was writ-
ten ; we must not interpret the sin of the angels, referred tc by Peter and
d google
Digitized b^jOCK
CHAP. VL 8. 135
as the consequence of ruling, Wi is the divine spirit of life
bestowed upon man, the principle of physical and ethical, natural
and spiritual life. This iHITspirit God will withdraw from man,
and thereby put an end to their life and conduct. D|t?a is re-
garded by many as a particle, compounded of 3, B* a contraction
Jade, in a one-sided manner, and arbitrarily connect it with only such pas-
sages of the book of Enoch as speak of angel marriages, to the entire disre-
gard of all the other passages, which mention totally different sins as com-
mitted by the angels, that are punished with bands of darkness ; but we must
interpret it from what Jude himself has said concerning this sin, as Peter
gives no further explanation of what he means by ifixprvrcu. Now the
only sins that Jude mentions are fiii rtip^am t%» hxurup dpx'i' and Am'hiieii*
to fiiop olKYirtipiof. The two are closely connected. Through not keeping
the dpxv («'•«• the position as rulers in heaven) which belonged to them, and
was assigned them at their creation, the angels left " their own habitation"
(lim ttjotrtipioo) ; just as man, when he broke the commandment of God
and failed to keep his position as ruler on earth, also lost " his own habita-
tion" (fiio* o/*uti)/mov), that is to say, not paradise alone, but the holy body
of innocence also, so that he needed a covering for his nakedness, and will
continue to need it, until we are " clothed upon with our house which is
from heaven " (oU>rrt>pio» tif*u» i£ oip»uou). In this description of the angels 1
sin, there is not the slightest allusion to their leaving heaven to woo the
beautiful daughters of men. The words may be very well interpreted, as
they were by the earlier Christian theologians, as relating to the fall of
Satan and his angels, to whom all that is said concerning their punishment
fully applies. If Jude had had the vapvu'x of the angels, mentioned in the
Enoch legends, in his mind, he would have stated this distinctly, just as he
does in ver. 9 in the case of the legend concerning Michael and the devil,
and in ver. 11 in that of Enoch's prophecy. There was all the more reason
for his doing this, because not only do contradictory accounts of the sin of
the angels occur in the Enoch legends, but a comparison of the parallels
cited from the book of Enoch proves that he deviated from the Enoch legend
in points of no little importance. Thus, for example, according to Enoch
liv. 3, " iron chains of immense weight " are prepared for the hoste of Azazel,
to put them into the lowest hell, and cast them on that grea^day into the
furnace with flaming fire. Now Jude and Peter say notning about iron
chains, and merely mention "everlasting chains under darkness " and "chains
of darkness." Again, according to Enoch x. 12,^£he angel sinners are
" bound fast under the earth for seventy generation/, till the day of judgment
and their completion, till the last judgment shall be held for all eternity."
Peter and Jude make no allusion to this point o." time, and the supporters
of the angel marriages, therefore, have thought -r ell to leave it out when
quoting this parallel to Jude 6. Under these circumstances, the silence of
the apostles as to either marriages or fornication on the part of the sinful
angels, is a sure sign that they gave no credence to these fables of a Jewish
gnosticising tradition.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
136 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
i of 1CV, and DJ (also), used in the sense of quoniam, because,
' \ , (efc = netes, as V or ^ = i#K Judg. v. 7, vi. 17 ; Song of Sol.
^ • i. 7). But the objection to this explanation is, that the D|, " be-
\ J ^ ' , cause he also is flesh," introduces an incongruous emphasis into
"^ y the clause. We therefore prefer to regard D|t? as the inf. of
_-="^ JJB> = nitf with the suffix : " in their erring (that of men) he
I "(man as a genus) is flesh;" an explanation ^to"wHich, to our mind,
' the extremely harsh change of number (they, he), is no objection,
since many examples might be adduced of a similar change (vid.
Hupfeld on Ps. v. 10). Men, says God, have proved themselves
by their erring and straying to be flesh, Le. given up to the flesh,
and incapable of being ruled by the Spirit of God and led back
, to the divine goal of their life. 1^2 is used already in its ethi cal
signification, like <rag£jin the Sew Testament, denoting not
merely the natural corporeality of man, but his materiality as
rendered ungodly by sin. u Therefore his days shall Be 120
years:" this means, not that human life should in future never
attain a greater age than 120 years, but that a respite of 120
years should still be granted to the human race. This sentence,
as we may gather from the context, was made known to Noah
in his 480th year, to be published by him as " preacher of right-
eousness" (2 Pet. ii. 5) to the degenerate race. The reason why
men had gone so far astray, that God determined to withdraw
His spirit and give them up to destruction, was that the sons of
God had taken wives of such of the daughters of men as they
. chose. Can this mean, because angels had formed marriages
t>. with the daughters of men ? Even granting that such marriages,
I as being unnatural connections, would have led to the complete
1 corruption of human nature ; the men would in that case have
been the tempted, and the real authors of the corruption would
have been the angels. Why then should judgment fall upon
the tempted alone ? The judgments of God in the world are
not executed with^snch partiality as this. And the supposition
that nothing is said about the punishment of the angels, because
the narrative has to da with the history of man, and the spiritual
world is intentionally veiled as much as possible, does not meet
the difficulty. If tn£ sons of God were angels, the narrative is
concerned not only with men, but with angels also ; and it is not
the custom of the. Scriptures merely to relate the judgments
which fall upon the tempted, and say nothing at all about the
(>•'
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. Vt 4. 137
tempters. For the contrary, see chap. iii. 14 sqq. If the " sons
of God" were not men, so as to he included in the term ffW, the
punishment would need to he specially pointed out in their case,
and no deep revelations of the spiritual world would be required,
since these celestial tempters would be living with men upon the
earth, when they had taken wives from among their daughters.
The judgments of God are not only free from all unrighteous-
ness, but avoid every kind of partiality.
Ver. 4. " The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and
also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters
of men, and they bare children to them : these are the heroes
(D^lkin) who from the olden time ( D ^W?, as in Ps. xxv. 6 ; 1 Sam.
xxvii. 8) are the men of name" (i.e. noted, renowned or notorious
men). DT'W, from *>M to fall upon (Job i. 15 ; Josh. xi. 7), sig-
nifies the invaders (iTriTrtirrovre; Aq., /Swubt Sym.). Luther gives
the correct meaning, "tyrants :" t hey were called N e philim b e- ,
c ause they fell upon the people and oppressed them. 1 The I
meaning of the verse is a subject of dispute. To an unpreju-
diced mind, the words, as they stand, represent the Nephilim,
who were on the earth in those days, as existing before the sons
of God began to marry the daughters of men, and clearly dis-
tinguish them from the fruits of these marriages. W can no
more be rendered " they became, or arose," in this connection,
than rvn in chap. i. 2. WW would have been the proper word.
The expression "in those days" refers most naturally to the
1 The notion that the Nephilim -were giants, to which the Sept. rendering
ytyeunti has given rise, was rejected even by Luther as fabulous. He bases
his view upon Josh. zi. 7 : " Nephilim non dictos a magnitudine corporum,
sicu( Itabbini putant, sed a tyrannide et oppressions quod vi grassati sint,
nulla hahita ratione legum aut honestatix, sed simpUciter indulgentes suis
vohtptatibus et cupiditatibus." The opinion that giants are intended derives
no support from Num. xiii. 82, 88. When the Bpies describe the land of
Canaan as " a land that eateth up the inhabitants thereof," and then add %
(ver. 83), " and there we saw the Nephilim, the sons of Anak among (p lit.
from, out of, in a partitive sense) the Nephilim," by the side of whom they
were as grasshoppers ; the term Nephilim cannot signify giants, since the
spies not only mention them especially along with the inhabitants of the
land, who are described as people of great stature, but single out only a
portion of the Nephilim as "sons of Anak" (pjp '33), i.e. long-necked
people or giants. The explanation "fallen from heaven" needs no refuta-
tion ; inasmuch as the main element, " from heaven," is a purely arbitrary
addition.
PENT. — VOL. I. K
Digitized by VjOOQlC
138 THE FIBST BOOK OP MOSES.
time when God pronounced the sentence upon the degenerate
race; but it is so general and comprehensive a term, that it
must not be confined exclusively to that time, not merely be-
cause the divine sentence was first pronounced after these mar
riages were contracted, and the marriages, if they did not
produce the corruption, raised it to that fulness of iniquity
which was ripe for the judgment, but still more because the
words " after that" represent the marriages which drew down
the judgment as an event that followed the appearance of the
NephiUm. " The same were mighty men :" this might point back
to the NephiUm ; but it is a more natural supposition, that it
refers to the children horn to the sons of God. " These,"
i.e. the sons sprung from those marriages, " are the heroes, those
renowned heroes of old." Now if, according to the simple
meaning of the passage, the NephiUm were in existence at the
very time when the sons of God came in to the daughters of
men, the appearance of the NephiUm cannot afford the slightest
evidence that the " sons of God" were angels, by whom a family
of monsters were begotten, whether demigods, daemons, or angel-
1 How thoroughly irreconcilable the contents of this veree are with the
angel-hypothesis is evident from the strenuous efforts of its supporters to
bring them into harmony with it. Thus, in Reuter's Repert., p. 7, Del.
observes that the verse cannot be rendered in any but the following man-
ner : " The giants were on the earth in those days, and also afterwards, when
the sons of God went in to the daughters of men, these they bare to them,
or rather, and these bare to them ; " but, for all that, he gives this as the
meaning of the words, " At the time of the divine determination to inflict
punishment the giants arose, and also afterwards, when this unnatural con-
nection between super-terrestrial and human beings continued, there arose
such giants;" not only substituting "arose" for "were," but changing
"when they connected themselves with them" into "when this connection
continued." Nevertheless he is obliged to confess that " it is strange that
this unnatural connection, which I also suppose to be the intermediate cause
of the origin of the giants, should not be mentioned in the first clause of
ver. 4." This is an admission that the text says nothing about the origin
of the giants being traceable to the marriages of the sons of God, but that
the commentators have been obliged to insert it in the text to save their
angel marriages. Kurtz has tried three different explanations of this verse,
but they are all opposed to the rules of the language. (1) In the History of
the Old Covenant he gives this rendering : " Nephilim were on earth in these
days, and that even after the sons of God had formed connections with the
daughters of men ;" in which he not only gives to DJ the unsupportable
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. VL &-«. 139
Vers. 5-8. Now when the wickedness of man became great,
and " every imagination of the tJioughis of his heart was only
evil the whole day," i.e. continually and altogether evil, it re-
pented God that He had made man, and He determined to
destroy them. This determination and the motive assigned
are also irreconcilable with the angel-theory. " Had the god-
less race, which God destroyed by the flood, sprung either en-
tirely or in part from the marriage of angels to the daughters
of men, it would no longer have been the race first created
by God in Adam, but a grotesque product of the Adamitic
factor created by God, and an entirely foreign and angelic
factor" (Phil.). 1 The force of nn|», « it repented the Lord,"
meaning, " even, just," but takes the imperfect wfy in the sense of the per-
fect «t3- (2) In his Ehen der SShne Gottes (p. 80) he gives the choice of
this and the following rendering : " The Nephilim were on earth in those
days, and also after this had happened, that the sons of God came to the
daughters of men and begat children," where the tmgrammatical rendering
of the imperfect as the perfect is artfully concealed by the interpolation of
" after this had happened." (3) In " die SShne Gottes," p. 85 : " In these
days and also afterwards, when the sons of God came (continued to come)
to the daughters of men, they bare to them (*c. Nephilim)," where \t£y,
they came, is arbitrarily altered into ttf 3? *D , Di'', they continued to come.
But when he observes in defence of this quid pro quo, that " the imperfect
denotes here, as Hengstenberg has correctly affirmed, and as so often is the
case, an action frequently repeated in past times," this remark only shows
that he has neither understood the nature of the usage to which H. refers,
nor what Ewald has said (§ 136) concerning the force and use of the im-
perfect.
1 When, on the other hand, the supporters of the angel marriages main- f
tain that it is only on this interpretation that the necessity for the flood,
i.e. for the complete destruction of the whole human race with the excep-
tion of righteous Noah, can be understood, not only is there no scriptural
foundation for this argument, but it is decidedly at variance with those
statements of the Scriptures, which speak of the corruption of the men whom
God had created, and not of a race that had arisen through an unnatural
connection of angels and men and forced their way into God's creation. If
it were really the case, that it would otherwise be impossible to understand
where the necessity could lie, for all the rest of the human race to be de-
stroyed and a new beginning to be made, whereas afterwards, when
Abraham was chosen, the rest of the human race was not only spared, bat
preserved for subsequent participation in the blessings of salvation : we
should only need to call Job to mind, who also could not comprehend the
necessity for the fearful sufferings which overwhelmed him, and was unable
to discover the justice of God, but who was afterwards taught a better
Digitized by VjOOQlC
140 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
may be gathered from the explanatory W1V, u it grieved Him
at His heart." This shows that the repentance of God does no t
presuppose any variableness in His nature. or His purposes. In
this sense God never repents of anything (1 Sam. xv. 29),
"quia nihil Mi inopinatum vel non pramsum accidit" (Calvin).
The repe ntance of God is an anthropomorphic expression for
the pain of the divine love at the sin of man, and signifies that
" God is hurt no less by the atrocious sins of men than if they
pierced His heart with mortal anguish" (Calvin). The destruc-
tion of all, u from man unto beast," etc., is to be explained on
the ground of the sovereignty of man upon the earth, the irra-
tional creatures being created for him, and therefore involved in
his fall. This destruction, however, was not to bring the human
race to an end. " Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord."
In these words mercy is seen in the midst of wrath, pledging
the preservation and restoration of humanity.
III. THE HISTORY OF NOAH.
Chap. vt. 9-ix. 29.
The important relation in which Noah stands both to sacrec
and unTversiil histofy^aflses from the fact, thartle T^ound mercy
on account of" his blameless walk with God ; that in him the
human race was kept from total destruction, and he was pre-
served from the all-destroying flood, to found in his sons a new
lesson by God Himself, and reproved for his rash conclusions, as a sufficient
proof of the deceptive and futile character of all such human reasoning.
But this is not the true state of the case. The Scriptures expressly affirm,
that after the flood the moral corruption of man was the same as before the
flood ; for they describe it in chap. viii. 21 in the very same words as in
chap. vi. 6 : and the reason they assign for the same judgment not being
repeated, is simply the promise that God would no more smite and destroy
all living, as He had done before — an evident proof that God expected no
change in human nature, and out of pure mercy and long-suffering would
never send a second flood. " Now, if the race destroyed had been one that
sprang from angel-fathers, it is difficult to understand why no improvement
, was to be looked for after the flood ; for the repetition of any such unna-
tural angel-tragedy was certainly not probable, and still less inevitable"
(Phihppi).
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. VI. 9-«. 141
beginning to the history of the world. The piety of Noah, his
preservatio n, a nd the covenant through which God appoi nted
hi m the hea d of the human race, are the three main_points in
this section. The first of these is dismissed in a very few words.
The second, on the contrary, viz. the destruction of the old
world by the flood, and the preservation of Noah, together with
the animals enclosed in the ark, is circumstantially and elabo-
rately described, " because this event included, on the one hand,
a work of judgment and mercy of the greatest significance to the
history of the kingdom of God " — a judgment of such univer-
sality and violence as will only be seen again in the judgment at
the end of the world ; and, on the other hand, an act of mercy
which made the flood itself a flood of grace, and in that respect
a type of baptism (1 Pet. in. 21), and of life rising out of death.
" Destruction ministers to preservation, immersion to purification,
death to new birth ; the old corrupt earth is buried in the flood,
that out of this grave a new world may arise" (Delitzsch).
PREPARATION FOR THE FLOOD. CHAP. VI. 9-22.
Vers. 9-12 contain a description of Noah and his contempo-
raries ; vers. 13-22, the announcement of the purpose of God
with reference to the flood. — Ver. 9. " Noah, a righteous man,
was blameless among his generations :" righteous in his moral re-
lation to God ; blameless (reXeto?, integer) in his character and
conduct, rfrrn, yeveai, were the generations or families " which
passed by Noah, the Nestor of his time." His righteousness
and integrity were manifested in his walking with God, in which
he resembled Enoch (chap. v. 22). — In vers. 10-12, the account
of the birth of his three sons, and of the corruption of all flesh, is
repeated. This corruption is represented as corrupting the whole
earth and filling it with wickedness ; and thus the judgment
of the flood is for the first time fully accounted for. " The
earth was corrupt before God (Elohim points back to the pre-
vious Elohim in ver. 9)," it became so conspicuous to God, that
He could not refrain from punishment. The corruption pro-
ceeded from the fact, that " all Jlesh" — i.e. the whole human
race which had resisted the influence of the Spirit of God and
become flesh (see ver. 3) — " had corrupted its way" The term
" flesh " in vgr^!2 cannot include_ the animal w orld, since the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
6*K
142 THE FIRST BOOK OB MOSES.
expression, u corrupted its way," is applicable to man alone. The
facttHat in vers. 13 arid 17 thlslerm^ernBraces boflTmen and
animals is no proof to the contrary, for the simple reason, that
in ver. 19 "all flesh" denotes the animal world only, an evident
proof that the precise meaning of the word must always be de-
termined from the context. — Ver. 13. " The end of all flesh is
come before Me" ?* Kte, when applied to rumours, invariably
signifies " to reach the ear" (vid. chap, xviii. 21 ; Ex. iii. 9 ;
Esth. ix. 11) ; hence '3B? K3 in this case cannot mean a me con?-
stitutus est (Ges.). )ft, there fore, is not the end in the sense of
y^yfyj 1 d estruction, bu t the end (extremity') of depravi ty or corrup tion,
* 1 which leads to destruction. " For the earth has become full of
' ttnckednelh U. r'JUUj" i.e. proceeding from them, u and I destroy
them along with the earth." Because all flesh had destroyed its
way, it should be destroyed with the earth by God. The lex
talionis is obvious here. — Vers. 14 sqq. Noah was exempted
from the extermination. He was to build an ark, in order that
he himself, his family, and the animals might be preserved.
nan, which is only used h ere an d^i n Exi ~iL_3^_5»—where jt ; s
a pplied t o tfie~ark in which Moses^ was placed, is probably an
~" ian word : ^lie JUXX. render it Kl/3arro<; herSpsxsi-^ilSfj^a
xodus; tfi&"-Vulgate area, from which our word ark is derived.
\Gopher-xooo d (ligna bituminata ; Jerome") is most likel y cj/press.
The air. \ey. gopher is related to ">B^, resin, arid Kunrapuraixi ; it
is no proof to the contrary that in later Hebrew the cypress is
called berosh, for gopher belongs to the pre-Hebraic times. The
ark was to be made cells, i.e. divided into cells, D'li? (lit. nests,
niduli, mansiunculce), and pitched pB3 denom. from IM) within
and without with copher, or asphalte (LXX. aa<f>aXro<:, Vulg.
bitumen). On the supposition, which is a very probable one,
that the ark wasjbailt in the f orm not o f a ship, but of a chest,
with flat bottom, like a floating house, aTif was noT meant for
saifihgPTrat merely to - Boatupon the water, the dimensions,
300 cubits long, 50 broad, and 30 high, give a superficial area
of 15,000 square cubits, and a cubic measurement of 450,000
cubits, probably of the ordinary standard, " after the elbow
of a man" (Deut. iii. 11), i.e. measured from the elbow to
the end of the middle finger. — Ver. 16. " Light shalt thou
make to the ark, and in a cubit from above shalt thou finish
it." As the meaning light for -irrtf is established by the word
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. VI. 9-J2. 143
D^irnt, " double-light" or mid-day, the passage can only signify .
that a hole or opening for light anj^ njr wa,s to hp, sn ^rmstmrtorl i Lit^. /£
ngto_n»a ch within a , cnhjt of the edge of the roof. A window '
only a cubit square could not possibly "Be intended ; for in* is
not synonymous with ft?n (chap. viii. 6), but signifies, generally, a
space for light, or by which light could be admitted into the ark,
and in which the window, or lattice for opening and shutting,
could be fixed ; though we can form no distinct idea of what the
arrangement was. The door he was to place in the side ; and
to make " lower, second, and third {to. cells)," i.e. three distinct
stories. 1 — Vers. 17 sqq. Noah was to build this ark, because
God was about to bring a flood upon the earth, and would save
him, with his family, and one pair of every kind of animal.
TOO, (thp. flnnd), is an arrfrmV. witrrl^ coined expresslyjot-lhe
waters of NoaK (Isa. liv. .9). and i* use<Lnowhfire_filae_ except
?St M' f- 1 P . n?? '? Q, ° 1S M apposition to mabbul : " I bring
tlie flood, watert upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein it a
living breath " {i.e. man and beast). With Noah, God made a
covenant. On rrta see chap. xv. 18. A» not only the human
race, but the animal world also was to be preserved through Noah,
he was to take with him into the ark his wife, his sons and their
wives, and of every living thing, of all flesh, two of every sort, a
male and a female, to keep them alive ; also all kinds of food for
himself and family, and for the sustenance of the beasts. — Vex.
22. " Thus did Noah, according to all that God commanded him"
(with regard to the building of the ark). Cf. Heb. xi. 7.
1 As the height of the ark was thirty cubits, the three stories of cells
can hardly have filled the entire space, since a room ten cubits high, or nine
cubits if we deduct the thickness of the floors, would have been a prodigality
of space beyond what the necessities required. It has been conjectured that
above or below these stories there was space provided for the necessary sup-
plies of food and fodder. At the same time, this is pure conjecture, like
every other calculation, not only as to the number and Bize of the cells, but
also as to the number of animals to be collected and the fodder they would
require. Hence every objection that has been raised to the suitability of
the structure, and the possibility of collecting all the animals in the ark and
providing them with food, is based upon arbitrary assumptions, and should
be treated as a perfectly groundless fancy. As natural science is still in the
dark as to the formation of species, and therefore not in a condition to
determine the number of pairs from which all existing species are descended,
it is ridiculous to talk, as Pfaff and others do, of 2000 species of mammalia,
and 6500 species of birds, which Noah would have had to feed every day.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
144
THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
'.■A
HISTOET OP THE FLOOD. — CHAP. VII.- VIII. 19.
The account of the commencement, course, and termination
of the flood ab ounds in repetition s ; but although it progresse s
somewhat heavily, the connection is well sustained, and no link
coiild be erased without producing a gap. — Vers. 1-16. When
the ark was built, and the period of grace (vi. 3) had passed,
Noah received instructions from Jehovah to enter the ark with
his family, and with the animals, viz. seven of every kind of
clean animals^ and two of the unclean ; and was informed
that within seven days God would cause it to rain upon the
earth forty days and forty nights. The date of the flood is
then given (ver. 6) : " Noah was six hundred years old, and
the flood was (namely) water upon the earth ;" and the execu-
tion of the divine command is recorded in vers. 7-9. There
follows next the account of the bursting forth of the flood,
the date being given with still greater minuteness; and the
entrance of the men and animals into the ark is again de-
scribed as being fully accomplished (vers. 10-16). — The fact
that in the command to enter the ark a distinction is now made
betw een clean a ncLuncleananimals. seven ofthe former being
ordered to be taken, — i.e. three pair and a single one, probably
a male for sacrifice, — is no more a proof of different authorship,
or of the fusion of two accounts, than the interchange of the
names Jehovah and Elohiin. For the distinction between clean
and unclean animals did not originate with Moses, but was
confirmed by him as a long established custom, in harmony with
the law. It reached hack to the very earliest times, and arose
from a certain innate feeling of the human mind, when undis-
turbed by unnatural and ungodly influences, which detects types
of sin and corruption in many animals, and instinctively recoils
from them (see my biblische Archdologie ii. p. 20). That the
variations in the names of God furnish no criterion by which
to detect different documents, is evident enough from the fact,
that in chap. vii. 1 it is Jehovah who commands Noah to
enter the ark, and in ver. \ Noah does as Elohim had com-
manded, whilst in ver. 16, in two successive clauses, Elohim
alternates with Jehovah — the animals entering the ark at the
command of Elohim, and Jehovah shutting Noah in. With
regard to the entrance of the animals into the ark, it is worthy
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VII. 17-M. 145
of notice, that in vers. 9 and 15 it is stated that " they came two
and two" and in ver. 16 that "the coming ones came male and
female of all flesh." In this expression " they came " it is
clearly intimated, that the animals collected about Noah and
were taken into the ark, without his having to exert himself to
collect them, and that they did so in consequence of an insti nct
produced by God, Tike - that which frequently leads animals to
scent and try to flee from dangers, of which man has no pre-
sentiment. The time when the flood commenced is said to have
been the 600th year of Noah's life, on the 17th day of the second
month (ver. 11). The months must be reckoned, not accord-
ing to the Mosaic ecclesiastical year, which commenced in the
spring, but according to the natural or civil yea r, which com-
menced in the autumn at the beginning of sowing time, or the
autumnal equinox; so that the flood would be pouring upon
the earth in October and November. " The same clay wire all
the fountains of the great deep (blnn the unfathomable ocean)
broken up, and the sluices (windows, lattices) of heaven opened,
and there was (happened, came) pouring rain (DW in distinction
from 1DD) upon the earth 40 days and 40 nights" Thus the
floodjwas produced by the bursting_Jorth of fountains^ hidden
withinjhe-fiarth^ whichjdrpve_seas_and_rkers. above their banks,
andbyjwn which continued incessantly for 40" days and ^0
nights. — Ver. 13. " In the self-same day had Noah . . . entered
into the ark :" Ma^p luperfect " had com e," not came, which would
require &P. The idea is not that Noah, with his family and
all the animals, entered the ark on the very day on which
the rain began, but that on that day he had entered, had com-
pleted the entering, which occupied the seven days between the
giving of the command (ver. 4) and the commencement of the
flood (ver. 10).
Vers. 17-24 contain a description of the flood : how the
water increased more and more, till it was 15 cubits above all
the lofty mountains of the earth, and how, on the one hand, it
raised the ark above the earth and above the mountains, and,
on the other, destroyed every living being upon the dry land,
from man to cattle, creeping things, and birds. " The descrip-
tion is simple and majestic ; the almighty judgment of God,
and the love manifest in the midst of the wrath, hold the his-
torian fast. ThgJaHtolQgies_depict the fear ful mono jpjiy_pJLth8
Digitized by VjOOQlC
146 THE FIBST BOOK OF MOSES.
immeasurable expanssj rf wate r: omnia pontes erant et deerant
liiera pontoT The words of ver. 17, " and the flood was (came)
upon the earth for forty days" relate to the 40 days' rain com-
bined with the bursting forth of the fountains beneath the earth.
By these the water was eventually raised to the height given,
at which it remained 150 days (ver. 24). But if the w ater
covered. " all the hig h hills under the whole^ajxn^thisjdea.rly
indicate s the u niversality of t he floo d. The statement, indeed,
that it rose 15^cubits~ above the mountains, is probably founded
upon the fact, that the ark drew 15 feet of water, and that when
the waters subsided, it rested upon the top of Ararat, from
which the conclusion would very naturally be drawn as to the
greatest height attained. Now as Ararat, according to the
measurements of Perrot, is only 16,254 feet high, whereas the
loftiest peaks of the Himalaya and Cordilleras are as much as
26,843, the submersion of these mountains has been thought
impossible, and the statement in ver. 19 has been regarded as a
rhetorical expression, like Dent. ii. 25 and iv. 19, which is not
of universal application. But even if those peaks, which are
higher than Ararat, were not covered by water, we cannot
therefore pronounce the flood merely partial in its extent, but
must regard it as universal, as extending over every part of
the world, since the few peaks uncovered would not only sink
into vanishing points in comparison with the surface covered,
but would form an exception not worth mentioning, for the
simple reason that no living beings could exist upon these
mountains, covered with perpetual snow and ice ; so that every-
thing that lived upon the dry land, in whose nostrils there was a
breath of life, would inevitably die, and, with the exception of
those shut up in the ark, neither man nor beast would be able
to rescue itself, and escape destruction. A flood which rose 15
cubits above the top of Ararat could not remain partial, if it
only continued a few days, to say nothing of the fact that the
water was rising for 40 days, and remained at the highest ele-
vation for 150 days. To speak of such a flood as partial is
absurd , even if it broke out at only one spot, it would spread
over the earth from one end to the other, and reach everywhere
to the same elevation. However impossible, therefore, scientific
men may declare it to be for them to conceive of a universal
flood of such a height and duration in accordance with the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. VIII. 1-6. 147
known laws of nature, this inability on their part does not
justify any one in questioning the possibility of such an event
being produced by the omnipotence of God. It has been justly
remarked, too, that the proportion of such a quantity of water to
the entire mass of the earth, in relation to which the mountains
are but like the scratches of a needle on a globe, is no greater
than that of a profuse perspiration to the body of a man. And
to this must be added, that, apart from the legend of a flood,
which is found in nearly every nation, the earth presents un-
questionable traces of submersion in the fossil remains of ani-
mals and plants, which are found upon the Cordilleras and
Himalaya even beyond the limit of perpetual snow. 1 In ver. 23,
instead of rnw (imperf. Niphal) read no^ (imperf. Kal) : " and
He (Jehovah) destroyed every existing thing," as He had said in
ver. 4.
Chap. viii. 1-5. With the words, "then God remembered
Noah and all the animals . . . tn the ark," the narrative turns
to the description of the gradual decrease of the water until the
ground was perfectly dry. The fall of the water is described
in the same pictorial style as its rapid rise. God's " remember-
ing'' was a manifestation of Himself, an effective restraint of the
force of the raging element. He caused a wind to blow over
the earth, so that the waters sank, and shut up the fountains of
the deep, and the sluices of heaven, so that the rain from heaven
was restrained. " Then the waters turned ('3?*} »'.«. flowed off) from
the earth, flowing continuously (the inf. absol. 3ien ^|vn expresses
continuation), and decreased at Hie end of 150 days." The de-
crease first became perceptible when the ark rested upon the
1 The geological facta which testify to the submersion of the entire
globe are collected in Bttckland's reliquim diluv., Schubert's Gesch. der Natur,
and C. v. Saunter's Geography, and are of such importance that even Cuvier
acknowledged " Je pense done, avec MM. Deluc et Dolomieu, que s'il y a
quelque chose de constate" en geologic ; e'est que la surface de notre globe a
6t6 victime d'une grande et subite revolution, dont la date ne peut remonter
beaucoup an dela de cinq on six mille ans " (Diacours but les revol. de la sur-
face du glebe, p. 290, ed. 6). The latest phase of geology, however, denies
that these facts furnish any testimony to the historical character of the
flood, and substitutes the hypothesis of a submersion of the entire globe
before the creation of man : 1. because the animals found are very different
from those at present in existence ; and 2. because no certain traces have
hitherto been found of fossil human bones. We have already shown that
there is no force in these arguments. Vid. Keerl, pp. 489 sqq.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
148
THE FIRST BOOK OF HOSES.
mountains of Ararat on the 17th day o f the seventh m onth; ue.,
reckoningjO.days to a month7 exactlyl50 da ys after the flood
commenced. FronTlhaT time forth it continued without inter-
mission, so that on the first day of the tenth month, probably 73
days after the resting of the ark, the tops of the mountains were
seen, viz. the tops of the Armenian highlands, by which the ark
was surrounded. Ararat was the name of a province (2 Kings
xix. 37), which is mentioned along with Minni (Armenia) as a
kingdom in Jer. li. 27, probably the central province of the
country of Armenia, which Moses v. Chorene calls Arairad,
Araratia. The mountains of Ararat are, no doubt, the group of
mountains which rise from the plain of the Araxes in two lofty
peaks, the greater and lesser Ararat, the former 16,254 feet
above the level of the sea, the latter about 12,000. This land-
ing-place of the ark is extremely interesting in connection with
the development of the human race as renewed after the flood.
Armenia, the source of the rivers of paradise, has been called
" a cool, airy, well-watered mountain-island in the midst of the
old continent ; " but Mount Ararat especially is situated almost
in the middle, not only of the great desert route of Africa and
Asia, but also of the range of inland waters from Gibraltar to
the Baikal Sea — in the centre, too, of the longest line that can
be drawn through the settlements of the Caucasian race and the
Indo-Germanic tribes ; and, as the central point of the longest
land-line of the ancient world, from the Cape of Good Hope to
the Behring Straits, it was the most suitable spot in the world,
for the tribes and nations that sprang from the sons of Noah to
descend from its heights and spread into every land (vid. K. v.
Raumer, Palast. pp. 456 sqq.).
Vers. 6-12. Forty days after the appearance of the mountain
tops, Noah opened the window of the ark and let a raven fly out
(lit. the raven, i.e. the particular raven known from that circum-
stance), for the purpose of ascertaining the drying up of the
waters. The raven went out and returned until the earth was
dry, but without being taken back into the ark, as the mountain
tops and the carcases floating upon the water afforded both rest-
ing-places and food. After that, Noah let a dove fly out three
times, at intervals of seven days. It is not distinctly stated that
he sent it out the first time seven days after the raven, but this
is implied in the statement that he stayed yet other seven days
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VIII. 18-19. 149
before sending it out the second time, and the same again be-.
fore sending it the third time (vers. 10 and 12). The dove,
when first sent out, "found no rest for the sole of its foot;" for
a dove will only settle upon such places and objects as are dry
and clean. It returned to the ark and let Noah take it in again
(vers. 8, 9j). The second time it returned in the evening,
having remained out longer than before, and brought a fresh
(*riD freshly plucked) olive-leaf in its mouth. Noah perceived
from this that the water must be almost gone, had " abated from
off the earth," though the ground might not be perfectly dry, as
the olive-tree will put out leaves even under water. The fresh
olive-leaf was the first sign of the resurrection of the earth to
new life after the flood, and the dove with the olive-leaf a herald
of salvation. The third time it did not return ; a sign that the
waters had completely receded from the earth. The fact that
Noah waited 40 days before sending the raven, and after that
always left an interval of seven days, is not to be accounted for
on tbe supposition that these numbers were already regarded as
significant. The 40 days correspond to the 40 days during
which the rain fell and the waters rose ; and Noah might as-s <
surae that they would require the same time to recede as to rise.
The seven days constituted the week established at the creation,
and God had already conformed to it in arranging their entrance
into the ark (chap. vii. 4, 10). The selection which Noah
made of the birds may also be explained quite simply from the
difference in their nature, with which Noah must have been ac-
quainted ; that is to say, from the fact that the raven in seeking
its food settles upon every carcase that it sees, whereas the dove
will only settle upon what is dry and clean.
Vers. 13-19. Noah waited some time, and then, on the first
day of the first month, in the 601st year of his life, removed the
covering from the ark, that he might obtain a freer prospect over
the earth. He could see that the surface of the earth was dry ;
but it was not till the 27th day of the second month, 57 days,
therefore, after the removal of the roof, that the earth was com-
pletely dried up. Then God commanded him to leave the ark
with his family and all the animals ; and so far as the latter were\
concerned, He renewed the blessing of the creation (ver. 17 cf. i. V
22). As the flood commenced on the 17th of the second month
of the 600th year of Noah's life, and ended on the 27th of the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
150 THE FIRST BOOK OF HOSES.
second month of the 601st year, it lasted a yearandtgjulays ; but
whether a solar year of 360 or 365 days, or a lunar year of 352,
is doubtful. The former is the more probable, as the first five
mouths are said to have consisted of 150 days, which suits the
solar year better than the lunar. The question cannot be de-
cided with certainty, because we neither know the number of
days between the 17th of the seventh month and the 1st of the
tenth month, nor the interval between the sending out of the
dove and the 1st day of the first month of the 601st year.
NOAH'S SACRIFICE, CUESE, AND BLESSING. — CHAP. VIII. 20-
IX. 29.
A -< \* Two twenty nf Nnq h's life, of w nrld-wjdq y^port""^, are re-
,X y^^^t/^ corded as having occurred after the flood : his sacrifice, with the
Uv » *A y divine promise which iollowed it (chap. viii.~20-ix. 17) ; and the
nj r prophetic curseand blessing pronounced upon his sons (ix. 18-
29).— Vers. 20-22. The first thing which Moses did, was to
build an altar for burnt sacrifice, to thank the Lord for gracious
protection, and pray for His mercy in time to come. This
I altar — ngto, lit , a place for the offering ofslajn animals, Xrom
rtgj, jjke UiMruurrfipiouTrom dvew — is ^ Eefirst altar mentioned in
history. The sons ot AdamHad built no altar for their offerings,
because God was still present on the earth in paradise, so that
they could turn their offerings and hearts towards that abode.
But with the flood God had swep t pa radise away, wi thdrawn t he
glace JiFHis jpresenceTanil "set up Wis throne In heaven, from
whiclTHe would henceforth reveal Himself to man (cf. chap,
xi. 5, 7). In future, therefore, the hearts of the pious had to be
turned towards heaven, and their offerings and prayers needed
to ascend on high if they were to reach the throne of God. To
give this direction to their offerings, heights or elevated places
were erected, from which they ascended towards heaven in
i. I fire. From this the offerings recei ved t he name of jfrfr fro m
S i yfyv f the ascending, not solnudTbecauseThlf'sacrificTal animals
ascertdecTbr were raised upon the altar, as because they rose
from the altar to heaven (cf . Judg. xx. 40 ; Jer. xlviii. 15 ;
Amos iv. 10). Noah took his offerings from every clean beast
and every clean fowl — from those animals, therefore, which were
destined for man's food ; probably the seventh of every kind,
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. IX. 1-7 151
which he had taken into the irk. " And Jehovah swelled the
smell of satisfaction" ».«. He graciously accepted the feelings of
the offerer which rose to Him in the odour of the sacrificial
flame. In the sacrificial flame the essence of the animal was
resolved into vapour ; so that when man presented a sacrifice in
his own stead, his inmost being, his spirit, and his heart ascended
to God in the vapour, and the sacrifice brought the feeling of
his heart before God. This feeling of gratitude for gracious
protection, and of desire for further communications of grace,
was well-pleasing to God. He " said to His heart " (to, or in
Himself; i.e. He resolved), "I will not again curse the ground any
more for man's sake, because the image (ue. the thought and
desire) of man's heart is evil from his youth up (ue. from the I U C\T
very time when he begins to act with consciousness)." This
hardly seems an appropriate reason. As Luther says: "Hie
inconstantiae videtur Deus accusari posse. Supra puniturus,
hominem causam consilii dicit, quia figmentum cordis humani
malum est. Hie promissurus homini gratiam, quod posthac tali '
ira uti nolit, eandem causam allegat." Both Lutlier and Calvin
-express the same thought, though without really solving the
apparent discrepancy. It was not because the thoughts and
desires of the human heart are evil that God would not smite
any more every living thing, that is to say, would not extermi-
nate it judicially ; but bec ause they are evil from his youth up,
becajis^evUisinnate injman^ andforTnar reason^he_Sfie3s the
forbeara nce oQjrod ; and also (and here lies the principal motive
for the divine resolution) because in the offering of the righteous
Noab, not only were thanks presented for past protection, and
entreaty for further care, but the desire of man was expressed,
to remain in fellowship with God, and to procure the divine
favour. " All the days of the earth ;" i.e. so long as the earth
shall continue, the regular alternation of day and night and of
the seasons of the year, so indispensable to the continuance of
the human race, would never be interrupted again.
Chap. ix. 1-7. These divine purposes of peace, which were
communicated to Noah while sacrificing, were solemnly con-
firmed by the renewal of the blessing pronounced at the creation
and the establishment of a covenant through a visible sign,
which would be a pledge for all time that there should never be
a flood again. In the words by which the first blessing was
Digitized by VjOOQlC
152 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
transferred to Noah and his sons (ver. 2), t he suprema cy gr&nt.pd
to_manj3^e£_rtie_ammanvorldwas expr essed j till_ more forc ibly
than in chap. i. 26 and 28; because, inasmuch as sin with its
consequences had loosened the bond of voluntary subjection on
the part of the animals to the will of man, — man, on the one
hand, having lost the power of the spirit over nature, and nature,
on the other hand, having become estranged from man, or rather
having rebelled against him, through the curse pronounced upon
the earth, — henceforth it was only by force that he could rule
over it, by that " fear and dread" which God instilled into the
animal creation. Whilst the animals were thus placed in the
hand (power) of man, permission was also given to him to
slaughter them for food, the eating of the blood being the only
thing forbidden. V ers. 3, 4. " Every moving thing that liveth shall
be food for you ; even as the green of the herb have I given you all
(73T1N = ?3n)." These words do notjiffirm that, man then_first
be^an^oeat_animal_iood, but only that God then for the first
time authorized, or allowed him to do, what probably he had
previously done in opposition to His will. " Only flesh in its
soul, its blood (iDT in apposition to ^^033), shall ye not eat;" t.«.
flesh in which there is still blood, because the soul of the animal
is in the blood. The prohibition applies to the eating of flesh
with blood in it, whether of living animals, as is the barbarous
custom in Abyssinia, or of slaughtered animals from which the
blood has not been properly drained at death. This prohibition
presented, on the one hand, a safeguard against harshness and
cruelty; and contained, on the other, "an undoubted reference
to the sacrifice of animals, which was afterwards made the sub-
ject of command, and in which it was the blood especially that
was offered, as the seat and soul of life (see note on Lev. xvii.
11, 14) ; so that from this point of view sacrifice denotes the
surrender of one's own inmost life, of the very essence of life, to
God " {Ziegler). Allusion is made to the first again in the still
\ further limitation given in ver. 5 : " and only (ffi) your blood,
I with regard to your souls (? indicative of reference to an indivi-
jdual object, Ewald, § 310a), will I seek (demand or avenge, cf .
iPs. ix. 13) from the Itand of every beast, and from the hand of
man, from the hand of every one, his brother;" i.e. from every
man, whoever he may be, because he is his (the slain man's)
brother, inasmuch as all men are brethren. The life of man
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. IX. 1-7.
153
was thus made secure against animals as well as men. Gcd
would avenge or inflict punishment for every murder, — not
directly, however, as He promised to do in the case of Cain, but
indirectly by giving the command, " Whoso sheddeth man's bloo d,
ly man shall hisJ dood be shed" and thus placing in the hand of
man His own judicial power. " This w as the fi rst command,"
says Luther, " hav ing reference to the tem poral sword. By these
words temporal government was established, and the sword
placed in its hand by God." It is true the punishment of the
murderer is enjoined upon " man " universally ; but as all the
judicial relations and ordinances of the increasing race were
rooted in those of the family, and grew by a natural process out
of that, the family relations furnished of themselves the norm
for the closer definition of the expression " man." Hence the
command does not ^sanction revenge, but lays the foundation
for the judicial rights of the divinely appointed "powers that
be " (Rom. xiii. 1). This is evident from the reason appended :
"for in the image of God made He man." If murder was to/
be punished with death because it destroyed the image of Godl
in man, it is evident that the infliction of the punishment was]
not to be left to the caprice of individuals, but belonged to those!
alone who represent the authority and majesty of God, i.e. thel
divinely appointed rulers, who for that very reason are called
Elohim in Ps. lxxxii. 6. This command then laid the founda-
tion for all civil government, 1 and formed a necessary comple-
ment to that unalterable continuance of the order of nature
which had been promised to the human race for its further de-
velopment. If God on account of the innate sinfulness of man
would no more bring an exterminating judgment upon the
earthly creation, it was necessary that by commands and autho-
rities He should erect a barrier against the supremacy of evil,
and thus lay the foundation for a well-ordered civil develop-
ment of humanity, in accordance with the words of the blessing,
which are repeated in ver. 7, as showing the intention and goal
of this new historical beginning.
\j^J-^ '"
Ir.i
1 " Hie igitnr fons est, ex quo manat totum jus civile et jus gentium.
Nam si Deus concedit homini potestatem super vitain et mortem, profecto
etiam concedit potestatem Buper id, quod minus est, ut sunt fortune, fa-
milia, uxor, liberi, servi, agri ; H«ec omnia vult certorum hominum potestati
esse obnoxia Deus, ut reos puniant." — Luther.
PENT. — VOL. I. L
Digitized by
Google
154
THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
Vers. 8—17. To give Noah and his sons a firm assurance of
the prosperous continuance of the human race, God condescended
to establish a covenant with them and their descendants, and
to confirm this covenant by a visible sign for all generations.
ma D , i?n is not equivalent to JTH3 rna • it does not denote the
formal conclusion of an actual covenant, but the " setting up of
a covenant," or the giving of a promise possessing the nature of
a covenant. In summing up the animals in ver. 10, the pre-
positions are accumulated : first 3 embracing the whole, then the
partitive V? restricting the enumeration to those which went out
of th» ark, and lastly ?, " with regard to," extending it again
to every individual. There was a correspondence between the
covenant (ver. 11) and the sign which was to keep it before the
sight of men (ver. 12) : " / give (set) My bow in the cloud" (ver.
13). When God gathers (|?P ver. 14, lit. clouds) clouds over
the earth, " the bow shall be seen in the cloud," and that not for
man only, but for God also, who will look at the bow, " to re-
member His everlasting covenant." An " everlasting covenant" is
a covenant " for perpetual generations," i.e. one which shall extend
to all ages, even to the end of the world. The fact that God
Himself would look at the bow and remember His covenant, was
" a glorious and living expression of the great truth, that God's
covenant signs, in which He has put His promises, are real
vehicles of His grace, that they have power and essential worth
not only with men, but also be/ore God" (0. v. Gerlach). The
1 establishment of the rainbow as a covenant sign of the promise
Ithat there should be no flood again, presupposes that it appeared
then for the first time in the vault and clouds of heaven. From
this it may be inferred, not that it did not rain before the flood,
which could hardly be reconciled with chap. ii. 5, but that the
atmosphere was differently constituted ; a supposition in perfect
: harmony with the facts of natural history, which point to dif-
ferences in the climate of the earth's surface before and after the
flood. The fact that the rainbow, that "coloured splendour
thrown by the bursting forth of the sun upon the departing
clouds," is the result of the reciprocal action of light, and air,
and water, is no disproof of the origin and design recorded here.
For the laws of nature are ordained by God, and have their ulti
mate ground and purpose in the divine plan of the universe
which links together both nature and grace. " Springing as it
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. IX. 18-29. 155
does from the effect of the sun upon the dark mass of clouds, it
typifies the readiness of the heavenly to pervade the earthly ,
spread out as it is between heaven and earth, it proclaims peace
between God and man ; and whilst spanning the whole horizon,
it teaches the all-embracing universality of the covenant of
grace" (JDeUtzseh).
Vers. 18-29. The second occurrence in the life of Noah after
the flood exhibited the germs of the future development of the
human race in a threefold direction, as manifested in the charac-
ters of his three sons. As all the families and races of man
descend from them, their names are repeated in ver. 18 ; and in
prospective allusion to what follows, it is added that " Ham was
the father of Canaan." From these three " the earth (the earth's
population) spread itself out." a The earth" is used for the popu-
lation of the earth, as in chap. x. 25 and xi. 1, and just as lands
or cities are frequently substituted for their inhabitants, rratu :
probably Niphal for TOM, from pB to scatter (xi. 4), to spread out.
" A nd No ah the husbandman began, an d planted a vineya rd" As
WiKn C'N cannofbeThe predicate of the sentence, on account of
the article, but must be in apposition to Noah, Ws^l and ?rm must
be combined in the sense of " began to plant" (Ges. § 142, 3).
The writer does not mean to affirm that Noah resumed his
agricultural operations after the Hood, but that as a husband- '
man he began to cultivate the vine ; because it was this which
furnished the occasion for the manifestation of that diversity in
the character of his sons, which was so eventful in its conse-
quences in relation to the future history of their descendants.
In ignorance of the fiery nature of wine, Noah drank and was
drunken, and uncovered himself in his tent (ver. 21). Although
excuse may be made for this drunkenness, the words of Luther
are still true : " Qui excusant patriarcham, volentes Iianc consola-
tionetn, quam Spiritus S. eeelesiis necessariam judicavit, abjiciunt,
quod scilicet etiam summi sancti aliquando labitntur." This trifling
fall served to display the hearts of his sons. Ham saw the naked-
ness of his father, and told his two brethren without. Not con-
tent with finding pleasure himself in his father's shame, " nun-
quam enim vino vietum patremfilius risisset, nisiprius ejecisset
animo illam reverentiam et opinionem, qua in liberie de parentibus
ex mandato Dei existere debet" (Luther), he must proclaim his
disgraceful pleasure to his brethren, and thus exhibit his shame*
Digitized by VjOOQlC
156 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
Lj ^, a tA less sensuality. The brothers, on the contrary, with reverential
! i )r ' modesty covered their father with a garment ('"YpbT! the garment,
which was at hand), walking backwards that they might not see
his nakedness (ver. 23), and thus manifesting their childlike
reverence as truly as their refined purity and modesty. For
this they receive their father's blessing, whereas Ham reaped
for his son Canaan the patriarch's curse. In ver. 24 Ham is
called Jtpj?n foa " his (Noah's) little son," and it is questionable
whether the adjective is to be taken as comparative in the sense
of " the younger," or as superlative, meaning " the youngest."
Neither grammar nor the usage of the language will enable us to
decide. For in 1 Sam. xvii. 14, where David is contrasted with
his brothers, the word means not the youngest of the four, but
the younger by the side of the three elder, just as in chap. i. 16
the sun is called "the great" light, and the moon " the little" light,
not to show that the sun is the greatest and the moon the least
of all lights, but that the moon is the smaller of the two. If, on
the other hand, on the ground of 1 Sam. xvi. 11, where "the
little one" undoubtedly means the youngest of all, any one would
press the superlative force here, he must be prepared, in order to
be consistent, to do the same with haggadol, " the great one," in
chap. x. 21, which would lead to this discrepancy, that in the verse
before us Ham is called Noah's youngest son, and in chap. x.
21 Shem is called Japhet's oldest brother, and thus implicite
Ham is described as older than Japhet. If we do not wish
lightly to introduce a discrepancy into the text of these two
chapters, no other course is open than to follow the LXX.,
Vulg. and others, and take " the little" here and " the great" in
chap. x. 21 as used in a comparative sense, Ham being represented
here as Noah's younger son, and Shem in chap. x. 21 as Japhet's
elder brother. Consequently the order in which the three names
stand is also an indication of their relative ages. And this is
not only the simplest and readiest assumption, but is even con-
firmed by chap, x., though the order is inverted there, Japhet
being mentioned first, then Ham, and Shem last ; and it is also
in harmony with the chronological datum in chap. xi. 10, as
compared with chap. v. 32 {vid. chap. xi. 10).
To understand the words of Noah with reference to his sons
(vers. 25—27), we must bear in mind, on the one hand, that as
the moral nature of the patriarch was transmitted by generation
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. IX. 18-29. 157
to his descendants, so the diversities of character in the sons of
Noah foreshadowed diversities in the moral inclinations of the
tribes of which they were the head ; and on the other hand, that
Noah, through the Spirit and power of that God with whom he
walked, discerned in the moral nature of his sons, and the
different tendencies which they already displayed, the germinal
commencement of the future course of their posterity, and
uttered words of blessing and of curse, which were prophetic of
the history of the tribes that descended from them. In the sin
of Ham " there lies the great stain of the whole Hamitic race, l^~
whose chief characteristic is sexual sin" {Zieghr) ; and the curse
which Noah pronounced upon this sin still rests upon the race.
It was not Ham who was cursed, however, but his son Canaan.
Ham had sinned against his father, and he was punished in his
son. But the reason why Canaan was the only son named, is
not to be found in the fact that Canaan was the youngest son of
Ham, and Ham the youngest son of Noah, as Hofmann sup-
poses. The latter is not an established fact; and the purely
external circumstance, that Canaan had the misfortune to be the
youngest son, could not be a just reason for cursing him alone.
The real reason must either lie in the fact that Canaan was
already walking in the steps of his father's impiety and sin, or
else be sought in the name Canaan, in which Noah discerned,
through the gift of prophecy, a significant omen ; a supposition
decidedly favoured by the analogy of the blessing pronounced
upon Japhet, which is also founded upon the name. Canaan
does not signify lowland, nor was it transferred, as many main-
tain, from the land to its inhabitants ; it was first of all the name
of the father of the tribe, from whom it was transferred to
his descendants, and eventually to the land of which they took
possession. The meaning of Canaan is " the submissive one,"
from W3 to stoop or submit, HipM^to bend or subjugate (Deut.
ix. 3 , Judg. iv. 23, etc.). " Ham gave his son the name from
the obedience which he required, though he did not render it
himself. The son was to be the servant (for the name points to
servile obedience) of a father who was as tyrannical towards
those beneath him, as he was refractory towards those above.
The father, when he gave him the name, thought only of sub-
mission to his own commands. But the secret providence of
God, which rules in all such things, had a different submission
Digitized by VjOOQlC
^U/f
158 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
in view " (Hengstenberg, Christol. i. 28, transl.). u Servant of
servants (i.e. the lowest of slaves, vid. Ewald, § 313) let him
become to his brethren." Although this curse was expressly
pronounced upon Canaan alone, the fact that Ham had no share
in Noah's blessing, either for himself or his other sons, was a
sufficient proof that his whole family was included by implica-
tion in the curse, even if it was to fall chiefly upon Canaan.
And history confirms the supposition. The_C_anaaidtes were
partly exterminated, and partly subjected to the lowest form of
slavery, by the Israelites, who belonged to the family of Shem ;
and those who still remained were reduced by Solomon to the
same condition (1 Kings ix. 20, 21). The Phoenici ans, alon g
V , with the Carthaginians and the Egyptians, who all belonged to
' i the family of Canaan, were jubjected by the Japhetic Persians,
( Macedonians, and Romans ; andjiiejgmamderj)? the Jtiamitic
tribes either shared the same fate, or still sigh, likeTKe negroes,
for example, and other African tribes, beneath the yoke of the
, most crushing slavery. — Ver. 26. In contrast with the curse,
the blessings upon Shem and Japhet are introduced with a fresh
" and he said," whilst Canaan's servitude comes in like a refrain
I and is mentioned in connection with both his brethren : " Blessed
\ be JehovaJi, the God of Shem, and let Canaan be servant to tJiem."
I Instead of wishing good to Shem, Noah praises the God of
Shem, just as Moses in Deut. xxxiii. 20, instead of blessing Gad,
blesses Him " that enlargeth Gad," and points out the nature of
the good which he is to receive, by using the name Jehovah.
This is done "propter excellentem benedictionem. Non enim
loquitur de corporali benedictione, sed de benedictione futura per
semen promissum. Earn tantam videt esse ut explicari verbis non
possit, ideo se vertit ad gratiarum actionem" (Luther). Because
Jehovah is the God of Shem, Shem will be the recipient and
heir of all the blessings of salvation, which God as Jehovah be-
stows upon mankind, to? = on? neither stands for the singular
\*? (Ges. § 103, 2), nor refers to Shem and Japhet. It serves to
show that the announcement does not refer to the personal relation
of Canaan to Shem, but applies to their descendants. — Ver. 27.
" Wide let God make it to Japliet, and let him dwell in the tents
of Shem." Starting from the meaning of the name, Noah
sums up his blessing in the word HB' (j gpht\ from nng to be wi de
(Prov. xx. 19), in the Hiphil with ?, to procure a wide space for
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. IX. 18-29. 159
any one, used either of extension over a wide territory, or of
removal to a free, unfettered position; analogous to ^rnn, cna P«
xxvi. 22 ; Ps. iv. 1, etc. Both allusions mast be retained here,
so that the promise to the family of Japhet embraced not only
a wide extension, but also prosperity on every band. This
blessing was desired by Noah, not from Jehovah, the God of
Shem, who bestows saving spiritual good upon man, but from
Eloldm, God as Creator and Governor of the world ; for it had
respect primarily to the blessings of the earth, not to spiritual
blessings ; although Japhet would participate in these as well,
for he should come and dwell in the tents of Shem. The d is
jmted question, whether G°d or Japhet is to be regarded as the
subject of the verb ".shalLdweiy is already decided by the use
of the word Elohim. If it were God whom Noah described as
dwelling in the tents of Shem, so that the expression denoted
the gracious presence of God in Israel, we should expect to find
the name Jehovah, since it was as Jehovah that God took up
His abode among Shem in Israel. It is much more natural to
regard the expression as applying to Japhet, (a) because the
refrain, "Canaan shall be his servant," requires that we should
understand ver. 27 as applying to Japhet, like ver. 26 to
Shem; (b) because the plural, tents, is not applicable to the
abode of Jehovah in Israel, inasmuch as in the parallel passages
" we read of God dwelling in His tent, on His holy hill, in Zion,
in the midst of the children of Israel, and also of the faithful
dwelling in the tabernacle or temple of God, but never of God
dwelling in the tents of Israel " (Hengstenberg) ; and (c) be-
cause we should expect the act of affection, which the two sons
so delicately performed in concert, to have its corresponding
blessing in the relation established between the two (Delitzsch).
Japhet's dwelling in the tents of Shem is supposed by Bpchart
and others to refer to the fact, that Japhet's descendants^ would
one day take the land of the Shemites, and subjugate the
inhabitants ; but even the fathers almost unanimously under-
stand the words i n a s piritual sense, as_denoting_tha-participation
o f thfi.T^ phptitps in thpT saving blessings of the Shemites. There
is truth in both views] Dwelling presupposes possession ; but
the idea of taking by force is. precluded by the fact, that it
would be altogether at variance with the blessing pronounced
upon Shem. If history shows that the tents of Shem were
Digitized by VjOOQlC
\J~-
1(50 THE FIBST BOOK OF MOSES.
conquered and taken by the Japhetites, the dwelling predicted
here still relates not to the forcible conquest, but to the fact that
the conquerors entered into the possessions of the conquered;
that along with them they were admitted to the blessings of
salvation; and that, yielding to the spiritual power of the van-
quished, they lived henceforth in their tents as brethren (Ps.
cxxxiii. 1). And if the dwelling of Japhet in the tents of
Shera presupposes the conquest of the land of Shem by Japhet,
,it is a blessing not only to Japhet, but to Shem also, since,
whilst Japhet enters into the spiritual inheritance of Shem, he
brings to Shem all the good of this world (Isa. lx.). " The ful-
filment," as Delitzsch says, "is plain enough, for we are all
Japhetites dwelling in the tents of Shem ; and the language of
the New Testament is the language of Javan entered into the
tents of Shem." To this we may add, that by the Gospel
preached in this language, Israel, though subdued by the
imperial power of Rome, became the spiritual conqueror of the
orbis terrarum Romanus, and received it into his tents. More-
over it is true of the blessing and curse of Noah, as of all pro-
phetic utterances, that they are fulfilled with regard to the
nations and families in question as a whole, but do not predict,
like an irresistible fate, the unalterable destiny of every indi-
vidual ; on the contrary, they leave room for freedom of per-
sonal decision, and no more cut off the individuals in the
accursed race from the possibility of conversion, or close the
way of salvation against the penitent, than they secure the indi-
viduals of the family blessed against the possibility of falling
from a state of grace, and actually losing the blessing. Hence,
whilst a Rahab and an Araunah were received into the fellow-
ship of Jehovah, and the Canaanitish woman was relieved by
the Lord because of her faith, the hardened Pharisees and
scribes had woes pronounced upon them, and Israel was
rejected because of its unbelief. In vers. 28, 29, the history of
Noah is brought to a close, with the account of his age, anl of
his death.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. X. 161
IV. HISTORY OF THE SONS OF NOAH.
Chap. x.-xi. 9.
pedigree of the nations. — chap. x.
Of the sons of Noah, all that is handed down is the pedigree
of the nations, or the list of the tribes which sprang from them
(chap, x.), and the account of the confusion of tongues, together
with the dispersion of men over the face of the earth (chap. xi.
1-9) ; two events that were closely related to one another, and
of the greatest importance to the history of the human race and
of the kingdom of God. The genealogy traces the origin of the
tribes which were scattered over the earth; the confusion oi
tongues shows the cause of the division of the one human race
into many different tribes with peculiar languages.
The genealogy of the tribes is not an ethnographical myth, nor
t]ie_attempt^oran .auc.ie.nt JSebxew to4w*je the -eefiaeetion of his
own people with the other nations of the earth by means of un-
ce rtain t raditions and subjective combinations, but a historical
record of the genesis of the nations, founded upon a tradition
handed down from the fathers, which, to judge from its contents,
belongs to the time of Abraham (cf. Havernick's Introduction
to Pentateuch, p. 118 sqq. transl.), and was inserted by Moses in
the early history of the kingdom of God on account of its uni-
versal importance in connection with sacred history. For it not
only indicates the place of the family which was chosen as the
recipient of divine revelation among the rest of the nations, but
traces the origin of the entire world, with the prophetical inten-
tion of showing that the nations, although they were quickly
suffered to walk in their own ways (Acts xiv. 16), were not in-
tended to be for ever excluded from the counsels of eternal
love. In this respect the genealogies prepare the way for the
promise of the blessing, which was one day to spread from the
chosen family to all the families of the earth (chap. xii. 2, 8). —
The historical character of the genealogy is best attested by the
contents themselves, since no trace can be detected, either of any
pre-eminence given to the Shemites, oi of an intention to fill up
gaps by conjecture or invention. It gives just as much as had
Digitized by VjOOQlC
162 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
been handed down with regard to the origin of the different
tribes. Hence the great diversity in the lists of the descendants
of the different sons of Noah. Some are brought down only to
the second, others to the third or fourth generation, and some
even further ; and whilst in several instances the founder of a
tribe is named, in others we have only the tribes themselves ;
and in some cases we are unable to determine whether the names
given denote the founder or the tribe. In many instances, too,
on account of the defects and the unreliable character of the
accounts handed down to us from different ancient sources with
regard to the origin of the tribes, there are names which cannot
be identified with absolute certainty. 1
Vers. 1-5. Descendants Of Japhet. — In ver. 1 the
names of the three sons are introduced according to their rela-
tive ages, to give completeness and finish to the ThoUdoth; but
in the genealogy itself Japhet is mentioned first and Shem last,
according to the plan of the book of Genesis as already explained
at p. 37. In ver. 2 seven sons of Japhet are given. The names,
indeed, afterwards occur as those of tribes ; but here undoubt-
edly they are intended to denote the tribe-fathers, and may
without hesitation be so regarded. For even if in later times
many nations received their names from the lands of which they
took possession, this cannot be regarded as a universal rule, since
unquestionably the natural rule in the derivation of the names
would be for the tribe to be called after its ancestor^ and for the
co untries to receijre_ their names from their earliest inhabitants.
Gomer is most probably the tribe of the Cimmerlans^vrho dwelt,
according to Herodotus, on the Maeotis, in the Taurian Cher-
sonesus, and from whom are descended the Cumri or Cymry in
1 Sam. Bochart has brought great learning to the explanation of the table
of nations in Phalcg, the first part of his geographia sacra, to which Mifhaelis
and Rosenmiiller made valuable additions, — the former in his spicil. geogr.
Hebr. ext. 1769 and 1780, the latter in his Biblical Antiquities. Knobel has
made use of all the modern ethnographical discoveries in his " Vblkertafel
der Genesis" (1850), but many of his combinations are very speculative.
Kieperl, in his article iiber d. geograph. Stellung der nordlicJien Lander in der
phBnikisch-hebriiischen Erdkwnde (in the Monatsberichte d. Berliner Akad,
1859), denies entirely the ethnographical character of the table of nations,
and reduces it to a mere attempt on the part of the Phoenicians to account
for the geographical position of the nations with which they were acquainted.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. X. 1-8. 16b
Wales and Brittany, whose relation to the Germanic Cimbri is
still in obscurity. Magog is connected by Josephus with the
Scythians on the Sea of Asdf and in the Caucasus ; but Kiepert
associates the name with Macija or Maka, and applies it to Scy-
thian nomad tribes which forced themselves in between the Arian
or Arianized Modes, Kurds, and Armenians. Madai are the
Medes, called Mada on the arrow-headed inscriptions. Javan
corresponds to the Greek J Ida>v, from whom the Ionians (Mawe?)
are derived, the parent tribe of the Greeks (in Sanskrit Javana,
old Persian Jund). Tubal and Meshech are undoubtedly the
Tibareni and Moschi, the former of whom are placed by Hero-
dotus upon the east of the Thermodon, the latter between the
sources of the Phasis and Cyrus. Tiras : according to Josephus,
the Thracians, whom Herodotus calls the most numerous tribe
next to the Indian. As they are here placed by the side of
Meshech, so we also find on the old Egyptian monuments Ma-
shuash and Tuirash, and upon the Assyrian Tubal and Misek
(Rawlinson). — Ver. 3. Descendants of Gomer. Ashkenaz: accord-
ing to the old Jewish explanation, the Germani; according to
Knobel, the family of Asi, which is favoured by the German
legend of Mannus, and his three sons, lscus (J sk, 'Ao-kovuk),
Tngus, and Hermino. Kiepert, however, and Bocliart decide, on
geographical grounds, in favour of the Ascanians in Northern
Phrygia. Riphath : in Knobel 's opinion the Celts, part of whom,
according to Plutarch, crossed the Sprj 'Pvrrata, Monies Rhipaei,
towards the Northern Ocean to the furthest limits of Europe ;
but Josephus, whom Kiepert follows, supposed 'PifSaBni to be
Paphlagonia. Both of these are very uncertain. Togarmah is
the name of the Armenians, who are still called the house of
Thorgom or Torkornatsi. — Ver. 4. Descendants of Javan. Elishah
suggests Elis, and is said by Josephus to denote the uEolians, the
oldest of the Thessalian tribes, whose culture was Ionian in its
origin; Kiepert, however, thinks of Sicily. Tarshish (in the
Old Testament the name of the colony of Tartessus in Spain) is
referred by Knobel to the Etruscans or Tyrsenians, a Pelasgic
tribe of Greek derivation ; but Delitzsch objects, that the Etrus-
cans were most probably of Lydian descent, land, like the Lydians
of Asia Minor, who were related to the Assyrians, belonged to
the Sbemites. Others connect the name with Tarsus in Cilicia.
But the connection with the Spanish Tartessus must be retained,
Digitized by VjOOQlC
10)4 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
although, so long as the origin of this colony remains in obscurity,
nothing further can be determined with regard to the name.
Kittim embraces not only the Citicei, CiUenses in Cyprus, with
the town Cition, but, according to Knobel and Delitzsch, probably
" the Carians, who settled in the lands at the eastern end of the
Mediterranean Sea ; for which reason Ezekiel (xxvii. 6) speaks
of the " isles of Chittim." Dodanim (Dardani) : according to
Delitzsch, " the tribe related to the Ionians and dwelling with
them from the very first, which the legend has associated with
them in the two brothers Jasion and Dardanos ;" according to
Knobel, " the whole of the Illyrian or north Grecian tribe." —
Ver. 5. " From these liave the islands of the nations divided tfiem-
selves in their lands ;" i.e. from the Japhetites already named, the
tribes on the Mediterranean descended and separated from one
another as they dwell in their lands, " every one after his tongue,
after their families, in their nations." The islands in the Old
Testament are the islands and coastlands of the Mediterranean,
on the European shore, from Asia Minor to Spain.
Vers. 6-20. Descendants of Ham. — Cush: th e Ethiop ians
of the ancients, who not only dwelt in Africa, but were scattered
over the whole of Southern Asia, and originally, in all probability,
settled in Arabia, where the tribes that still remained, mingled
with Shemites, aqd adopted a Shemitic language. Mizraim is
Egypt : the dual form was probably transferred from the land
to tbe people, referring, however, not to the double strip, i.e. the
two strips of land into which the country is divided by the Nile,
but to the two Egypts, Upper and Lower, two portions of the
country which differ considerably in their climate and general
condition. The name is obscure, and not traceable to any
Semitic derivation ; for the term "tf¥D in Isa. xix. 6, etc., is not to
be regarded as an etymological interpretation, but as a signifi-
cant play upon the word. The old Egyptian name is Kemi
(Copt. Chgmi, Ke*me), which, Plutarch says, is derived from the
dark ash-grey colour of the soil covered by the slime of the Nile,
but which it is much more correct to trace to Ham, and to re-
card as indicative of the Hamitic descent of its first inhabitants.
Put denotes the Libyans in the wider sense of the term (old
Egypt. Phet; Copt. Phaiai), who were spread over Northern
Africa as far as Mauritania, where even in the time of Jerome
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. X. 8-12. ll>5
ft river with the neighbouring district still bore the name of
Phut; cf. Bochart, Phal. iv. 33. On Canaan, see chap. ix. 25. —
Ver. 7. Descendants of Cush. Seba ; the inhabitants of Meroii;
according to Knobel, the northern Ethiopians, the ancient
Blemmyer, and modern Bisharin. Havihh: the AlaXlrai or
'AfiaXiTai of the ancients, the Macrobian Ethiopians in modern
Habesh. Sabtah : the Ethiopians inhabiting Hadhramaut,
whose chief city was called Sabatha or Sabota. Maamah :
'Peypd, the inhabitants of a city and bay of that name in south-
eastern Arabia (Oman). Sabtecah: the Ethiopians of Cara-
mania, dwelling to the east of the Persian Gulf, where the
ancients mention a seaport town and a river Sa/ivScuen. The
descendants of Raamah, Sheba and Dedan, are to be sought in
the neighbourhood of the Persian Gulf, "from which the
Sabaean and Dedanitic Cushites spread to the north-west, where
they formed mixed tribes with descendants of Joktan and Abra-
ham." See notes on ver. 28 and chap. xxv. 3.
Vers. 8-12. Besides the tribes already named, there sprang
f rom Cush Nimrod , the founder of the first imperial kingdo m,
the origin ot which is introduced as a memorable event into the
genealogy of the tribes, just as on other occasions memorable
events are interwoven with the genealogical tables (cf. 1 Chron.
ii. 7, 23, iv. 22, 23, 39-41). 1 Nimrod " began to be a mighty
one in the earth." I3i is used here, as in chap. vi. 4, to denote a
man who makes himself renowned for bold and daring deeds.
Nimrod was mighty in hunting, and that in opposition to Jeho-
vah (ivavriov tcvptov, LXX.) ; not before Jehovah in the sense
of7 according to the purpose and will of Jehovah, still less, like
DVDtO in Jonah iii. 3, or t$ &e$ in Acts vii. 20, in a simply
superlative sense. The last explanation is not allowed by the
usage of the language, the second is irreconcilable with the con-
text. The name itself, Nimrod from T^o, "we will revolt,"
points to some violent resistance to God. It is so characteristic
that it can only have been given by his contemporaries, and
thus have become a proper name. 3 In addition to this, Nimrod
1 These analogies overthrow the assertion that the verses before us have
been interpolated by the Jehovist into the Elohistic document; since the
use of the name Jehovah is no proof of difference of authorship, nor the use
of t^ for T^in, as the former also occurs in vers. 13, 15, 24, and 26.
' This was seen even by Perizonius (Origg. Babul, p. 183), who says,
Digitized by VjOOQlC
IOC. THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES
as a mighty hunter founded a powerful kingdom ; and the
founding of this kingdom is shown by the verb VBjfl with 1
consec. to have been the consequence or result of his strength in
hunting, so that the hunting was most intimately connected with
the establishment of the kingdom. Hence, if the expression " a
mighty hunter " relates primarily to hunting in the literal sense,
we must add to the literal meaning the figurative signification of
a " hunter of men " (" a trapper of men by stratagem and force,"
Herder) ; Nimrod the hunter became a tyrant, a powerful
hunter of men. This course of life gave occasion to the pro-
verb, " like Nimrod, a mighty hunter against the Lord," which
immortalized not his skill in hunting beasts, but the success of his
hunting of men in the establishment of an imperial kTngdom by
tyj^nnyand power. But if this be the meaning of the proverb,
rfnyoDp "in the face of Jehovah " can only mean in defiance of
Jehovah, as Josephus and the Targums understand it. And the
proverb must have arisen when other daring and rebellious men
followed in Nimrod's footsteps, and must have originated with
those who saw in such conduct an act of rebellion against the
God of salvation, in other words, with the possessors of the
divine promises of grace. 1 — Ver. 10. " And the beginning of his
/kingdom was Babel," the well-known city of Babylon on the
Euphrates, which from the time of Nimrod downwards has
been the symbol of the power of the world in its hostility to
God; — i( and Ereeh" ('O/je^, LXX.), one of the seats of the
Cutheans (Samaritans), Ezra iv. 9, no doubt Orchoi, situated,
according to Rawlinson, on the site of the present ruins of
Warka, thirty hours' journey to the south-east of Babel ; — and
Accad ^ApxaS, LXX.), a place not yet determined, though,
judging from its situation between Ereeh and Calneh, it was not
" Grediderim hominem hiuic utpote venatorem ferocem et sodalium comitatu
succinctam semper in ore habuisse et ingeminasse, ad reliquoe in rebellionem
excitandos, illud nimrod, nimrod, h.e. rebellemus, rebellemus, atque inde
postea ab aliis, etiam ab ipso Mose, hoc vocabalo tanquam proprio nomine
designatum," and who supports his opinion by other similar instances in
history.
I l This view of Nimrod and his deeds is favoured by the Eastern legend,
L which not only makes him the builder of the tower of Babel, which was to
t- reach to heaven, but has also placed him among the constellations of heaven
/ as a heaven-storming giant, who was chained by God in consequence. Vid.
Herzog's Real-Encyel. Art. Nimrod.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. X 13, 14.
167
•a *#i
far from either, and Pressel is probably right in identifying it
with the ruins of Niffer, to the south of Hillah; — "and Calneh:"
this is fonnd by early writers on the site of Ctesiphon, now a
great heap of ruins, twenty hours north-east of Babel. These
four cities were in the land of Shinar, i.e. of the province of
Babylon, on the Lower Euphrates and Tigris. — Vers. 11, 12.
From Shinar Nimrod went to Assyria (^Wjsjhfi-accnsative pf
direction), the country on the east of the Tigris, and there built
four - cities, or probably a large imperial city composed of the
four cities named. As three of these cities — Rehoboth-Ir, i.e.
city markets (not " street-city," as Bunsen interprets it), Chelack,
and Besen — are not met with again, whereas Nineveh was re-
nowned in antiquity for its remarkable size (vid. Jonah iii. 3),
the words " this i s the great city " must apply not to Besen, bat
to Ninev eh. This is grammatically admissible, if we regard the
last three names as subordinate to the first, taking i as the sign
of subordination (Ewald, § 339a), and render the passage thus :
"he built Nineveh, with Rehoboth-Ir, Oheloch, and Besen
between Nineveh and Chelach, this is the great city." From
this it follows that t he four places fo rmed a large composit e city, I
a large range. of towns, to which tKe"n ame o f the (well-known) j 1/2^/
gr eat city j)f Nineveh was" applied, in distinction^from Nineveh /
i n the more restncteoTienseTwIth which Nimrod probably con-
nected the other three places so as to form one great capital,
possibly also the chief fortress of his kingdom on the Tigris.
These four cities most likely correspond to the ruins on the east
of the Tigris, which Layard has so fully explored, viz. Nebbi
Yunus and Kouyunjik opposite to Mosul, Khorsabad five hours to
the north, and Nimrud eight hours to the south of Mosul. 1
Vers. 13, 14. From Mizraim descended Ludim: not the
Semitic Ludim (ver. 22), bnt, according to Movers, the old tribe
of the Lewdtah dwelling on the Syrtea, according to others, the
Moorish tribes collectively. Whether the name is connected
with the Laud Jlumen (Plin. v. 1) is uncertain; in any case
Knobel is wrong in thinking of Ludian Shemites, whether
Hyksos, who forced their way to Egypt, or Egyptianized
Arabians. Anamim: inhabitants of the Delta, according to
Knobel. He associates the ' Eveftertelf* of the LXX. with
1 This supposition of Bawliruon, Grote, M. v. Niebuhr, Knobel, Delituch,
•cd others, has recently been adopted by Ewald also.
m>
t4n*"\
Digitized by
Google
168 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
Sunemhit, or Northern Egypt : " tsanemhit, i.e. pars, regio sep~
teritrionis." Leliabim (= Lubim, Nahum iii. 9) are, according
to Josephus, the Alfives or Avpies, not the great Libyan tribe
(PJiut, ver. 6), which Nahum distinguishes from them, but the
Libyaegyptii of the ancients. Naphtuchim: in KnobeFs opinion,
the Middle Egyptians, as the nation of PthaJi, the god of Mem-
phis: but Bochart is more probably correct in associating the name
with Ne<j>dw;, in Plut. de Is., the northern coast line of Egypt.
Pathrusim : inhabitants of Pathros, Iladovpns, Egypt. Petris,
land of the south ; i.e. Upper Egypt, the Tliebais of the ancients.
Casluchim: according to general admission the Colchians, who
descended from the Egyptians (Herod, ii. 104), though the
connection of the name with Cassiods is uncertain. "From
thence (i.e. from Casluchim, which is the name of both people
and country) proceeded the Philistines." Philistim, LXX. $fX-
Itortet/i or 'AX)J><f>vXoi, lit. emigrants or immigrants from the
lEthiopic falldsa. This is not at variance with Amos ix. 7 and
jjer. xlvii. 4, according to which the Philistines came from
•Caphtor, so that there is no necessity to transpose the relative
clause after Philistim. The two statements may be reconciled
on the simple supposition that the Philistian nation was primarily
a Casluchian colony, which settled on the south-eastern coast
line of the Mediterranean between Gaza (ver. 19) and Pelu-
sium, but was afterwards strengthened by immigrants from
Caphtor, and extended its territory by pressing out the Avim
(Deut. ii. 23, cf. Josh. xiii. 3). Caphtorim : according to the
old Jewish explanation, the Cappadocians ; but according to
Lakemacher's opinion, which has been revived by Ewald, etc.,
the Cretans. This is not decisively proved, however, either by
the name Cherethites, given to the Philistines in 1 Sam. xxx.
14, Zeph. ii. 5, and Ezek. xxv. 16, or by the expression u isle
of Caphtor" in Jer. xlvii. 4. — Vers. 15 sqq. From Canaan de-
scended "Zidon his first-born, and Heth." Although Zidon
occurs in ver. 19 and throughout the Old Testament as the
name of the oldest capital of the Phoenicians, here it must be
regarded as the name of a person, not only because of the apposi-
tion " his first-born" and the verb >?, "begat," but also because
the name of a city does not harmonize with the names of the
other descendants of Canaan, the analogy of which would lead
us to expect the nomen gentile " Sidonian" (Judg. iii. 3, etc.);
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP.. X. 18, 14. 'f 169
and lastly, because the word Zidon, from -nv to hunt, to catch,
is not directly applicable to a sea-port and Commercial town,
and there are serious objections upon philological grounds to
Justin! 8 derivation, " quam a piscium ubertate Sidona appellave-
runt, nampiscem Phaenices Sidon vocant" (var. hist. 18, 3). Heth
is also the name of a person, from which the term Hittite (xxv.
9 ; Num. xiii. 29), equivalent to " sons of Heth" (chap, xxiii. 5),
is derived. "The Jebusite:" inhabitants of Jebus, afterwards
called Jerusalem. " The Amorite :" not the inhabitants of the
mountain or heights, forlhe derivation from "^DK, " summit," is
not established, but a branch of the Canaanites, descended from
Emor^Amor), which was spread far and wide over the moun-
tains of Judah and beyond the Jordan in the time of Moses, so
that in chap. xv. 16, xlviii. 22, all the Canaanites are compre-
hended by the name. " The Girgashites" Tepyecrauy; (LXX.),
are also mentioned in chap. xv. 21, Deut. vii. 1, and Josh. xxiv.
11 ; but their dwelling-place is unknown, as the reading Tepye-
crqvoi in Matt. viii. 28 is critically suspicious. " The Hwites"
dwelt in Sichem (xxxiv. 2), at Gibeon (Josh. ix. 7), and at the
foot of Hermon (Josh xi. 3) ; the meaning of the word is un-
certain. "The Arkites:" inhabitants of 'Apicrf, to the north of
Tripolis at the foot of Lebanon, the ruins of which still exist
(yid. Robinson). " The Sinite :" the inhabitants of Sin or Sinna,
a place in Lebanon not yet discovered. " The Anadite" or
Aradians, occupied from the eighth century before Christ, the
small rocky island of Arados to the north of Tripolis. u The
Zemarite:" the inhabitants of Simyra in Eleutherus. " The
Hamathite : " the inhabitants or rather founders of Hamath on
the most northerly border of Palestine (Num. xiii. 21, xxxiv. 8),
afterwards called JEpiphania, on the river Orontes, the present
Hamdh, with 100,000 inhabitants. The words in ver. 18, " and
afterward were the families of the Canaanites spread abroad"
mean that they all proceeded from one local centre as branches
of the same tribe, and spread themselves over the country, the
limits of which are given in two directions, with evident refer-
ence to the fact that it was afterwards promised to the seed of
Abraham for its inheritance, viz. from north to south, — "from
Sidon, in the direction (lit. as thou comest) towards Gerar (see
chap. xx. 1), unto Gaza," the primitive Awite city of the Philis-
tines (Deut. ii. 23), now called Guzzeh, at the S.W. corner of
PENT. — VOL. I. M
K
Digitized by VjOOQlC
170 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSKS.
Palestine, — and thence from west to east, "in the direction towards
Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboim (see xix. 24) to Lesha^
i.e. Calirrhoe, a place with sulphur baths, on the eastern side of
the Dead Sea, in Wady Serka Maein (Seetzen and Sitter).
Vers. 21-32. Descendants of Shem. — Ver. 21. For the
construction, vid. chap. iv. 26. Shem is called the father of all
the sons of Eber, because two tribes sprang from Eber through
Peleg and Joktan, viz. the Abrahamides, and also the Arabian
tribe of the Joktanides (vers. 26 sqq.). — On the expression,
"the brother ofJaphet7n\<]," see chap. ix. 24. The names of
the five sons of Shem occur elsewhere as the names of tribes
and countries; at the same time, as there is no proof that
in any single instance the name was transferred from the
country to its earliest inhabitants, no well-grounded objection
can be offered to the assumption, which the analogy of the other
descendants of Shem renders probable, that they were originally
the names of individuals. As the name of a people, Elam de-
notes the Elymaans, who stretched from the Persian Gulf to
the Caspian Sea, but who are first met with as Persians no
longer speaking a Semitic language. Asshur: the Assyrians
who settled in the country of Assyria, 'Arovpla, to the east of
the Tigris, but who afterwards spread in the direction of Asia
Minor. Arphaxad: the inhabitants of 'AppaTrajfiTK in nor-
thern Assyria. The explanation given of the name, viz.
"fortress of the Chaldeans" (Ewald), "highland of the Chal-
deans " (Knobel), " territory of the Chaldeans" (Dietrich), are
very questionable. Lud: the Lydians of Asia Minor, whose
connection with the Assyrians is confirmed by the names of the
ancestors of their kings. Aram: the ancestor of the Aramceans
of Syria and Mesopotamia. — Ver 23. Descendants of Aram. Uz:
a name which occurs among the Nahorides (chap. xxii. 21) and
Horites (xxxvi. 28), and which is associated with the Alcrirat
of Ptolemy, in Arabia deserta towards Babylon; this is favoured
by the fact that Uz, the country of Job, is called by the LXX.
yu>pa Aval-rut, although the notion that these Aesites were an
Aramaean tribe, afterwards mixed up with Nahorides and Hor-
ites, is mere conjecture. Hul: Delitzsch associates this with
Cheli (Chert), the old Egyptian name for the Syrians, and the
Hylatce who dwelt near the Emesenes (Plin. 5, 19). Gether he
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAI'. X. 21-82. 171
connects with the name given in the Arabian legends to the
ancestor of the tribes Them&d and Ghadis. Mash: for which we
find Meshech in 1 Chron. i. 17, a tribe mentioned in Ps. cxx. 5
along with Kedar, and since the time of Bochart generally asso-
ciated with the Spo? Mdaiov above Niaibis. — Ver. 25. Among
the descendants of Arphaxad, Eber's eldest son received the
name of Peleg, because in his days the earth, i.e. the population/
of the earth, was divided, in consequence of the building of the'
tower of Babel (xi. 8). His brother Joktan is called Kachtan
by the Arabians, and is regarded as the father of all the primi-
tive tribes of Arabia. The names of his sons are given in vers.
26-29. There are thirteen of them, some of which are still
retained in places and districts of Arabia, whilst others are not
yet discovered, or are entirely extinct. Nothing certain has
been ascertained about Almodad, Jerah, Diklah, Obal, Abimael,
and Jobab. Of the rest, Sheleph is identical with Salif or
Sulaf (in Ptol. 6, 7, XaXanrnvoL), an old Arabian tribe, also a
district of Yemen. Hazarmaveth (ye. forecourt of death) is
the Arabian Hadhramaut in South-eastern Arabia on the
Indian Ocean, whose name Jauhari is derived from the un-
healthiness of the climate. Hadoram: the 'ABpa/urai of Ptol.
6, 7, Atramitce of Plin. 6, 28, on the sonthern coast of Arabia.
Uzal: one of the most important towns of Yemen, south-west of
Mareb. Sheba: the Sabceans, with the capital Saba or Mareb,
Mariaba regia (Plin.), whose connection with the Cushite (ver.
7) and Abraliamite Sabseans (chap. xxv. 3) is quite in obscurity.
Ophir has not yet been discovered in Arabia ; it is probably to
be sought on the Persian Gulf, even if the Ophir of Solomon
was not situated there. Havilah appears to answer to Chaulaw
of Edrisi, a district between Sanaa and Mecca. But this dis-
trict, which lies in the heart of Yemen, does not fit the account
in 1 Sam. xv. 7, nor the statement in chap. xxv. 18, that
Havilah formed the boundary of the territory of the Ishmaelites.
These two passages point rather to XavKoraZoi, a place on the
border of Arabia Petrsea towards Yemen, between the Naba-
tseans and Hagrites, which Strabo describes as habitable. — Ver.
30. The settlements of these Joktanides lay "from Mesha
towards Sephar the mountain of the East" Mesha is still un-
known : according to Gesenius, it is Mesene on the Persian Gulf,
and in KnobeVs opinion, it is the valley of Bisha or Beishe in the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
172 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
north of Yemen ; bnt both are very improbable. SepJiar is sup-
posed by Mesnel to be the ancient Himyaritish capital, Shafdr,
on the Indian Ocean ; and the mountain of the East, the moun-
tain of incense, which is situated still farther to the east. — The
genealogy of the Shemites closes with ver. 31, and the entire
genealogy of the nations with ver. 32. According to the Jewish
Midrash, there are seventy tribes, with as many different lan-
guages; but this number can only be arrived at by reckoning Nim-
rod among the Hamites, and not only placing Peleg among the
Shemites, but taking his ancestors Salah and Eber to be names
of separate tribes. By this we obtain for Japhet 14, for Ham
31, and for Shem 25, — in all 70 names. The Eabbins, on the
other hand, reckon 14 JapR?ticj^30 Hamitic, and 26 Semitic
nations ; whilst the fathers make 72 in all. But as these calcu-
lations are perfectly arbitrary, and the number 70 is nowhere
given or hinted at, we can neither regard it as intended, nor
discover in it " the number of the divinely appointed varieties of
the human race," or " of the cosmical development," even if the
seventy disciples (Luke x. 1) were meant to answer to the
seventy nations whom the Jews supposed to exist upon the earth.
— Ver. 32. The words, " And by these were the nations of Hie
earth divided in the earth after thejlood," prepare the way for the
description of that event which led to the division of the one
race into many nations with different languages.
THE CONFUSION OF TONGUES. — CHAP. XI. 1-9.
Ver. 1. "And the whole earth (i.e. the population of the
earth, vid. chap. ii. 19) was one lip and one kind of words :"
unius labii eorundemgue verborum. The unity of language of the
whole human race follows from the unity of its descent from one
human pair (vid. ii. 22). But as the origin and formation of the
races of mankind are beyond the limits of empirical research, so
no philology will ever be able to prove or deduce the original
unity of human speech from the languages which have been
historically preserved, however far comparative grammar may
proceed in establishing the genealogical relation of the languages
of different nations. — Vers. 2 sqq. As men multiplied they moved
from the land of Ararat "eastward," or more strictly to the
touth-east, and settled in a plain. nyj?a does not denote a valley
Digitized by VjOOQlC
\
CHAP. XI. l-». 173
between mountain ranges, but a broad plain, ireZiov fieya, as
Herodotus calls the neighbourhood of Babylon. There they
resolved to build an immense tower ; and for this purpose they
made bricks and burned them thoroughly (nc^fe? " to burning "
serves to intensify the verb like the inf. absol.), so that they
became stone; whereas in the East ordinary buildings are con-
structed of bricks of clay, simply dried in the sun. For mortar
they used asphalt, in which the neighbourhood of Babylon
abounds. From this material, which may still be seen in the
ruins of Babylon, they intended to build a city and a tower,
whose top should be in heaven, i.e. reach to the sky, to make to
themselves a name, that they might not be scattered over the
whole earth. DtP X? ne»y denotes, here and everywhere else, to
establish a name, or reputation, to set up a memorial (Isa. lxiii.
12, 14; Jer. xxxii. 20, etc.). The r eal motive therefore was the
desire for renown, and the object was to^estaDTisfrirfnoTeiL cen-
t ral poin t, which might serve, la maintain their jinity. The one
was jast as "ungodly as the other. For, ac cording to the divine
purpos e, men were to fill tbfi_eaxth, i.e. to spread over the wTToIe
earth, not indeed to separate, but to maintain their inward unity
notwithstanding their dispersion. But the fact that they were
afraid of dispersion is a proof that the inward spiritual bond of
unity and fellowship, not only " the oneness of their God and
their worship," but also the unity of brotherly love, was already
broken by sin. Consequently the undertaking, dictated by pride,
to preserve and consolidate by outward means the unity which
was inwardly lost, could not be successful, but could only bring
down the judgment of dispersion. — Vers. 5 sqq. " Jehovah came
down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men had
built" (the perfect U3 refers_to_the_ building^as. one^nished^np
tQ c-a certain poin t). Jehovah's " coming down " is not the same
here as in Ex. xix. 20, xxxiv. 5, Num. xi. 25, xii. 5, viz. the
descent from heaven of some visible symbol of His presence, but I
is an anthropomorphic description of God's interposition in the I
actions of men, primarily a " judicial cognizance of the actual •
fact," and then, ver. 7, a judicial infliction of punishment. The
reason for the judgment is given in the word, i.e. the sentence,
which Jehovah pronounces upon the undertaking (ver. 6) : " Be-\
hold one people (p¥ lit. union, connected whole, from ODV to \
bind) and one language have they all, and this (the building )
Digitized by VjOOQlC
174 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
of this city and tower) w (onMjhe beginning of their deeds ;
and now («c. when they have finished this)~ nothing wiU be im-
possible to them (Dno "TC3^ to lit. cut off from them, prevented)
\which they purpose to do" (*D£ for IBfj from DOf, see chap. ix. 19).
By the firm establishment of an ungodly unity, the wickedness
and audacity of men would have led to fearful enterprises. But
God determined, by confusing their language, to prevent the
heightening of sin through ungodly association, and to frustrate
their design. " Up" (nan " go to," in ironical imitation of the
' same_expression in vers. 3 and 4), wi We wilt gd dow%'an& there
confound their language (oiTlhe plural, see chap. i. 26 ; rraj for
n?i, Kal from 7?a, like 1Dr> in ver. 6), that they may not under-
stand one another's speech." The execution of this divine purpose
is given in ver. 8, in a description of its consequences : " Jehovah
scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth,
and they left off building the city" We must not conclude from
this, however, that the differences in language were simply the
result of the separation of the various tribes, and that the latter
arose from discord and strife ; in which case the confusion of
tongues would be nothing more than " dissensio animorum, per
quam factum sit, ut qui turretn struebant distraeti sint in contraria
studia et consilia" (Vitringd). Such a view not only does vio-
lence to the words " that one may not discern (understand) the lip
(language) of the other," but is also at variance with the object
of the narrative. When it is stated, first of all, that God re-
solved to destroy the unity of lips and words by a confusion of
the lips, and then that He scattered the men abroad, this act of
divine judgment cannot be understood in any other way, than
that God deprived them of the ability to comprehend one
another, and thus effected their dispersion. The event itself
cannot have consisted merely in a change of the organs of speech,
produced by the omnipotence of God, whereby speakers were
turned into stammerers who were unintelligible to one another.
This opinion, which is held by Vitringa and Hofmann, is neither
reconcilable with the text, nor tenable as a matter of fact. The
differences, to which this event gave rise, consisted not merely in
variations of sound, such as might be attributed to differences in
the formation in the organs of speech (the lip or tongue), but
had a much deeper foundation in the human mind. If language
is the audible expression of emotions, conceptions, and thoughts
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XI. 1-9. 175
of the mind, the cause of the confusion or division of the one
human language into different national dialects must be sought
in an effect produced upon the human mind, by which the origi-
nal unity of emotion, conception, thought, and will was broken
up. This inward unity had no doubt been already disturbed by
sin, but the disturbance had not yet amounted to a perfect
breach. This happened first of all in the event recorded here,
through a direct manifestation of divine power, which caused the
disturbance produced by sin in the unity of emotion, thought,
and will to issue in a diversity of language, and thus by a
miraculous suspension of mutual understanding frustrated the
enterprise by which men hoped to render dispersion and estrange-
ment impossible. More we cannot say in explanation of this
miracle, which lies before us in the great multiplicity and variety
of tongues, since even those languages which are genealogically
related — for example, the Semitic and Indo-Germanic — were
no longer intelligible to the same people even in the dim prime-
val age, whilst others are so fundamentally different from one
another, that hardly a trace remains of their original unity.
With the disappearance of unity the one original language was
also lost, so that neither in the Hebrew nor in any other lan-
guage of history has enough been preserved to enable us to form
the least conception of its character. 1 The primitive language
is extinct, buried in the materials of the languages of the nations, s .
to rise again one day to eternal life in_the glorified form of the I '
tctuval yKwtracu intelligible to all the redeemed, when sin with'
its consequences is overcome and extinguished by the power of
grace. A type and pledge of this hope was given in the gift of
tongues on the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon the Church
1 The opinion of the Rabbins and earlier theologians, that the Hebrew
was the primitive language, has been generally abandoned in consequence of
modern philological researches. The fact that the biblical names handed
down from the earliest times are of Hebrew extraction proves nothing.
With the gradual development and change of language, the traditions with
their names were cast into the mould of existing dialects, without thereby
affecting the truth of the tradition. For as Drechster has said, " it makes
no difference whether I say that Adam's eldest son had a name correspond-
ing to the name Cam from flip, or to the name Ctesias from xr&rtcu ; the
T r T
truth of the Thorah, which presents us with the tradition handed down from
the sons of Noah through Shem to Abraham and Israel, is not a verbal, but
a living tradition — is not in the letter, but in the spirit."
Digitized by VjOOQlC
(faA~
176 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
on the first Christian day of Pentecost, when the apobtles, filled
with the Holy Ghost, spoke with other or new tongues of u the
wonderful works of God," so that the people of every nation
under heaven understood in their own language (Acts ii. 1-11).
From the confusion of tongues the city received the name
Babel (-03 %.e. confusion, contracted from 7Sf& from 573 to con-
fuse), according to divine direction, though without any such
intention on the part of those who first gave the name, as a
standing memorial of the judgment of God which follows all
the ungodly enterprises of the power of the world. 1 Of this
city consi derable ruins still remain, including the remains of an
enormous tower, Sirs Nimrud,' which is regarded by the Arabs
as the tower of Babel that was destroyed by fire from heaven.
Whether these ruins have any historical connection witli the
tower of the confusion of tongues, must remain, at least for the
present, a matter of uncertainty. With regard to the date of
the event, we find from ver. 10 that the division of the human
race occurred in the days of Peleg, who was born 100 years
after t he-nood. In 150 or 180 years, with a rapid succession of
births, the descendants of the three sons of Noah, who were
already 100 years old and married at the time of the flood,
might have become quite numerous enough to proceed to the
erection of such a building. If we reckon, for example, only
four male and four female births as the average number to each
marriage, since it is evident from chap. xi. 12 sqq. that chil-
dren were born as early as the 30th or 35th year of their parent's
age, the sixth generation would be born by 150 years after the
flood, and the human race would number 12,288 males and as
many females. Consequently there would be at least about
30,000 people in the world at this time.
1 Such explanations of the name as " gate, or house, or fortress of Bel,"
are all the less worthy of notice, because the derivation iri rot BvXov in
the Etymol. magn., and in Persian and Nabatean works, is founded upon the
myth, that Bel was the founder of the city. And as this myth is destitute
of historical worth, so is also the legend that the city was built by Semi-
ramis, which may possibly have so much of history as its basis, that this
half-mythical queen extended and beautified the city, just as Nebuchad-
nezzar added a new quarter, and a second fortress, and strongly fortified it.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
chap. xi. io-2e. 177
V. HISTORY OF SHEM.
Chap. xi. 10-26.
After describing the division of the one family which sprang
from the three sons of Noah, into many nations scattered over
the earth and speaking different languages, the narrative returns
to Shem, and traces his descendants in a direct line to Terah the
father of Abraham. The first five members of this pedigree have
already been given in the genealogy of the Shemites ; and in that
case the object was to point out the connection in which all the
descendants of Eber stood to one another. They are repeated
here to show the direct descent of the Terahites through Peleg
from Shem, but more especially to follow the chronological
thread of the family line, which could not be given in the gene-
alogical tree without disturbing the uniformity of its plan. By
the statement in ver. 10, that " Shem, a hundred years old, begat
Arphaxad two years after the flood," the chronological data
already given of Noah's age at the birth of his sons (chap. v. 32)
and at the commencement of the flood (vii. 11) are made still
more definite. As the expression " after the flood" refers to the
commencement of the flood (chap. ix. 28), and according to chap,
vii. 11 the flood began in the second month, or near the begin-
ning of the six hundredth year of Noah's life, though the year
600 is given in chap. vii. 6 in round numbers, it is not necessary
to assume, as some do, in order to reconcile the difference between
our verse and chap. v. 32, that the number 500 in chap. v. 32
stands as a round number for 502. On the other hand, there
can be no objection to such an assumption. The different state-
ments may be easily reconciled by placing the birth of Shem at
the end of the five hundredth year of Ndah's life, and the birth
of Arphaxad at the end of the hundredth year of that of Shem ;
in which case Shem would be just 99 years old when the flood
began, and would be fully 100 years old " two years after the
flood," that is to say, in the second year from the commencement
of the flood, when he begat Arphaxad. In this case the " two
years after the flood" are not to be added to the sum-total of the
chronological data, but are included in it. The table given here
forms in a chronological and material respect the direct con-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
178 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
tinuation of the one in chap, v., and differs from it only in form,
viz. by giving merely the length of life of the different fathers
before and after the birth of their sons, without also summing
up the whole number of their years as is the case there, since
this is superfluous for chronological purposes. But on comparing
the chronological data of the two tables, we find this very im-
portant difference in the duration of life before and after the
flood, that the patriarch J s_afterjhejGbod _ Jived upon an average
\ only half the num ber of years of thoseJ aefore it, ancTthat with
1 Eeleg the .average duration of life was again reduced by one
\ half. Whilst Noah with his 950 years belonged entirely to the
'old world, and Shem, who was born before the flood, reached
the age of 600, Arphaxad lived only 438 years, Salah 433, and
Eber 464 ; and again, with Peleg the duration of life fell to 239
years, Reu also lived only 239 years, Serug 230, and Nahor not
more than 148. Here, then, we see that the two catastrophes,
j t he fl flfld. and the jf p ara tinn si t 1 "* *"""<»" race Tn to nations,
, y ( \ exerted ji powerful mfluencejn^shgrtening the duration of life ;
■ V v_ , the—former by_altg ring the c limate of the earth, the. latter by
changing_the. habit s of men. But while the length of life
diminished, the children were born proportionally earlier. Shem
begat his first-born in his hundredth year, Arphaxad in the thirty-
fifth, Salah in the thirtieth, and so on to Terah, who had no
children till his seventieth year ; consequently the human race,
notwithstanding the shortening of life, increased with sufficient
rapidity to people the earth very soon after their dispersion.
There is nothing astonishing, therefore, in the circumstance, that
wherever Abraham went he found tribes, towns, and kingdoms,
though only 365 years had elapsed since the flood, when we con-
sider that eleven generations would have followed one another
in that time, and that, supposing every marriage to have been
blessed with eight children on an average (four male and four
female), the eleventh generation would contain 12,582,912
couples, or 25,165,824 individuals. And if we reckon ten chil-
dren as the average number, the eleventh generation would con-
tain 146,484,375 pairs, or 292,968,750 individuals. In neither
of these cases have we included such of the earlier generations
as would be still living, although their number would be by no
means inconsiderable, since nearly all the patriarchs from Shem
to Terah were alive at the time of Abram's migration. In ver.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
\ \
CHAP. XL 27-82: 179
26 the genealogy closes, like that in chap. v. 32, with the names
of three sons of Terah, all of whom sustained an important rela-
tion to the subsequent history, viz. Abram as the father of the
chosen family, Nahor as the ancestor of Rebekah (cf. ver. 29 with
chap. xxii. 20-23), and Haran as the father of Lot (ver. 27).
VI. HISTORY OF TERAH.
Chap. xi. 27-xxv. 11.
family of terah. — chap. xi. 27-32.
The genealogical data in vers. 27-32 prepare the way for
the history of the patriarchs. The heading, " These are the gene-
rations of Ttrahf hftlny^gH not, mo/feh^tn Yfrg 9/TZ2& r tu\tJpj}\(>
whole of the fofowjng accountof_ Abram, since it corresponds to
" the generations" of Ishmael and oflsaac in chap. xxv. 12 and 19.
Of the three sons of Terah, who are mentioned again in ver. 27
to complete the plan of the different Toledoth, such genealogical
notices are given as are of importance to the history of Abram and
his family. According to the regular plan of Genesis, the fact that
Haran the youngest son of Terah begat Lot, is mentioned first
of all, because the latter went with Abram to Canaan ; and then
the fact that he died before his father Terah, because the link
which would have connected Lot with his native land was broken
in consequence. " Be/ore his father," 'JB ?V lit. upon the face
of his father, so that he saw and survived his death. Ur of the
Chaldees is to be sought either in the " Ur nomine persicum castel-
lum" of Ammian (25, 8), between Hatra and Nisibis, near Arra-
pachitis, or in Orhoi, Armenian Urrhai, the old name for Edessa,
the modern Urfa. — Ver. 29. Abram and Nahor took wives from
their kindred. Abram married Saraii his_halfj*ister (xx. 12), of ^
whom it is already related, in anticipation of what follows, that
she was barren. Nahor married Milcah, the daughter of his
hr^tior Har^ who borejto- him Bethuelj the father of Rebekah v_^
(xxii. 22, 23). The reason why Iscah is mentioned is doubtful.
For the rabbinical notion, that Iscah is another name for Sarai,
is irreconcilable with chap. xx. 12, where Abram calls Sarai his
sister, daughter of his father, though not of his mother ; on the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
180 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
other hand, the circumstance that Sarai is introduced in ver 31
merely as the danghter-in-law of Terah, may be explained on the
ground that she left Ur, not as his daughter, but as the wife of
i his son Abram. A better hypothesis is that of Ewald, that
J«4scah is mentioned because she was the wife of Lot ; but this is
I pure conjecture. According to ver. 31, Terah already prepared
to leave Ur of the Chaldees with Abram and Lot, and to remove
to Canaan. In the phrase " they went forth with them" the
subject cannot be the unmentioned members of the family, such
as Nahor and his children ; though Nahor must also have gone
to Haran, since it is called in chap. xxiv. 10 the city of Nahor.
For if he accompanied them at this time, there is no perceptible
reason why he should not have been mentioned along with the
rest. The nominative to the verb must be Lot and Sarai, who
went with Terah and Abram ; so that although Terah is placed
\ ,i-0 v * at the head, Abram must have taken an active part in the re-
i 1 (V/V^ moval, or the resolution to remove. This does not, however,
iv « \ • \ Pecessitatejthe conclusion, that he_ hacTalready be en called b y
I lJUr y ?od in U r. Nor does chap. xv. 7 require any such assumption.
^^ For it is not stated there that God called Abram in Ur, but only
that He brought him out. But the simple fact of removing from
Ur might also be called a leading out, as a work of divine super-
intendence and guidance, without a special call from God. _It
was in Haran that Abram first received the divine call to go to
Canaan (xii. 1-4J, when he left not only his country and kindred,
but also his father's house. Terah did not carry out his inten-
tion to proceed to Canaan, but remained in Haran, in his native
country Mesopotamia, probably because he found there what he
was going to look for in the land of Canaan. Haran, more pro-
perly Charan, pn, is a place in north-western Mesopotamia, the
ruins ofwhich may stuTBe - seen7a~full day's journey Totfie south
of Edessa (Gr. Kdjbfcu, Lat. Carrce), where Crassus fell when
defeated by the Parthians. It was a leading settlement of the
Ssabians, who had a temple there dedicated to the moon, which
they traced back to Abraham. There Terah died at the age of
205, or sixty years after the departure of Abram for Canaan ; for,
according to ver. 26, Terah was seventy years old when Abram
was born, and Abram was seventy-five years old when he ar-
/"\ jrived in Canaan. When Stephen, therefore, placed the removal
lof Abram from Haran to Canaan after the death of his father,
\ wa
\ .'
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XI. 27-XXV. 11. 181
he merely inferred this from the fact, that the call of Abram
(chap, xii.) was not mentioned till after the death of Terah had
been noticed, taking the order of the narrative as the order of
events ; whereas, according to the plan of Genesis, the death of
Terah is introduced here, because Abram never met with his
father again after leaving Ilaran, and there was consequently
nothing more to be related concerning him.
CHARACTER OF THE PATRIARCHAL HISTORY.
The dispersion of the descendants of the sons of Noah, who
had now grown into numerous families, was necessarily followed
on the one hand by the rise of a variety of nations, differing in
language, manners, and customs, and more and more estranged
from one another; and on the other by the expansion of the germs
of idolatry, contained in the different attitudes of these nations to-
wards God, into the polytheistic religions of heathenism, in which
the glory of the immortal God was changed into an image made
like to mortal man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and
creeping things (Rom. i. 23 cf. Wisdom xiii.-xv.). If God
therefore would fulfil His promise, no more to smite the earth
with the curse of the destruction of every living thing because of
the sin of man (chap. viii. 21, 22), and yet would prevent the
moral corruption which worketh death from sweeping all before
it ; it was necessary that by the side of these self-formed nations
He should form a nation for Himself, to be the recipient and pre-
server of His salvation, and that in opposition to the rising king-
doms of the world He should establish a kingdom for the living,
saving fellowship of man with Himself. The foundation for this
was laid by God in the call and separation of Abram from his
people and his country, to make him, by special guidance, the
father of a nation from which the salvation of the world should
come. With the choi ce of Abram the revelation of God Jxunan
assumed a select r^rapter^nngirmpVi as Qr\r\ manifested Himnalf
henceforth to Abram and his posterity alone as the, author. of
sa lvatio n andtheguide to true life ; whilst other nations were left
to follow their own course according to the powers conferred upon
them, in order that they might learn that in their way, and with-
out fellowship with the living God, it was impossible to find peace
to the soul, and the true blessedness of life (cf. Acts xvii. 27).
Digitized by VjOOQlC
182
THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
W>
o
Kiitjjvis escluaJYeneSS <-nntainpd frnm thp very £rat tba-gtwnn of
universalism. Abram was called, that through him all the fami-
lies of~the earth might be blessed (chap. xii. 1-3). Hence the
new form which the divine guidance of the human race assumed
in the call of Abram was connected with the general develop-
ment of the world, — on the one hand, by the fact that Abram
belonged to the family of Shem, which Jehovah had blessed, and
on the other, by his not being called alone, but as a married
man with his wife. But whilst, regarded in this light, the con-
tinuity of the divine revelation was guaranteed, as well as the
plan of human development established in the creation itself, the
call of Abram introduced so far the commencement of a new
period, that to carry oat the designs of God their very founda-
tions required to be renewed. Although, for example, the know-
ledge and worship of the true God had been preserved in the
families of Shem in a purer form than among the remaining
descendants of Noah, even in the house of Terah the worship of
God was corrupted by idolatry (Josh. xxiv. 2, 3) ; and although
Abram was to become the father of the nation which God was
about to form, yet his wife was barren, and therefore, in the way
of nature, a new family could not be expected to spring from
him.
As a perfectly new begim img^herefor e, the patriarchal his-
tory jisjumed the form of a family history, in which the grace
of God prepared the ground for the coming Israel. For the
nation was to grow out of the family, and in the lives of the
patriarchs its character was to be determined and its develop-
ment foreshadowed. The early history consists of three stages ,
which are indicated by t he thre e patriarchs, peculiarly so called,
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob ; and injJiesons of Jacob the van ity
of the chosen family was expa nded i nto the twelve immediate
fathers of the nation. l a the triple num F >pr " f tllg p a tir'ftrfib''j
the d ivine electio n of the nation on the one hand, and the entire
. _formation_of the character ahd~guidance of theTifed Israel on
the other, were to attain to their fullest typical manifestation.
These two were the pivots, upon which all'the divine revelations
made to the patriarchs, and all the guidance they received, were
made to turn. The revelations consisted almost exclusively of
promises ; and so far as these promises were fulfilled in the lives
of the patriarchs, the fulfilments themselves were predictions and
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XI. 27-XXV. 11.
183
pledges of the ultimate and complete fulfilment, reserved for a
distant, or for the most remote futurity. And the guidance
vouchsafed had for its object the calling forth of faith in response
to the promise, which should maintain itself amidst all the changes
of this earthly life. " A faith, which laid hold of the word of
promise, and on the strength of that word gave up the visible
and present for the invisible and future, was the fundamental
characteristic of the patriarchs" (Delitzsch). This faith Abram
manifested and sustained by great sacrifices, by enduring pa-
tience, and by self-denying obedience of such a kind, that he
thereby became the father of believers {ira-rhp ir a vrmv tS^ v iruf-
Tevovrav, Bom. iv. 11). Isaac also was strong in patience and
hope ; and Jacob wrestled in faith amidst painful circumstances
of various kinds, until he had secured the blessing of the promise.
" Abraham was a man of faith that works ; Isaac, of faith tha,t
endures; Jacob, of faith that yrfesUes' r ~(Baumgarteri) . — Thus,
walking in faith, the patriarchs were types of faith for all the
families that should spring from them, and be blessed through
them, and ancestors of a nation which God had resolved to form
according to the election of His grace. For the election of God
was not restricted to the separation of Abram from the family
of Shem, to be the father of the nation which was destined to be
the vehicle of salvation ; it was also manifest in the exclu sion of
Ishmael, whom Abram had begotten by the will of man, through
Hagar the handmaid" of his~wTR£~for~Fh~e purpose of securing
the promised seed, and in the new life imparted to the womb of
the barren Sarai, and her consequent conception and birth of
Isaac, the son of promise. And lastly, it appea red still more mani-
festly in the twin sons born by Bebekah to Isaac, of whom the
first-born, Esau, was rejected, and the younger, Jacob, chosen to
be the heir of the promise; - and this choice, which was announced
before their birth, was maintained in spite of Isaac's plans, so
that Jacob, and not Esau, received the blessing of the promise.
— AH this occurred as a typefpr Jthe. future, that Israel might
know and lay to heart the fact, that bodily descent- from Ahra-
ham did not make a man a child of God, but that they alone
were children of "God who laid hold of the divine promise in
faith, and" walked In the steps of their forefather's faith (cf. Bom.
ix. 6-13)."
If we fix our eyes upon the method of the divine revelation,
■ AU,
I I
4-n * -»s
/
Digitized by
Google
184 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
we find a new beginning in this respect, that as soon as Abram
is called, we read of the appearing of God. It is true that from
the very beginning God had manifested Himself visibly to men ;
but in the olden time we read nothing of appearances, because
before the flood God had not withdrawn His presence from the
earth. Even to Noah He revealed Himself before the flood as
one who was present on the earth. But when He had established
a covenant with him after the flood, and thereby had assured the
continuance of the earth and ofjhe human race, the direct mani -
festationsfc eased, for Trod withdrew His visible presence from the
world] so that it was from heaven that the judgment fell upon the
. tower of Babel, and even the call to Abram in his home in Haran
was issued through His word, that is to say, no doubt, through an
inward monition. But as soon as Abram had gone to Canaan,
in obedience to the call of God, Jehovah appeared to him there
(chap. xii. 7). These appearance, whichja^reconstantlyrepeated
from that time forward, mustjiave tjdcen_place_frojnJhsaYen ;
for we read that Jehovah, after speaking with Abram and the
other patriarchs, " went away" (chap, xviii. 33), or " went up"
(chap. xvii. 22, xxxv. 13) ; and the patriarchs saw them, some-
times while in a waking condition, in a form discernible to the
bodily senses, sometimes in visions, in a state of mental ecstasy,
and at other times in the form of a dream (chap, xxviii. 12 sqq.).
On the form in which God appeared, in most instances, nothing
is related. But in chap, xviii. 1 sqq. it is stated that three men
came to Abram, one of whom is introduced as Jehovah, whilst
the other two are called angels (chap. xix. 1). Beside this, we
frequently read of appearances of the " angel of Jehovah"
(xvi. 7, xxii. 11, etc.), or of "Elohim," and the "angel of
Elohim" (chap. xxi. 17, xxxi. 11, etc.), which were repeated
throughout the whole of the Old Testament, and even occurred,
though only in vision, in the case of the prophet Zechariah.
. The appj^rances_of_the angel of Jeh ovah for El ohi m) canno t
/ haveHbeen essentially different from those of Jehovah (or _Elo-
( hm^Hiniself ; for Jacob describes the appearance of Jehovah at
Bethel (chap, xxviii. 13 sqq.) as an appearance of " the angel
of Elohim," and of " the God of Bethel" (chap. xxxi. 11, 13) ;
and in his blessing on the sons of Joseph (chap, xlviii. 15, 16),
" The God {Elohim) before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac
did walk, the God (Elohim) which fed me all my life long unto
Digitized by VjOOQlC
I'
CHAP. XL 27-XXV. 11. 185
this day, the angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless th«
lads," he places the angel of God on a perfect equality with God,
not only regarding Him as the Being to whom he has been in-
debted for protection all his life long, but entreating from Him
a blessing upon his descendants.
The question arises, therefore, w hethe r the angel of Jehovah,
or of GWPwas God Himself in one particular phase of His
self-manifestation, or a created angel of whom God made use
as the organ of His self-revelation. 1 The former appears to
us to be the only scriptural view. For the essential unity of
the Angel of Jehovah with Jehovah Himself follows indisput-
ably from the following facts. In the first place, the Angel of
Godjdentifies Himself with Jehovah and Elohim, by attributing
to Himself divine attributes and performing divine works : e.g.,
chap. xxii. 12, "Now /know that thou fearest God, seeing thou
hast not withheld thy son, thine only son, from me" (i.e. hast
been willing to offer him up as a burnt sacrifice to God) ; again
(to Hagar) chap. xvi. 10, " 1 will multiply thy seed exceedingly,
that it shall not be numbered for multitude ;" chap, xxi., ' I will
make him a great nation," — the very words used by Elohim in
chap. xvii. 20 with reference to Ishmael, and by Jehovah in
chap. xiii. 16, xv. 4, 5, with regard to Isaac; also Ex. in. 6
sqq., " i" am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham, the
God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob : / have surely seen the
affliction of My people which are in Egypt, and have heard their
cry, and / am come down to deliver them" (cf. Judg. ii. 1).
In addition to this, He performs miracles, consuming with fire
the offering placed before Him by Gideon, and the sacrifice pre-
pared by Manoah, and ascending to heaven in the flame of the
burnt-offering (Judg. vi. 21, xiii. 19, 20). Secondly, theAngel i« \
of__Qo4_was recognised as God by those to whom He appeared, '
1 In the old Jewish synagogue the Angel of Jehovah was regarded as
the Shechinah, the indwelling of God in the world, i.e. the only Mediator
between God and the world, who bears in the Jewish theology the name
Metatron. The early Church regarded Him as the Logos, the second person
of the Deity ; and only a few of the fathers, such as Augustine and Jerome,
thought of a created angel (vid. Hengstenberg, Ghristol. vol. 3, app.). This
view was adopted by many Romish theologians, by the Socinians, Arminians,
and others, and has been defended recently by Hofmann, whom Delilzsch,
Kurtz, and others follow. But the opinion of the early Church has been
vindicated most thoroughly by Hengstenberg in his Christology.
PENT. — VOL I. V
Digitized by VjOOQlC
(l\
186 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES
on the one hand by their addressing Him a s Adonai (t.e. the
Lord God ; Judg. vi. 15), declaring tbit Jhey_ha3~seen God,
and fearing that they should die (chap. xvi. 13 ; Ex. hi. 6 ;
Judg. vi. 22, 23, xiii. 22), and on the other hand by thgir_paying
Him divine honour, offering sacrifices which He accepted, and
worshipping Him (Judg. vi. 20, xiii. 19, 20, cf. ii. 5). The
force of these facts has been met by the assertion, that the am-
bassador perfectly represents the person of the sender; and
evidence of this is adduced not only from Grecian literature,
but from the Old Testament also, where the addresses of the
prophets often glide imperceptibly into the words of Jehovah,
whose instrument they are. But even if the address in chap,
xxii. 16, where the oath of the Angel of Jehovah is accompanied
by the words, " saith the Lord," and the words and deeds of the
Angel of God in certain other cases, might be explained in this
way, a created angel sent by God could never say, " I am the
God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob," or by the acceptance of
sacrifices and adoration, encourage the presentation of divine
honours to himself. How utterly irreconcilable this fact is
with the opinion that the Angel of Jehovah was a created angel,
is conclusively proved by Rev. xxii. 9, which is generally re-
garded as perfectly corresponding to the account of the " Angel
of Jehovah " of the Old Testament. The angel of God, who
shows the sacred seer the heavenly Jerusalem, and who is sup-
posed to say, "Behold, I come quickly" (ver. 7), and "I am
Alpha and Omega" (ver. 13), refuses in the most decided way
the worship which John is about to present, and exclaims, " See
I am thy fellow-servant: worship God." Thirdly, the Angel
of Jehovah is ako identified with Jehovah by the sacred writers
themselves, who call theTAng^TJehcivairwrthtmftheleast reserve
(cfTExT iii. 2 and 4, Judg. vi. 12 and 14-16, but especially
Ex. xiv. 19, where the Angel of Jehovah goes before the host of
the Israelites, just as Jehovah is said to do in Ex. xiii. 21). —
On the other hand, the objection is raised, that 0776X09 icvpiov
in the New Testament, which is confessedly the Greek rendering
of mrp -]vbo, is always a created angel, and for that reason can-
not be the uncreated Logos or Son of God, since the latter could
not possibly have announced His own birth to the shepherds at
Bethlehem. But this important difference has been overlooked,
that according to Greek usage, ayycXo; icvpiov denotes an (any)
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XL 27-XXV. 11. 187
angel of the Lord, whereas according to the rules of the Hebrew
language njrp ?[K7D means the angel of the Lord ; that in the
New Testament the angel who appears is always described as
&ffeKxxs Kvptov without the article, and the definite article is
only introduced in the further course of the narrative to denote
the angel whose appearance has been already mentioned, where-
as in the Old Testament it is always "the Angel of Jehovah"
who appears, and whenever the appearance of a created angel is
referred to, he is introduced first of all as " an angel " (yid. 1
Kings xix. 5 and 7). 1 At the same time, it does not follow from
this use of the expression Maleach Jehovah, that the (particular)
angel of Jehovah was essentially one with God, or that Maleach
Jehovah always has the same signification ; for in Mai. ii. 7 the
priest is called Maleach Jehovah, i.e. the messenger of the Lord.
Who the messenger or angel of Jehovah was, must be deter-
mined in each particular instance from the connection of the
p assag e ; and where the context furnishes ho criterion, it must
remain undecided. Consequently such passages as Ps. xxxiv.
7, XXXV. 5, 6, etc., where the angel of Jehovah is not more
particularly described, or Num. xx. 16, where the general term
angel is intentionally employed, or Acts vii. 30, Gal. iii. 19,
and Heb. ii. 2, where the words are general and indefinite,
furnish no evidence that the Angel of Jehovah, who proclaimed
Himself in His appearances as one with God, was not in reality
equal with God, unless we are to adopt as the rule for inter-
preting Scripture the inverted principle, that clear and definite
statements are to be explained by those that are indefinite and
obscure.
In attempting now to determine the connection between the
appearance of the Angel of Jehovah (or Elohim) and the ap-
pearance of Jehovah or Elohim Himself, and to fix the precise
meaning of the expression Maleach Jehovah, we cannot make
1 The force of this difference cannot be set aside by the objection that
the New Testament writers follow the usage of the Septuagint, where 1JK7D
miV is rendered otyyiXo; xvptov. For neither in the New Testament nor in
the Alex, version of the Old is iyyihet xvplw used as a proper name ; it is
a simple appellative, as is apparent from the fact that in every instance, in
which further reference is made to an angel who has appeared, he is called
• <Jyy«*of, with or without xvpi'ov. All that the Septuagint rendering
proves, is that the translators supposed " the angel of the Lord " to be a
created angel ; but it by no means follows that their supposition is correct.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
188 THE FIBST BOOK OF MOJSKS.
use, as recent opponents of the old Church view have done, of
the manifestation of God in Gen. xviii. and xix., and the allusion
to the great prince Michael in Dan. x. 13, 21, xii. 1 ; just be-
cause neither the appearance of Jehovah in the former instance,
nor that of the archangel Michael in the latter, is represented as
an appearance of the Angel of Jehovah. We must confine our-
selves to the passages in which " the Angel of Jehovah" is actu-
ally referred to. We will examine these, first of all, for the
purpose of obtaining a clear conception of the form in which
the Angel of Jehovah appeared. Gen. xvi., where He is men-
tioned for the first time, contains no distinct statement as to
His shape, but produces on the whole the impression that He
appeared to Hagar in a human form, or one resembling that
of man ; since it was not till after His departure that she drew
the inference from His words, that Jehovah had spoken with
her. He came in the same form to Gideon, and sat under the
terebinth at Ophrah with a staff in His hand (Judg. vi. 11 and
21) ; also to Manoah's wife, for she took Him to be a man of
God, i.e. a prophet, whose appearance was like that of the Angel
of Jehovah (Judg. xiii. 6) ; and lastly, to Manoah himself, who
did not recognise Him at first, but discovered afterwards, from
the miracle which He wrought before his eyes, and from His
miraculous ascent in the flame of the altar, that He was the
Angel of Jehovah (vers. 9-20). In other cases He revealed
Himself merely by calling and speaking from heaven, without
those who heard His voice perceiving any form at all : e.g., to
Hagar, in Gen. xxi. 17 sqq., and to Abraham, chap. xxii. 11
sqq. On the other hand, He appeared to Moses (Ex. iii. 2) in
a flame of fire, speaking to him from the burning bush, and to
the people of Israel in a pillar of cloud and fire (Ex. xiv. 19, cf.
xiii. 21 sq.), without any angelic form being visible in either
case. Balaam He met in a human or angelic form, with a
drawn sword in His hand (Num. xxii. 22, 23). David saw Him
by the threshing-floor of Araunah, standing between heaven and
earth, with the sword drawn in His hand and stretched out over
Jerusalem (1 Chron. xxi. 16) ; and He appeared to Zechariah
in a vision as a rider upon a red horse (Zech. i. 9 sqq.). — From
these varying forms of appearance it is evident that the opinion
that the Angel of the Lord was a real angel, a divine mani-
festation, " not in the disguise of angel, but through the actual
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XI. 27-XXV. 11. 189
appearance of an angel," is not in harmony with all the state-
ments of the Bible. The form of the Angel of Jehovah, which
was discernible by the senses, varied according to the purpose of
the appearance ; and, apart from Gen. xxi. 17 and xxii. 11, we
have a sufficient proof that it was not a real angelic appearance,
or the appearance of a created angel, in the fact that in two
instances it was not really an angel at all, but a dame of fire
and a shining cloud which formed the earthly substratum of the
revelation of God in the Angel of Jehovah (Ex. iii. 2, xiv. 19),
unless indeed we are to regard natural phenomena as angels,
without any scriptural warrant for doing so. 1 These earthly
substrata of the manifestation of the u Angel of Jehovah" per-
fectly suffice to establish the conclusion, that the Angel of
Jehovah was only a peculiar form in which Jehovah Himself
appeared, and which differed from the manifestations of God
described as appearances of Jehovah simply in this, that in " the
Angel of Jehovah," God or Jehovah revealed Himself in a mode
which was more easily discernible by human senses, and ex-
hibited in a guise of symbolical significance the design of each
particular manifestation. In the appearances of Jehovah no
reference is made to any form visible to the bodily eye, unless
they were through the medium of a vision or a dream, excepting
in one instance (Gen. xviii.), where Jehovah and two angels
come to Abraham in the form of three men, and are entertained
1 The only passage that could be adduced in support of this, viz. Ps.
civ. 4, does not prove that God makes natural objects, winds and flaming
fire, into forms in which heavenly spirits appear, or that He creates spirits
out of them. Even if we render this passage, with Delitzsch, " making His
messengers of winds, His servants of flaming fire," the allusion, as Delitzsch
himself observes, is not to the creation of angels ; nor can the meaning be,
that God gives wind and fire to His angels as the material of their appear-
ance, and as it were of their self-incorporation. For nbj?, constructed with
T 1
two accusatives, the second of which expresses the materia ex qua, is never
met with in this sense, not even in 2 Chron. iv. 18-22. For the greater
part of the temple furniture summed up in this passage, of which it is stated
that Solomon made them of gold, was composed of pure gold ; and if some
of the things were merely covered with gold, the writer might easily apply
the same expression to this, because he had already given a more minute
account of their construction (e.g. chap. iii. 7). But we neither regard
this rendering of the psalm as in harmony with the context, nor assent tc
the assertion that nfc>JJ with a double accusative, in the sense of making
into anything, is ungrammatical
Digitized by VjOOQlC
190
THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
I 1
2,
by him, — a form of appearance perfectly resembling the appear-
ances of the Angel of Jehovah, but which is not so described by
the author, because in this case Jehovah does not appear alone,
but in the company of two angels, that " the Angel of Jehovah"
might not be regarded as a created angel.
But although there was no essential difference, but only a
formal one, between the appearing of Jehovah and the appear-
ing of the Angel of Jehovah, the disti nction between J ehovah
andjthe^Angel of Jehovah points to a distinction in the divine
nature, to which even the Old Testament contains several obvious
allusions. The very_joame indicates such a differe nce, :Jt<?D
nirp (from jJN? to work, from^vhtchrcbme >ij«5b the work, opus,
and 1$P, /t?rheThrough whom a work is executed, but in ordi-
nary usage restricted to the idea of a messenger) denotes the
person through whom God works and appears. Beside these
passages which represent "the Angel of Jehovah" as one with
Jehovah, there are others in which the Angel distinguishes
Himself from Jehovah ; e.g. when He gives emphasis to the
oath by Himself as an oath by Jehovah, by adding " saith Jeho-
vah" (Gen. xxii. 16) ; when He greets Gideon with the words,
"Jehovah with thee, thou brave hero" (Judg. vi. 12); when
He says to Manoah, " Though thou constrainedst me, I would
not eat of thy food ; but if thou wilt offer a burnt-offering to
Jehovah, thou raayest offer it" (Judg. xiii. 16) ; or when He
prays, in Zech. i. 12, "Jehovah Sabaoth, how long wilt Thou
not have mercy on Jerusalem?" (Compare also Gen. xix. 24,
where Jehovah is distinguished from Jehovah.) Just as in
these passages the Angel of Jehovah distinguishes Himself per-
sonally from Jehovah, there are others in which a distinction is
drawn between a self-revealing side of the divine nature, visible
to men, and a hidden side, invisible to men, i.e. between the
self-revealing and the hidden God. Thus, for example, not
only does Jehovah say of the Angel, whom He sends before
Israel in the pillar of cloud and fire, " My name is in Him," i.e.
he reveals My nature (Ex. xxiii. 21), but He also calls Him '3fi,
" My face" (xxxiii. 14) ; and in reply to Moses' request to see His
glory, He says " Thou canst not see My face, for there shall no
man see Me and live," and then causes His glory to pass by
Moses in such a way that he only sees His back, but not His
face (xxxiii. 18-23). On the strength of these expressions, He
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XI. 27-XXV. 11. 191
in whom Jehovah manifested Himself to His people as a Saviour
is called in Isa. lxiii. 9, " the Angel of His face," and all the
guidance and protection of Israel are ascribed to Him. In
accordance with this, Malachi, the last prophet of the Old
Testament, proclaims to the people waiting for the manifesta-
tion of Jehovah, that is to say, for the appearance of the Mes-
siah predicted by former prophets, that the Lord (1^*0 > *•*• God),
the Angel of the covenant, will come to His temple (iii. 1).
This "Angel of the covenant," or "Angel of the face," hasi
appeared in Christ. The A ngel of Jehovah, therefore, was nol
ot her than the_JLflfios, which not only "was with God," but[
"was God," and in Jesus Christ "was made flesh" and "came/
unto His own" (John i. 1, 2, 11) ; the only-begotten Son or
God, who was sent by the Father into the world, who, thongh
one with the Father, prayed to the Father (John xvii.), and
who is even called " the Apostle," 6 airoaraiKos, in Heb. iii. 1.
From all this It is sufficiently obvious, that neither the title
Angel or Messenger of Jehovah, nor the fact that the Angel of
Jehovah prayed to Jehovah Sabaoth, furnishes any evidence
against His essential unity with Jehovah. That which is un-
folded in perfect clearness in the New Testament through the
incarnation of the Son of God, was still veiled in the Old Tes-
ment according to the wisdom apparent in the divine training.
The difference between Jehovah and the Angel of Jehovah is
generally hidden behind the unity of the two, and for the most
part Jehovah is referred to as He who chose Israel as His nation
and kingdom, and who would reveal Himself at some future
time to His people in all His glory ; so that in the New Testa-
ment nearly all the manifestations of Jehovah under the Old
Covenant are referred to Christ, and regarded as fulfilled
through Him. 1
1 This is not a mere accommodation of Scripture, but the correct inter-
pretation of the obscure hints of the Old Testament by the light of the ful-
filment in the New. For not only is the Maleach Jehovah the revealer of
God, but Jehovah Himself is the revealed God and Saviour. Just as in the
history of the Old Testament there are not only revelations of the Maleach
Jehovah, but revelations of Jehovah also ; so in the prophecies the announce-
ment of the Messiah, the sprout of David and servant of Jehovah, is inter-
mingled with the announcement of the coming of Jehovah to glorify His
people and perfect Hie kingdom.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
192
THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
CALL OP ABEAM.
INTO EGYPT. — CHAP. XII.
k^
The life of Abraham, from his call to his death, consists of
four stage s, the commencement of each of which is markedjby a
divine revelation of sufficient importance to constitute a distinct
epoch. The first stage (chap, xii.-xiv.) commences with his call
and removal to Canaan ; the second (chap. xv. xvi.), with the
promise of a lineal heir and the conclusion of a covenant ; the
third (chap, xvii.— xxi.), with the establishment of the covenant,
accompanied by a change in his name, and the appointment of
the covenant sign of circumcision ; the fourth (chap, xxii.-xxv.
11), with the temptation of Abraham to attest and perfect his life
of faith. All the revelations made to him proceed from Jehovah ;
and the name Jehovah is employed throughout the whole life of
the father of the faithful, El phim bein g used only where Jehovah,
from its meaning, would be either entirely inapplicable, or at any
rate less appropriate. 1
Vers. 1-3. The Call. — The word of Jehovah, by which
Abram was called, contained a command and a promise. Abram
was to leave all — his country, his kindred (see chap, xliii. 7), and
his father's house — and to follow the Lord into the land which He
would show him. Thus he was to trust entirely to the guidance
of God, and to follow wherever He might lead him. But as he
went in consequence of this divine summons into the land of
Canaan (ver. 5), we must assume that God gave him at the very
first a distinct intimation, if not of the land itself, at least of the
direction he was to take. That Canaan was to be his destination,
was no doubt made known as a matter of certainty in the revela-
tion which he received after his arrival there (ver. 7). — For thus
renouncing and denying all natural ties, the Lord gave him the
inconceivably great promise, " / will make of thee a great nation ;
and I will bless thee, and make thy name great ; and thou shalt be a
blessing." The four members of this promise are not to be divided
1 The hypothesis, that the history is compounded of Jeliovistic and Elo-
histic documents, can only be maintained by those who misunderstand the
distinctive meaning of these two names, and arbitrarily set aside the Jehovah
in chap. xvii. 1, on account of an erroneous determination of the relation in
which nE* fo stands to mn».
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XII. 1-3. 193
into two parallel members, in which case the athnach would
stand in the wrong place ; bat are to be regarded as_an_ascand-
ing climax, expressing four elements of the salvation promised to
Abram, the last of which is still further expanded in ver. 3. By
placing the athnach under ip# the fourth member is marked as
a new and independent feature added to the other three. The
four distinct elements are — 1. increase int o a numerpns_p^ople
2. a blessing, that is to say, material P n ^ spiritual prosperity ; 3.
t he exalta tion of his rum a, i.e. the elevation of Abram to honour
and glory; 4. his appointment -to be the possessor and dispenser
•of the bless ing. Abram was not only to receive blessing, but to
be a blessing ; not only to be blessed by God, but to become a
blessing, or the medium of blessing, to others. The blessing, as
the more minute definition of the expression " be a blessing" in
ver. 3 clearly shows, was henceforth to keep pace as it were
with Abram himself, so that (1) the blessing and cursing of men
were to depend entirely upon their attitude towards him, and (2)
all the families of the earth were to be blessed in him. i"|gi lit. to
treat as light or little, to despise, denotes " blasphemous cursing
on the part of a man ;" "ntj " judicial cursing on the part of
God." It appears significant^ however, "that the_plural isuged i,
in relation to the blessing, and the singular only in relation to"3p
thVcursing ; grace expects that there will be many to bless, and
that only an individual here and there will render not blessing
for blessing, but curse for curse." — In ver. 3 b, Abram, the one,
is made a blessing for all. In the word *l 3 the primary mean-
ing of 3, tw, is not to be given up, though the instrumental sense,
through, is not to be excluded. Abram was not merely to be-
come a mediator, but the source of blessing for all. The expres-
sion " all the families of the ground" points to the division of
the one family into many (chap. x. 5, 20, 31), and the word
noiKn to the curse pronounced upon the ground (chap. iii. 17).
The blessing of Abraham was once more to unite the divided
families, and change the curse, pronounced upon the ground on
account of sin, into a blessing for the whole human race. This
concluding word comprehends all nations and times, and con-
denses, as Bawmgarten has said, the whole fulness of the divine
counsel for the salvation of men into the call of Abram. All
further promises, therefore, not only to the patriarchs, but also
to Israel, were merely expansions and closer definitions of the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
194 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
salvation held out to the whole human race in the first promise.
Even the assurance, which Abram received after his entrance
into Canaan (ver. 6), was implicitly contained in this first pro-
mise ; since a great nation could not be conceived of, without a
r. q country of its own. This promise was renewed to Abram on
(_l i \MAI*s*~*> several occasions: first after his separation from Eot (xiii. 14-16),
/' 7 on which occasion, however, the " blessing" was not mentioned,
■L^iixttt ■ because not required by the connection, and the two elements
** on ly> viz* the numerous increase of his seed, and the possession
of the land of Canaan, were assured to him and to his seed, and
that " for ever ; " secondly, in chap, xviii. 18 somewhat more
casually, as a reason for the confidential manner in whicTTJehovah
explained to him the secret of His government ; and lastly, at the
t wo princ ipal turning points of his life, where the whole promise
was confirmed with the greatest solemnity, viz. in ch ap, xvi i. at the
commencement of the establishment of the covenant made with
him, where u I will make of thee a great nation" was heightened
into " I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of
thee," and his being a blessing was more fully defined as the estab-
lishment of a covenant, inasmuch as Jehovah would be God to
him and to his posterity (vers. 3 sqq.), and in .chap. xiii. after
the attestation of his faith and_obedience, even to the sacrifice of
his only son, where the innumerable increase of his seed and the
| ... blessing to pass from him to all nations were guaranteed by an
Oath. Thgjjianie prmnJH^wns aftprwftrHa rpnp.wpfl t/< Tsimn, with a
distinct allusion to the oath (chap. xxvi. 3, 4), and a gain to J acob,
bnthj n) his flightj Frnm flf^flg^ for fear of Esau^chapTxxviii.
» •'. < ) 13, 14), and on his return thither (chap. xxxv. 11, 12). In the
case of these renewalspltis only in chap, xxviii. 14 that the last
expression, "all the families of theAdamah," is repeated verbatim,
though with the additional clause " and in thy seed ;" in the
other passages " all the nations of the earth" are mentioned,
the family connection being left out of sight, and the national
character of the blessing being brought into especial prominence.
In two instances also, instead of the Niphal U"D3 we find the
Hithpael ^ari?. This change of conjugation by no means proves
that the Niphal is to be taken in its original reflective sense. The
Hithpael has no doubt the meaning " to wish one's self blessed"
(Deut. xxix. 19), with 3 of the person from whom the blessing
is sought (Isa. lxv. 16 ; Jer. iv. 2), or whose blessing is desired
Digitized by VjOOQlC
.<
CHAP. XII. 4-9. 195
(Gen. xlviii. 20). But the Niphal *H3? has only the passive sig-
nification " to be blessed." And the promise not only meant that
all families of the earth would wish for the blessing which Abram
possessed, but that they would really receive this blessing in
Abram and his seed. By the explanation "wish themselves
blessed" the point of the promise is broken off ; and not only is
its connection with the prophecy of Noah respecting Japhet's
dwelling in the tents of Shem overlooked, and the parallel between
the blessing on all the families of the earth, and the curse pro-
nounced upon the earth after the flood, destroyed, but the actual
participation of all the nations of the earth in this blessing is
rendered doubtful, and the application of this promise by Peter
(Acts iii. 25) and Paul (Gal. iii. 8) to all nations, is left without
any firm scriptural basis. At the same time, we must not attri-
bute a passive signification on that account to the Hithpael in I
chap. xxii. 18 and xxvi. 4. In these passages prominence is I
given to the subjective attitude of the nations towards the bless- J
ing of Abraham, — in other words, to the fact that the nations/
would desire the blessing promised to them in Abraham and his*
seed.
Vers. 4-9. Bemoval to Canaan. — Abram cheerfully
followed the call of the Lord, and " departed as the Lord had
spoken to him." He was then 75 years old. His age is given,
because a new period in the history of mankind commenced with
his exodus. After this brief notice there follows a more circum-
stantial account, in ver. 5, of the fact that he left Haran with
his wife, with Lot, and with all that they possessed of servants
and cattle, whereas Terah remained in Haran (cf.chap. xi. 31).
*b£ IB** trsari are not the souls which they had begotten, but the
male and female slaves that Abram and Lot had acquired. —
Ver. 6. On his arival in Canaan, " Abram passed through the
land to the place of Sichem : " i.e. the place where Sichem, the
present Nablus, afterwards stood, between Ebal and Gerizim,
in the heart of the land. " To the terebinth (or, according to
Deut. xi. 30, the terebinths) of Moreh : " fb*, *?$ (chap. xiv. 6)
and D7K are the terebinth, Ji;* and njw the oak; though in many
MSS. and editions |WK and tftt are interchanged in Josh. xix. 33
and Judg. iv. 11, either because the pointing in one of these
passages is inaccurate, or because the word itself was uncertain,
Digitized by VjOOQlC
196 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
as the ever-green oaks and terebinths resemble one another in
the colour of their foliage and their fissured bark of sombre
grey. — The notice that " the Caxmajajej ■>"« re then in. tke-.land "
does not point to a p ost-Mosaic date f when the Canaanites were
extinct. For it does not mean that the Canaanites were then
still in the land, but refers to jthe promise which fo llows, that
God would give this land to the seed of Abram (ver. 7), and
merely states that the land into which Abram had come was
1 not uninhabited and without a possessor ; so that Abram could
I not regard it at once as his own and proceed to take possession
of it, but could only wander in it in faith as in a foreign land
(Heb. xi. 9). — Ver. 7. Here in Sichem Jehovah appeared to
him, and assured him of the possession of the land of Canaan
for his descendants. The assurance was made by means of an
appearance of Jehovah, as a sign that this land was henceforth
to be the scene of the manifestation of Jehovah. Abram
understood this, " and there builded he an altar to Jehovah, who
appeared to him," to make the soil which was hallowed by the
appearance of God a place for the worship of the God who
appeared to him. — Ver. 8. He did this also in the mountains,
to which he probably removed to secure the necessary pasture
for his flocks, after he had pitched his tent there. " Bethel west-
wards and Ai eastwards" i.e. in a spot with Ai to the east and
Bethel to the west. The nnmff Tiefhtl (^nr^ligrg_pro)°ptj^flljy :
at the time referred to, it was still called Luz (chap, xxviii. 19);
its present name is Beitin (Robinson's Palestine). At a dis-
tance of about five miles to the east was Ai, ruins of which are
still to be seen, bearing the name of Medinet Gai (Ritters
Erdkunde). On the words " called upon the name of the Lord,"
see chap. iv. 26. From this point Abram proceeded slowly to
the Negeb, i.e. to the southern district of Canaan towards the
Arabian desert (yid. chap. xx. 1).
Vers. 10-20. Abram in Egypt. — Abram had scarcely
passed through the land promised to his seed, when a famine
compelled him to leave it, and take refuge in Egypt, which
abounded in corn ; just as the Bedouins in the neighbourhood
are accustomed to do now. Whilst the famine in Canaan was
to teach Abram, that even in the promised land food and cloth-
ing come from the Lord and His blessing, he was to discover in
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XII. 10-20. 197
Egypt that earthly craft is soon put to shame when dealing with
the possessor of the power of this world, and that help and
deliverance are to be found with the Lord alone, who can so
smite the mightiest kings, that they cannot touch His chosen or
do them harm (Ps. cv. 14, 15). — When trembling for his life in
Egypt on account of the beauty of Sarai his wife, he arranged
with her, as he approached that land, that she should give her-
self out as his sister, since she really was his half-sister (chap,
xi. 29). He had already made an arrangement with her, that
she should do this in certain possible contingencies, when they. _^
first removed to Canaan (chap. xx. 13). The conduct of the
Sodomites (chap, xix.) was a proof that he had reason for his
anxiety ; and it was not without cause even so far as Egypt was
concerned. But his precaution did not spring from faith.
He might possibly hope, that by means of the plan concerted,
he should escape the danger of being put to death on account of
his wife, if any one should wish to take her ; but how he ex-
pected to save the honour and retain possession of his wife, we
cannot understand, though we must assume, that he thought he
should be able to protect and keep her as his sister more easily,
than if he acknowledged her as his wife. But the very thing
he feared and hoped to avoid actually occurred. — Vers. 15 sqq.
The princes of Pharaoh finding her very beautiful, extolled her
beauty to the king, and she was taken to Pharaoh's house. As
Sarah was th en 65 years old (cf. chap. xvii. 17 and xii. 4),Jier
beauty at such an age has been made a difficulty by some. But
as sheT Tvect Jo Ihe age ]rf i2T^Bhapr"5Xlil.' 1), She was then
middle-aged ; and as her vigour and bloom had not been tried
by bearing children, she might ^asily appear verjjDeautifuLin
the_eyes_jof the Egyptians, whose wires, accwdiag_tg— both
ancient and modern testimony, were generally u gly, and faded
early. FharaoK (the Egyptian ouro, king, with the article Pi)
is~the Hebrew name for all the Egyptian kings in the Old
Testament; their proper names being only occasionally men-
tioned, as, for example, Necho in 2 Kings xxiii. 29, or Hophra
in Jer. xliv. 30. For Sarai' s sake Pharaoh treated Abram well,
presenting him with cattle and slaves, possessions which con-
stitute the wealth of nomads. These presents Abram could
not refuse, though by accepting them he increased his sin. God
then interfered (ver. 17), and smote Pharaoh and his house
Digitized by VjOOQlC
\
N
198 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
with great plagues. What the nature of these plagues was,
cannot be determined; they were certainly of such a kind,
however, that whilst Sarah was preserved by them from dis-
honour, Pharaoh saw at once that they were sent as punishment
by the Deity on account of his relation to Sarai ; he may also
have learned, on inquiry from Sarai herself, that she was
Abram's wife. He gave her back to him, therefore, with a
reproof for his untruthfulness, and told him to depart, appoint-
ing men to conduct him out of the land together with his wife
and all his possessions, fw, to dismiss, to gi ve an escort (xvii i.
16, xxxi. 27), does not necessarily denote an involuntary dis-
missal here. For as Pharaoh had discovered in the plague the
wrath of the God of Abraham, he did not venture to treat him
harshly, but rather sought to mitigate the anger of his God, by
the safe-conduct which he granted him on his departure. But
Abram was not justified by this result, as was very apparent
from the fact, that he was mute under Pharaoh's reproofs, and
did not venture to utter a single word in vindication of his con-
duct, as he did in the similar circumstances described in chap.
xx. 11, 12. The saving mercy of God had so humbled him,
that he silently acknowledged his guilt in concealing his relation
to Sarah from the Egyptian king.
abram's separation from LOT. — CHAP. XIII.
Vers. 1-4. Abram, having returned from Egypt to the south
of Canaan with his wife and property uninjured, through the
gracious protection of God, proceeded with Lot V^BD? " accord -
i ng to 7iis j ourne ys " (lit. with the repeated breaki ng up of his
camp^ required by a nomad life ; on PD) to break up a tenty to
remove, see Ex. xii. 37) into the neighbourhood of Bethel and
Ai, where he had previously encamped and built an altar (chap,
xii. 8), that he might there call upon the name of the Lord
again. That K"}i??5 (ver. 4) is not a continuation of the relative
clause, but a resumption of the main sentence, and therefore
corresponds with ^P5. (ver. 3), " he went . . . and called upon
the name of the Lord there" has been correctly concluded by
DeUtztch from the repetition of the subject Abram. — Vers. 5-7.
But as Abram was very rich ( Tjj, li t, weighty) in possessions
(rupo, cattle and slaves), and Lot also had flocks, and herds, and
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XIII. 1-4. 199
tents (D^TK for D^K, Get. § 93, 6, 3) for his men, of whom
there must have been many therefore, the land did not bear them
when dwelling together ("fc'J, masculine at the commencement of
the sentence, as is often the case when the verb precedes the
subject, vid. Ges. § 147), i.e. the land did not furnish space
enough for the numerous herd to graze. Consequently disputes
ar ose between the two parties of herds jpen. The difficulty was /
in creased by the fact tha t the Can aanites an d Perizzites were j
then dwellingjn thgJian^^aoiKaFtnB gparp was very contracted.
The Feriszites, who are mentioned here and in chap, xxxiv. 30,
Judg. i. 4, along with the Canaanites, and who are placed in
the other lists of the inhabitants of Canaan among the different
Canaanitish tribes (chap. xv. 20 ; Ex. iii. 8, 17, etc.), are not
mentioned among the descendants of Canaan (chap. x. 15-17),
and may therefore, like the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites,
and Kephaim (xv. 19-21), not have been descendants of Ham at
all. The common explanation of the name Perizzite as equiva-
lent to rfriB J-TK 3g* "inhabitant of the level ground" (Ezek.
xxxviii. 11), is at variance not only with the form of the word,
the inhabitant of the level ground being called TiBil (Deut. iii.
5), but with the fact of their combination sometimes with the
Canaanites, sometimes with the other tribes of Canaan, whose
names were derived from their founders. Moreover, to explain
the term " Canaanite," as denoting u the civilised inhabitants of
towns," or " the trading Phoenicians," is just as arbitrary as if
we were to regard the Kenites, Kenizzites, and the other tribes
mentioned chap. xv. 19 sqq. along with the Canaanites, as all
alike traders or inhabitants of towns. The origin of the name
Perizzite is involved in obscurity, like that of the Kenites and j)
other tribes settled in Canaan that were not descended from ' 9^*yp>^
Ham. But we may infer from the frequency with which theyl
are mentioned in connection with the Hamitic inhabitants off
Canaan, that they were widely dispersed among the latter. Vid!
chap. xv. 19-21. — Vers. 8, 9. To put an end to the strife be-
tween their herdsmen, Abram proposed to Lot that they should
separate, as strife was unseemly between CHK e^n, men w h
stood in the relation of brethren, and left him to choose his
ground. " If thou to the left, I will turn to the right ; and if
thou to the right, I will turn to tlie left." Although Abram was
the_glde r, and the lea der of the company, he was magnanimous
Digitized by VjOOQlC
200
THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
'l
enough to leave the choice to his nephew, who was the younger,
in the contTdehtassurance that the Lord would so direct the de-
cis!on,"tEat His promise would be fulfilled. — Vers. 10-13. Lot
chose what was apparently the best portion of the land, the
whole district of the Jordan, or the valley on both sides of the
Jordan from the Lake of Gennesareth to what was then the
vale of Siddim. For previous to the destruction of Sodom and
Gomorrah, this whole country was well watered, " as the garden
of Jehovali" the garden planted by Jehovah in paradise, and
" as Egypt," the land rendered so fertile by the overflowing of
the Nile, "in the direction of Zoar." Abram therefore re-
mained in the land of Canaan, whilst Lot settled in the cities of
the plain of the Jordan, and tented (pitched his tents) as far as
Sodom. In anticipation of the succeeding history (chap, xix.), it
is mentioned here (ver. 13), that the inhabitants of Sodom were
very wicked, and sinful before Jehovah. — Vers. 14-18. After
Lot's departure, Je hpvah rep eated to Abramjb y - a mo nt al, inw ard
assurance, as. w e may in fer from thejfact that IDS "saidJMs not
ac«jnipanjed_byKT3 " be appeared") His promise that He would
give the land tohlm and to his seed in its whole extent, north-
ward, and southward, and eastward, and westward, and would
make his seed innumerable like the dust of the earth. From
this we may see that the separation of Lot was in accordance
with the will of God, as Lot had no share in the promise of
God ; though God afterwards saved him from destruction for
Abram's sake. The possession of thft land is jrnmi sed D?iy ts
"_£or eve r." The promise of God is unchangeable. As the seed
of Abraham was to exist before God for ever, so Canaan was to
be its everlasting possession. Tfcl f^i'g a pplied not to thn linril
posterjtyjojfj^bram, *° his seed according to the flesh, hji&lo.the
true spiritual ^geed, which embraced the promise in faith, and
herd it in a pure believing heart. The promise, ther efore,
neither prp pln d n d thn -twtpukion-nf the nnheliftvjn g sppiH from the.
land of Canaan, nor guarantees to pvisting .Tpws a wtnm tr> the
earthly Palestine after their conversion to Christ. For as Calvin
justly says, "guum terra in saculum promittitur, non simpliciter
notatur perpetuitas ; sed qua finem accepit in Christo." Throu gh
Christ the premise has been exalted from its temporal form to
its4rue_gssence_; through Him the wholeearth becomes Canaan
(ml. chap. xvii. 8). That Abram might appropriate this renewed
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIV. 1-1*. 201
and now more fully expanded promise, Jehovah directed him to
walk through the land in the length of it and the breadth of it.
In doing this he came in his " tenting" i.e. his wandering
through the land, t o Hebr on, where he nettlad hy the terebinth
of _the Am ori te Mamre (chap. xiv. 13), and built an altar to
Jehovah. The t erm~Hgfr (s et himself, settled down, sat, dwelt)
den otes that Abram made J^j?h}geUie_cgntoal _pojial_ pf his s ub-
sequent stay in Can aan (cf. chap. xiv. 13, xviii. 1, and chap,
xxiii.). On Hebron, see chap, xxiii. 2.
ABRAM's MILITARY EXPEDITION ; AND HIS SUBSEQUENT
MEETING WITH MELCHIZEDEK. — CHAP. XIV.
Vers. 1-12. The war, which furnished Abram with an op-
portunity, while in the promised land of which as yet he could
not really call a single rood his own, to prove himself a valiant
warrior, and not only to smite the existing chiefs of the imperial
power of Asia, but to bring back to the kings of Canaan the
booty that had been carried off, is circumstantially described, not
so much in the interests of secular history as on account of its
significance in relation to the kingdom of God. It is of impor-
tance, however, as a simple historical fact, to see that in the state-
ment in ver. 1, the k ing of S hinar occupies the first place,
although the king of Eoom, Chedorlaomer, not only took the
lead in the expedition, and had allied himself for that purpose
with the other kings, but had previously subjugated the cities of
the valley of Siddim, and therefore had extended his dominion
very widely over hither Asia. If, notwithstanding this, the time
of the war related here is connected with " the days ofAmraphel,
king of Shinar," this is done, no doubt, with reference to the fact
that th£_first worldly kingdom, was founded in Shinar bv_Nim-
rodj(chap. x. 10), a kingdom-wlujJisti^x^ted^undeFAmraphel.
though it was now confined to Shinar itselfj" wKilsTElam pos-
sessed the supremacy in inner Asia. There is no_ground what-
ever f or—gaeafdiag _thfi four kingsLmentioned in yer.1 as four
Assyriangenerals or viceroys, as Josephus has done in direct
conlrMIciionJ:o the Tiiblical text; for, according to the more
careful historical researches, the commencement of the Assyrian
l^gdom_betongs_to a later penocT; and Berostts speaks of an
earlier Median rule in Babylon, which reaches as far back as the
PENT. — vol. I. o
Digitized by VjOOQlC
202 THE FIBST BOOK OF MOSES
age of the patriarchs (cf. M. v. Niebuhr, Geseh. Assurs, p. 271).
It appears significant^ako, that the imperial power of Asia had
already extended as f ar-as-Canaan, and had snbdned the valley of
"The Jordan, no doubt-with. the intention of holding ihcjlordan
valley as the high-road. toJEgypt. "We have here a prelude of
the future assault of .the worldly power .upgn. the kingdom of
God established tu Canaan ; and the importance of this event to
sacred history consists in the fact, that the kings of the valley of
the Jordan and the surrounding country submitted to the worldly
power, whilst Abram, on the contrary, with his home-born ser-
vants, smote the conquerors and rescued their booty, — a pro-
phetic sign that in the conflict with the power of the world the
seed of Abram would not only not be subdued, but would be
able to rescue from destruction those who appealed to it for aid.
In vers. 1-3 the account is introduced by a list of the parties
eugaged in war. The kings named here are not mentioned
again. On Shinar, see chap. x. 10 ; and on Elatn, chap. x. 22.
It cannot be determined with certainty where EUasar was.
Knobel supposes it to be Artemita, which was also called XaXdaap,
in southern Assyria, to the north of Babylon. Goyim is not
used here for nations generally, but is the name of one parti-
cular nation or country. In DelitzscKs opinion it is an older
name for Galilee, though prohably with different boundaries (cf .
Josh. xii. 23 ; Judg. iv. 2 ; and Isa. ix. 1). — The verb ife'V (made),
in ver. 2, is governed by the kings mentioned in ver. 1. To
Bela, whose king is not mentioned by name, the later name Zoar
(vid. xix. 22) is added as being better known. — Ver. 3. " All
these (five kings) allied themselves together, (and came with their
forces) into the vale of Siddim (D""?^, prob. fields or plains),
which is the Salt Sea ;" that is to say, which was changed into the
ISalt Sea on the destruction of its cities (chap. xix. 24, 25). That
xhere should be five kings in the five cities (vevrdiroXis, Wisdom
x. 6) of this valley, was quite in harmony with the condition of
Canaan, where even at a later period every city had its king. —
Vers. 4 sqq. The occasion of the war was the revolt of the kings
,of the vale of Siddim from Chedorlaomer. They had been
subject to him for twelve years,' "and the thirteenth year they re-
belled." In the fourteenth year Chedorlaomer came with his
allies to punish them for their rebellion, and attacked on his way
several other cities to the east of the Arabah, as far as the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XIV. 1-12. 203
Elanitic Golf, no doubt because they also had withdrawn from
his dominion. The_army moved along the great military road
f rom inner Asia, past Damascus, through Eerrea, where they
smote the Rephaim s, Znzim s^ Emims, and Horites. " The
Rephaim in Ashteroth Karnaim:" all that is known with cer-
tainty of the Rephaim is, that they were a tribe of gigantic
stature, and in the time of Abram had spread over the whole of
Peraea, and held not only Bashan, but the . country afterwards
possessed by the Moabites ; from which possessions they were
subsequently expelled by the descendants of Lot and the Anior-
ites, and so nearly exterminated, that O g, jring of Bashan, is de-
scribed as the remnant of theJEephaim (Deut.1T. 20, lii. 11, 13 ;
Josh. xii. 4, xiii. 12). Reside this, there were Rephaim on this
side of the Jordan among the Canaanitish tribes (chap. xv. 20),
some to the west of Jerusalem, in the valley which was called
after them the valley of the Rephaim (Josh. xv. 8, xviii. 16;
2 Sam. v. 18, etc.), others on the mountains of Ephraim (Josh,
xvii. 15) ; while the last remains of them were also to be found
among the Philistines (2 Sam. xxi. 16 sqq. ; 1 Chron. xx. 4 sqq.).
The current explanation of the name, viz. " the long-8tretched,"l
or giants (Ewald), does not prevent our regarding KB") as the per-'
sonal name of their forefather, though no intimation is given of
their origin. That they were not Canaanites may be inferred
from the fact, that on the eastern side of the Jordan they were
subjugated and exterminated by the Canaanitish branch of the
Amorites. Notwithstanding this, they may have been descend-
ants of Ham, though the fact that the Canaanites spoke a
Semitic tongue rather favours the conclusion that the oldest
population of Canaan, and therefore the Rephaim, were of
Semitic descent. At any rate, the opinion of J. G. Muller, that
they belonged to the aborigines, who were not related to Shem,
Ham, and Japhet, is perfectly arbitrary. — Ashteroth Karnaim,
or briefly Aihtaroth, the capital afterwards of Og of Bashan, was
situated in Hauran ; and ruins of it are said to be still seen in
Tell Ashtereh, two hours and a half from Nowah, and one and
three-quarters from the ancient Edrei, somewhere between Nowah
and Mezareib (see Bitter, Erdkunde). 1 — " The Zuzims in Ham n
1 J. G. Welztein, however, has lately denied the identity of Ashteroth
Karnaim, which he interprets as meaning Ashtaroth near Karnaim, with
Ashtaroth the capital of Og (See Reueber. lib. Hauran, etc. 1860, p. 107).
ltyM~~
Digitized by VjOOQlC
2M THE FIRST BOOK OF MO&ES.
were probably the people whom the Ammonites called Zam
zummim, and who were also reckoned among the Rephaim
(Deut. ii. 20). Ham was possibly the ancient name of Rabba
of the Ammonites (Deut. iii. 11), the remains being still pre-
served in the ruins of Amman. — " The Emim in the plain of
Kiryathaim:" the &&$ or D'DN (»'.«. fearful, terrible), were the
earlier inhabitants of the country of the Moabites, who gave
them the name ; and, like the Anakim, they were also reckoned
among the Rephaim (Deut. ii. 11). Kiryathaim is certainly
not to be found where Eusebius and Jerome supposed, viz. in
Kapid&a, Coraiatha, the modern Koerriatli or Kereyat, ten miles
to the west of Medabah ; for this is not situated in the plain, and
corresponds to Keriotli (Jer. xlviii. 24), with which Eusebiue
and Jerome have confounded Kiryathaim. It is probably still to
be seen in the ruins of el Teym or et Tueme, about a mile to the
west of Medabah. " Tlie Horites (from *"jn, dwellers in caves),
in the mountains of Seir" were the earlier inhabitants of the
land between the Dead Sea and the Elanitic Gulf, who were
conquered and exterminated by the Edomites (xxxvi. 20 sqq.). —
" To El-Paran, which is by tlie wilderness :" i.e. on the eastern
side of the desert of Paran (see chap. xxi. 21), probably the
same as Elath (Deut. ii. 8) or Eloth (1 Kings ix. 26), the im-
portant harbour of Aila on the northern extremity of the so-
called Elanitic Gulf, near the modern fortress of Akaba, where
extensive heaps of rubbish show the site of the former town,
which received its name El or Elath (terebinth, or rather wood)
probably from the palm-groves in the vicinity. — Ver. 7. From
Aila the conquerors turned round, and marched (not through
the Arabah, but on the desert plateau which they ascended from
But he does so without sufficient reason. He disputes most strongly the fact
that Ashtaroth was situated on the hill Aahtere, because the Arabs now in
Hauran assured him, that the ruins of this Tell (or hill) suggested rather a
monastery or watch-tower than a large city, and associates it with the Bostra
of the Greeks and Romans, the modern Bozra, partly on account of the cen-
tral situation of this town, and its consequent importance to Hauran and
Perea generally, and partly also on account of the similarity in the name,
as Bostra is the latinized form of Beeshterah, which we find in Josh. xxi.
27 in the place of the Ashtaroth of 1 Chron. vi. 56 ; and that form is composed
of Beth Ashtaroth, to which there are as many analogies as there are instances
of the omission of Beth before the names of towns, which is a sufficient ex*
planation of Ashtaroth (cf. Ges. thes., p. 175 and 19S).
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XIV. 18-16. 205
Aila) to En-mishpat {well of judgment), the older name of
Kadesh, the situation of which, indeed, cannot be proved with
certainty, but which is most probably to be sought for in the
neighbourhood of the spring Ain Kades, discovered by Rowland,
to the south of Bir Seba and Khalcua (JElusa), twelve miles
E.S.E. of Moyle, the halting-place for caravans, near Hagar*s
well (xvi. 14), on the heights oiJebelHalal (see Bitter, Erdkunde,
and Num. xiii.). " And they smote all the country of the Ama-
lekites" i.e. the country afterwards possessed by the Amalekites
(vid. chap, xxxvi. 12), 1 to the west of Edomitis on the southern
border of the mountains of Judah (Num. xiii. 29), " and also the
Amorites, who dwelt in Hazazon-Thamar" i.e. Engedi, on the
western side of the Dead Sea (2 Chron. xx. 2). — Vers. 8 sqq.
After conquering all these tribes to the east and west of the
Arabah, they gave battle to the kings of the Pentapolis in the
vale of Siddim, and put them to flight. The kings of Sodom
and Gomorrah fell there, the valley being full of asphalt-pits,
and the ground therefore unfavourable for flight ; but the others
escaped to the mountains (rnn for f^ri), that is, to the Moabitish
highlands with their numerous denies. The conquerors there-
upon plundered the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, and carried
off Lot, who dwelt in Sodom, and all his possessions, along with
the rest of the captives, probably taking the route through the
valley of the Jordan up to Damascus.
Vers. 13-16. A fugitive (lit. the fugitive ; the jtrticle de notes
th e genus , Ewald, § 277) brought intelligence of this to Abram
thejlebrew (^yn^ an immigPUitjFjrom_beyoa€l- th o E uphrates).
Abram is so called in distinction from Mamre and his two
brothers, who were Amorites, and had made a defensive treaty
with him. To rescue Lot, Abram ordered his trained slaves
(vyan, i.e. practised in arms) born in the house (cf. xvii. 12), 318
men, to turn out {lit, to pour themselves out) ; and with these,
and (as the supplementary remark in ver. 24 shows) with his
allies, he pursued the enemy as far as Dan, where " he divided
i ' The circumstance that in the midst of a list of tribes -who were defeated,
\ we find not the tribe but only ihejields (mt?) of the Amalekites mentioned,
lean only be explained on the supposition that the nation of the Amalekites
Iwas not then in existence, and the country was designated proleptically by
the name of its future and well-known inhabitants (Hengstenberg, Diss. ii.
p. 249, translation).
Digitized by VjOOQlC
206 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES
himself against them, he and his servants, by night," — {.«. he divided
his men into companies, who fell upon the enemy by night from
different sides, — "smote them, and pursued them to Hobah, to the
left (or north) of Damascus'' Hobah has probably been pre-
served in the village of Hobo, mentioned by Troilo, a quarter of a
mile to the north of Damascus. So far as the situation of Dan
is concerned, this passage proves that it cannot have been iden-
tical with Leshem or Laish in the valley of Beth Behob, which
the Danites conquered and named Dan (J'udg. xviii. 28, 29;
Josh. xix. 47) ; for this Laish-Dan was on the central source of
the Jordan, el Leddan in Tell el Kady, which does not lie in
either of the two roads, leading from the vale of Siddim or of
the Jordan to Damascus. 1 This Dan belonged to Gilead (Dent,
xxxiv. 1), and is no doubt the same as the Dan-Jaan mentioned
in 2 Sam. xxiv. 6 in connection with Gilead, and to be sought
for in northern Persea to the south-west of Damascus.
Vers. 17-24. — As Abram returned with the booty which he
had taken from the enemy, the king of Sodom (of course, the
successor to the one who fell in the battle) and Melchizedek,
king of Salem, came to meet him to congratulate him on his
victory ; the former probably also with the intention of asking
for the prisoners who had been rescued. They met him in " the
valley of Shaveh, which is (what was afterwards called) t he King 's
dale." This valley, in which Absalom erected a monument for
himself (2 Sam. xviii. 18), was, according to Josephus, two
stadia from Jerusalem, probably by the brook Kidron there-
fore, although Absalom's pillar, which tradition places there, was
of the Grecian style rather than the early Hebrew. The name
King's dale was given to it undoubtedly with reference to the
event referred to here, which points to the neighbourhood of
Jerusalem. For the Salem of Melchizedek cannot have been
the Salem near to which John baptized (John iii. 23), or JEnon,
which was eight Roman miles south of Scythopolis, as a march
l One runs below the Sea of Galilee past Fik and Nowa, almost in a
straight line to Damascus ; the other from Jacob's Bridge, below Lake
Merom. But if the enemy, instead of returning with their booty to Thap-
sacus, on the Euphrates, by one of the direct roads leading from the Jordan
past Damascus and Palmyra, bad gone through the land of Canaan to the
sources of the Jordan, they would undoubtedly, when defeated at Laish-Dan,
have fled through the Wady et Teim and the Bekaa to Hamath, and not by
Damascus at all (vid. Robinson, Bibl. Researches.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
IfjU-J^
CHAP. XIV. 17-24. 207
of about forty hours for the purpose of meeting Abraham, if
not romantic, would at least be at variance with the text of
Scripture, where the kings are said to have gone out to Abram
after his return. It must be Jerusa lem, therefore, which is
called by the old nam e Salens in PsTlxxvi. 2, out of which the .
name Jerusalem (founding of peace, or possession of peace) was I /^* *-<->*•&-»
formed by the addition of the prefix vv = 'vv " founding," or 'q/L^J-a*
efrv "j fwgQgginn " Melcbizedek brings bread and wine from J
Salem " to supply the exhausted warriors with food and drink,
but more especially as a mark of gratitude to Abram, who had
conquered for them peace, freedom, and prosperity " (Delitzsch).
This gratitude he expresses, as a priest of the supreme God, in
the words, " Blessed be Abram of the Most High God, the founder
of heaven and earth ; and blessed be God, the Most Sigh, who
hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand." The form of the
b lessing is poeti cal, two parallel members with words peculiar to
poetry, TVS for T3*, and isb.—fty £>K without the article is a
proper name for the supreme God, the God over all (cf. Ex.
xviii. 11), who is pointed out as the only true God by the addi-
tional clause, " founder of the heaven and the earth." On the
construction of *P">3 with \, vid. chap. xxxi. 15, Ex. xii. 16, and
Ges. § 143, 2. rub, founder and possessor : njj? combines the
meanings of ktI^siv and /craadai. This priestly reception Abram
reciprocated by giving him the tenth of all, ue. of the whole of
the booty taken from the enemy. Gi ving the tenth wasaprac- i
tic al ackn owledgment of the divine priesthood of Melchizedek ; j
fo r the tenth was, according "to The geria^TBtistOm, The offering -
pre sented tol he Deity. Abram_also_acknowledged the God of
Melchizedek. as. _ the true God; for when the king of Sodom
asked for his people only, and would have left the rest of the
booty to Abram, he lifted up his hand as a solemn oath " to
Jehovah, the Most High God, the founder of heaven and earth," —
acknowledging himself as the servant of this God by calling
Him by the name Jehovah, — and swore that he would not take
" from a thread to a shoe-string," i.e. the smallest or most worth-
less thing belonging to the king of Sodom, that he might not
be able to say, he had made Abram rich. Qs*, as the sign of an
oath, is negative, and in an earnest address is repeated before
the verb. " Except (^S^?, lit. not to me, nothing for me) only
what the young men (Abram's men) have eaten, and the portion
Digitized by VjOOQlC
208 THE FIRST BOOS OF MOSES.
of my allies . ... let them ta'ke their portion:" i.e. his follower!
should receive what had been consumed as their share, and the
allies should have the remainder of the booty.
Of the property belonging to the king of Sodom, which he
had taken from the enemy, Abram would not keep^thejjnallest
partj because be would not have anything in common with
Sodom. On the other hand, he accepted from Salem's pFieslT
and king, Melchizedek, not only bread and wine for the invigo-
ration of the exhausted warriors, but a priestly blessing also,
and gave him in return the tenth of all his booty, as a sign that
he acknowledged this king as a priest of the living God, and
submitted to his royal priesthood. Tn this self-subordination of
Abram to Melchizedek there was the practical prediction of a
royal priesthood which is higher than the priesthood entrusted to
Abram's descendants, the sons of Levi, and foreshadowed in the
noble form of Melchizedek, who blessed as king and priest the
patriarch whom God had called to be a blessing to all the fami-
lies of the earth. The name of this royal priest is full of mean-
ing : Melchizedek, i.e. King of Righteousness. Even though,
\ judging from Josh. x. 1, 3, where a much later king is called
Adoniz edek, i.e. Lord of Righteousness, this name may have
been a standing title of the ancient kings of Salem, it no doubt
originated with a king who ruled his people in righteousness,
and was perfectly appropriate in the case of the Melchizedek
mentioned here. There is no less significance in the name of
the seat of his government, Sqlem^ the peaceful or peace, since
it shows that the capital of its kings was a citadel oTpeace, not
only as a natural stronghold, but through the righteousness of
its sovereign ; for which reason David chose it as the seat of
royalty in Israel ; and Moriah, which formed part of it, was
pointed out to Abraham by Jehovah as the place of sacrifice for
the kingdom of God which was afterwards to be established.
And, lastly, there was something very significant in the appear-
i ance in the midst, of .the. Regenerate tribes of Canaan of^ this
king^of righteousness, and priest of the true God of heaven and
earth, without any account of his descent, or of the beginning
and end of his life ; so that he stands forth in the Scriptures,
u without father, without mother, without descent, having neither
beginning of days nor end of life." Although it by no means
follows from this, however, that Melchizedek was a celestial
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XV. 209
being (the Logos, or an angel), or one of the primeval patriarchs
(Enoch or Shem), as Church fathers, Rabbins, and others have
conjectured, and we can see in him nothing more than one, per-
haps the last, of the witnesses and confessors of the early reve-
lation of God, coming out into the light of history from the dark
night of heathenism ; yet this appearance does point to a priest-
hood of universal s ignifican ce, and to a higher, order of things,
which existed jit the commencement of the world, and is one day \
t o be restored agai n. In all these respects, the noble form of
this king of Salem and priest of the Most High God was a
type of the God-King and eternal High Priest Jesus Christ ;
a thought which is expanded in Heb. vii. on the basis of this
account, and of the divine utterance revealed to David in the
Spirit, that the King of Zion sitting at the right hand of Jeho-
vah should be a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek
(Ps. ex. 4).
THE COVENANT. — CnAP. XV
With the formula "after these things" there is introduced a
new revelation of the Lord to Abram, which differs from the
previous ones in form and substance, and constitutes a new
turning point in his life. The "word ofJehovali " came to him
" i n a vision : n i.e. neither by a direct internal address, norTiy such
a manifestation of Himself as fell upon the outward senses, nor
in a dream of the night, but i n a state o f ecstasy by an inward
spy ftyftl in tuition, and that not in a nocturnaTvTsloh, as In chap.
xlvi. 2, but i n the day- time. The expr ession " in a vision " ap-
p lies to th e whole chapter. There is no pause anywliere, nor
any sign that the~vi5ibn ceased, or that the action was trans-
ferred to the sphere of the senses and of external reality. Con-
sequently the whole process is to be regarded as an internal
one. The vision embraces not only vers. 1-4 or 8, but the
entire chapter, with this difference merely, that fro m ver. 12
onwards th e ecstasy assumed the form of a prophetic sleep pro-
duced by God. It is true that the bringing Abram out, his
seeing tne stars (ver. 5), and still more especially his taking the
sacrificial animals and dividing them (vers. 9, 10), have been
supposed by some to belong to the sphere of external reality,
on the ground that these purely external acts would not neces-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
210 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
sarily presuppose a cessation of the ecstasy, since the vision was
no catalepsy, and did not preclude the full (t) use of the out-
ward senses. But however true this may be, not only is even'
■> _^ mark wanting, which would warrant us in assuming a transition
Y*^ A"* 1 from the purely inward and spiritual sphere, to the outward
' J kvv**Y*"^ sphere of the senses, but the entire revelation culminates in a
"' prophetic sleep, which also bears the character of a vision. As
it was in a deep sleep that Abram saw the passing of the divine
appearance through the carefully arranged portions of the sacri-
fice, and no reference is made either to the burning of them,
as in Judg. vi. 21, or to any other removal, the arrangement of
the sacrificial animals must also have been a purely internal
process. To regard this as an outward act, we must break up the
continuity of the narrative in a most arbitrary wayj'alld uul only
transfer the commencement of the vision into the night, and
"^ suppose it to have lasted from twelve to eighteen hourSj. but
i we must interpolate the burning of the sacrifices, etc., in a still
| more arbitrary manner, merely for the sake of supporting the
1 erroneous assumption, that visionary procedures had no objec-
tive reality, or, at all events, less evidence of reality than out-
ward acts, and things perceived by the senses. A vision wrought
by God was not a mere fancy, or a subjective play of the
thoughts, but a spiritual fact, which was not only in all respects
as real as things discernible by the senses, but which surpassed
in its lasting significance the acts and events that strike the eye.
The covenant which Jehovah made with Abram was not in-
tended to give force to a mere agreement respecting mutual
rights and obligations, — a thing which could have been accom-
plished by an external sacrificial transaction, and by God pass-
ing through the divided animals in an assumed human form, —
I but it was designed to establish the purely spiritual relation of
a living fellowship between God and Abram, of the deep in-
ward meaning of which, nothing but a spiritual intuition and
experience could give to Abram an effective and permanent hold.
Vers. 1-6. The words of Jehovah run thus: "Fear not,
Abram : J am a shield to thee, thy reward very much." n:nn an
inf. absol., generally used adverbially, but here as an adjective,
equivalent to " thy very great reward." The divine promise to
be a shield to him, that is to say, a protection against all ene-
mies, and a reward, i.e. richly to reward his confidence, his
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XV. 1-6. 211
ready obedience, stands here, as the opening words " after these
things " indicate, in close connection with the previous guidance
of Abram. Whilst the protection of his wife in Egypt was a
practical pledge of the possibility of his having a posterity, and
the separation of Lot, followed by the conquest of the kings of
the East, was also a pledge of the possibility of his one day pos-
sessing the promised land, there was as yet no prospe ct what-
ever of the promise being realized, that he should become a
great nation, and possess an innumerable posterity. In these
circumstances, anxiety about the future might naturally arise in
h is mind . To meet this, the word of the Lord came" to him
with the comforting assurance, "Fear not, I am thy shield."
Bu b <w h u ii lilt Lord acld ad, ilandihyjcery. great reward," Abram
co uld only rep ly, as he thought of his childless condition:
" Lo rd Jehov ah, what wilt Thou give me } seeing I go childless t"
Of what avail are all my possessions, wealth, and power, since
I have no child, and the heir of my house is Eliezer the Dama-
scene? pVD } synonymous with pen?? (Zeph. ii. 9), possession, or
the seizure of possession, is chosen on account of its assonance
with PfeW. PEte"J3, son of the seizing of possession = seizer of
possession, or heir. Eliezer of Damascus (lit. Damascus viz.
Eliezer) : Eliezer is an explanatory apposition to Damascus, in
the sense of the Damascene Eliezer ; though Pfef?, on account
of its position before itJT^Kj cannot be taken grammatically as
equivalent to ^pfcTjPi. 1 — To give still more distinct utterance to
his grief, Abra m adds (ver. Sp ic Behold, to me Thou hast given
no seed ; and lo, an~z^flUUi~of my house (W3"|3 in distinction
from JvaTT*., home-born, chap. xiv. 14) will be my heir." The
word of the Lord then came to him : " Not he, but one who shall
come forth from thy body, he will be thine heir" God then took
him into the open air, told him to look up to heaven, and pro-
mised him a posterity as numerous as the innumerable host of
stars (cf. chap. xxii. 17, xxvi. 4 ; Ex. xxxii. 13, etc). Whether
Abram at this time was "in the body or out of the body," is a
matter of no moment. The reality of the occurrence is the
same in either case. This is evident from the remark made by
Moses (the historian) as to the conduct of Abram in relation to
1 The legend of Abram having been king in Damascus appears to have
originated in this, though the passage before us does not so much as show
that Abram obtained possession of Eliecer on his way through Damascus.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
212 THE FIRST BOOK OF HOSES.
the promise of God : " And he believed in Jehovah, and He
counted it to him for righteousness" In the strictly objective
character of the account in Genesis, in accordance with which
the simple, facts are related throughout without any introduc-
tion of subjective opinions, this remark appears so striking, that
the qnestion naturally arises, What led Moses to introduce it ?
In what way did Abram make known his faith in Jehovah ?
And in what way did Jehovah count it to him as righteousness ?
The reply to both questions must not be sought in the New
Testament, but must be given or indicated in the context.
What reply did Abram make on receiving the promise, or
what did he do in consequence ? Wher. God, to confirm the
promise, declared Himself to be Jehovah, who brought him out
*, of Ur of the Chaldees to give him that land as a possession,
Ifot H Abram replied, " Lord, whereby shall I know that I shall pos-
^•^ i \/ sess it?" God then directed him to "fetch a heifer of three
Q*r years old," etc. ; and Abram fetched the animals required, and
arranged them (as we may certainly suppose, though it is not
expressly stated) as God had commanded him. B y this re adi-
n ess to perform what God commanded him, ^brarajjave a
practical proof that he belieyei Jehovah 4 and what God did
\vith_the animals so arranged was a practical declaration ou the
part of Jehovah, that He reckoned this faith .tft.Abram as
righteousness. The significance of the divine act is, finally,
summed up in ver. lopin the words, " On that day Jehovah
made a covenant with Abram." Consequently Jehovah reckoned
Abram' s faith to him as righteousness, by making a covenant
with him, by taking Abram into covenant fellowship with Him-
self. HP^n, from !?K to continue and to preserve, to be firm
and to confirm, in Hiphil to trust, believe (irunewa)), expresses
"that state of mind which is sure of its object, and relies
firmly upon it ;" and as denoting conduct towards God, as " a
firm, inward, personal, self-surrendering reliance upon a per-
sonal being, especially upon the source of all being," it is con-
strued sometimes with ? (e.g. Deut. ix. 23), but more frequently
with a (Num. xiv. 11, xx. 12; Deut. i. 32), "to believe the
Lord," and " to believe on the Lord," to trust in Him, — ina-
I reveiv hrl rov Qeov, as the apostle has more correctly rendered
I the brtarevaev — t& &e$ of the LXX. (yid. Bom. iv. 5). Eait h
therefore is not me rely assensus. nut JMwiy also, unconditional
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XV. 7-11. 213
t rust in the L ord and His word, even where tibe n atural course
of eve nts f urnishes no ground for hope or expectation. This
faith Abram manifested, as the apostle has shown in Rom. iv. ;
and this faith God reckoned to him as righteousness by the
actual conclusion of a covenant with him. njTiy, ri ghteousness, j
as a human characteristic, is correspo ndence to the will of God I
both in c haracter and conduct, or a state answerijig__to_the[
d ivine purpose of a_man3s_T>eihg. This was the state in which
man was first created in the image of God ; but it was lost by
sin, through which he placed himself in opposition to the will
of God and to his own divinely appointed destiny, and could
only be restored by God. When the human race had univer-
sally corrupted its way, Noah alone was found righteous before
God (vii. 1), because he was blameless and walked with God
(vi. 9). This righteousness Abram acquired through his un-
conditional trust in the Lord, his undoubting faith in His pro-
mise, and his ready obedience to His word. This state of mind,
which is expressed in the words nirva P?K£, was reckoned to him
as righteousness, so that God treated him as a righteous man,
and formed such a relationship with him, that he was placed in
living fellowship with God. The foundation of this relation-
ship was laid in the manner described in vers. 7—11.
Vers. 7—11. Abram's question, " Whereby shall I know that I
shall take possession ofti (the land)?" was not an expression of
doubt, but of desire for the confirmation or sealing of a promise,
which transcended human thought and conception. To gratify
this desire, God commanded him to make preparation for the
conclusion of a covenant. " Take Me, He said, a heifer of three
years old, and a she-goat of three years old, and a ram of three
years old, and a turtle-dove, and a young pigeon ;" one of every
species of the animals suitable for sacrifice. Abram took these,
and "divided them in the mid*t" i.e. in half, " and placed one
half of each opposite to the other (fan? E"K, every one its half, cf .
xlii. 25 ; Num. xvii. 17) ; onlyjhe birds divided Aft. mrf,"- -just as
in sacrifice_the doves were not divided into pieces, but placed
upon the fire whole (Lev. i. 17). The animals chosen, as well
as the fact that the doves were left whole, co rresponded exactl y
to Ahe ritual of s acrifice. Yet the transaction itself was not a
real sacrifice, since there was neither sprinkling of blood nor
offering upon an altar (oblatio), and no mention is made of the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
•I
214 THE FIBST BOOK OF MOSES.
pieces being burned. The proceeding corre sponded rather to
thecustom, prevalent in many ancient nations, o f slaughterin g
animals when concluding a covenant, and after dividing them
into pieces, of laying the pieces opposite to one another, that
the persons making the covenant might pass between them.
Thus Ephraem Syrus (1, 161) observes, that God condescended
to follow the custom of the Chaldeans, that He might in the
most solemn manner confirm His oath to Abram the Chaldean.
The wide extension of this custom is evident from the.£xpxes§ion
used to denote the conclusion of a covenant, nna rna tohew, or
cut a covenant, Aram. D"}!? HJ, Greek S piua re/ iveiv, Jwdusjfrire,
i.e. ferienda hostia facet -e fadus ; cf. JBochart (Hieroz. 1, 332) ;
whilst it is evident from Jej\_xxxiv. 18, that this was still
customary among the Israelites of later times. The choice of
sacrificial animals for a transaction which was not strictly a
sacrifice, was founded upon the symbolical significance of the
sacrificial animals, i.e. upon the fact that they represented and
took the place of those who offered them. In the case before
us, they were meant to typify the promised seed of Abram.
This would not hold good, indeed, if the cutting of the animals
had been merely intended to signify, that any who broke the
covenant would be treated like the animals that were there cut
in pieces. But there is no sure ground in Jer. xxxiv. 18 sqq.
for thus interpreting the ancient custom. The meaning which
the prophet there assigns to the symbolical usage, may be simply
a different application of it, which does not preclude an earlier
and different intention in the symbol. The division of the
animals probably denoted originally the two parties to the
covenant, and the passing of the latter through the pieces laid
opposite to one another, their formation into one ; a signification
to which the other might easily have been attacned as a further
consequence and explanation. And if in such a case the sacri-
ficial animals represented the parties to the covenant, so also
even in the present instance the sacrificial animals were fitted
for that purpose, since, although originally representing only the
owner or offerer of the sacrifice, by their consecration as sacri-
fices they were also brought into connection with Jehovah. But
in the case before us the animals represented Abram and his
seed, not in the fact of their being slaughtered, as significant of
the slaying of that seed, but only in what happened to and in
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XV. 1*-17. 215
connection with the slaughtered animals : birds of prey attempted
to eat them, and when extreme darkness came on, the glory of
God passed through them. As all the seed of Abram was con-
cerned, one of every kind of animal suitable for sacrifice was
taken, ut ex toto populo et singulis partibus sacrificium unurn\
Jieret (Calvin). The age of the animals, three years old, was
supposed by Theodoret to refer to the three generations of
Israel which were to remain in Egypt, or The three centuries
of captivity in a foreign land ; and this is rendered very probable
by the fact, that in Judg. vi. 25 the bullock of seven years old
undoubtedly refers to the seven years of Midianitish oppression.
On the other hand, we cannot find in the six halves of the three
animals and the undivided birds, either 7 things or the sacred
number 7, for two undivided birds cannot represent one whole,
but two ; nor can we attribute to the eight pieces any symbolical
meaning, for these numbers necessarily followed from the choice
of one specimen of every kind of animal that was fit for sacri-
fice, and from the division of the larger animals into two. — Ver.
11. " Then birds, of prey (p]V^ with the article, as chap. xiv. 13)
came down upon the carcases, and A bram frigldened them away."
The„.hirris jif-.prejr represented the_foes of .Israel^ who would
seek to eat up, i.e. exterminate it. And the fact that Abram
frightened them away was a sign, that Abram' s faith and his
relation to the Lord would preserve the whole of his posterity
from destruction, that Israel would be saved for Abram's sake
(Ps. cv. 42).
Vers. 12-17. " And when the sun was just about to go down
(on the construction, see Ges. § 132), and deep sleep (nDTW, as
in chap. ii. 21, a deep sleep produced by God) had fallen upon
Abram, behold there fell upon him terror, great darkness" The
vision here passes into a prophetic sleep produced by God. In
tmssTeep there fell upon Abram dread and darkness ; this is
shown by the interchange of the perfect rfa&i and the participle
JvBJ. The reference to the time is intended to show u the
supernatural character of the darkness and sleep, and the dis-
tinction between the vision and a dream" (0. v. Gerlach). It
also possesses a symbolical meaning. The setting oi the sun
prefigured to_ Abram the departtjre of the sun of grace, which
shone upon Israel, and the commencement of a dark and dread-
ful _peri<^of ^sufeiing-fnrJii&posterity, the very anticipation of
Digitized by VjOOQlC
21<? THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
which involved Abram in darkness. For the words which he
heard in the darkness were these (vers. 13 sqq.) : u Know of a
surety, that thy seed sliall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs,
and shall serve them (the lords of the strange land), and they (the
foreigners) shall oppress them 400 years" That these words
had reference to the sojourn of the children of Israel in Egypt,
is placed beyond all doubt by the fulfilment. T he 400 years
were, according to prophetic language, a round number for the
430 years that Israel spent in Egypt (Ex. xii. 40). " Also
that nation whom tliey shall serve will I judge (see the fulfilment,
Ex. vi. 11) ; and afterward shall they come out with great sub-
stance (the actual fact according to Ex. xii. 31-36). And thou
shalt go to thy fathers in peace, and be buried in a good old age
(cf. chap. xxv. 7, 8) ; and in Hie fourth generation they sliall come
hither again" The calculations are made here on the basis of a
hundred years to a generation : not too much for those times,
when the average duration of life was above 150 years, and
Isaac, was born in the hundredth year of Abraham's life. " For
the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full" ^.wionte^thfi-name
of the most powerful tribe of the Cana apites. is used here as_the
common nameoFTuTthe inhabitants of Canaan, just as in Josh,
xxiv. llT~(cfrx. 5),Tu3g. vi. 10, etc.).— By this revelation
Abram had the future history of his seed pointed out to him in
general outlines, and was informed at the same time why
neither he nor his descendants could obtain immediate posses-
sion of the promised land, viz. because the Canaanites were not
yet ripe for the sentence of extermination. — Ver. 17. When
the sun had gone down, and thick darkness had come on (HNi
impersonal), " behold a smoking furnace, and (with) a fiery
torch, which passed between those pieces" — a description of what
Abram saw in his deep prophetic sleep, corresponding to the
mysterious character of the whole proceeding. "WSlji, a stove, is
a cylindrical fire-pot, such as is used in the dwelling-houses of
the East. The phenomenon, which passed through the pieces
as they lay opposite to one another, resembled such a smoking
stove, from which a fiery torch, i.e. a brilliant flame, was
streaming forth. In this symbol Jehovah manifested Himself
to Abram, just as He afterwards did to the peopleof Israel in
the pillar of cloud and fire. Passing through the jpieces, He
ratified the covenant which He made with Abram. His glory
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XV. 18-J1. 217
was enveloped in fire and smoke, the product of the consuming
tire, — both symbols of the wrath of God (cf. Ps. xviii. 9, and
Hengstenberg in foe), whose fiery zeal consumes whatever
opposes it (vid. Ex. iii. 2). — To establish and give reality to the
covenant to be concluded with Abram, Jehovah would have
to pass through the seed of Abram when oppressed by the
Egyptians and threatened with destruction, and to execute
judgment upon their oppressors (Ex. vii. 4, xii. 12). In this
symbol, the passing of the Lord between the pieces meant
something altogether different from the oath of the Lord by
Himself in chap. xxii. 16, or by His life in Dent, xxxii. 40, or
by His soul in Amos vi. 8 and Jer. li. 14. It set before Abram
the condescension of the Lord to his seed, in the fearful glory
of His majesty as the judge of their foes. Hence the pieces
were not consumed by the fire ; for the transaction had refer-
ence not to a sacrifice, which God accepted, and in which the
soul of the offerer was to ascend in the smoke to God, but to a
covenant in which God came down to man. From the nature
of this covenant, it followed, however, that God alone went
through the pieces in a symbolical representation of Himself,
and not Abram also. For although a covenant always estab-
lishes a reciprocal relation between two individuals, yet in that
covenant which God concluded with a man, the man did not
stand on an equality with God, but God established the relation
of fellowship by His promise and His gracious condescension to
the man, who was at first purely a recipient, and was only
qualified and bound to fulfil the obligations consequent upon
the covenant by the reception of gifts of grace.
In vers. 18-21 this divine revelation is described as the mak-
ing of a covenant ("V}3, from Tia to cut, lit. the bond concluded
by cutting up the sacrificial animals), and the substance of this
covenant is embraced in the promise, that God would give that
land to the seed of Abram, from the river of Egypt to the great
river Euphrates. The river (i*u) of Egypt is the Nile, and not
the brook (fy"0) of Egypt (Num. xxxiv. 5), i.e. the boundary
stream Rhinocorura, Wady el Arish. According to the oratori-
cal-character of the promise, the two large rivers, the Nile and
the Euphrates, are mentioned as the boundaries within which
the* seed of Abram would possess the promised land, the exact
limits of which are more minutely described in the list of tho
pent. — VOL. T. p
Digitized by VjOOQlC
218 THE FIBST BOOK OF MOSES.
tribes who were then in possession. Ten tribes are mentioned
between the southern border of the land and the extreme north,
" to convey the impression of universality withoutjexception, of
unqualified completeness, the symbol of which i&_the-number
ten " (JDelitzsch). In other passages we find sometimes seven
tribes mentioned (Deut. vii. 1 ; Josh. iii. 10), at other times six
(Ex. iii. 8, 17, xxiii. 23 ; Deut. xx. 17), at others five (Ex. xiii.
5), at others again only two (chap. xiii. 7) ; whilst occasionally
they are all included in the common name of Canaanites (chap,
xn. 6). The absence of the Hivites is striking here, since they
are not omitted from any other list where as many as five or seven
tribes are mentioned. Out of the eleven descendants of Canaan
(chap. x. 15-18) the names of four only are given here ; the
others are included in the common name of Canaanites. On
the other hand, four tribes are given, whose descent from Canaan
is very improbable. The origin of the Kenites cannot be deter-
mined. According to Judg. i. 16, iv. 11, Hobab, the brother-
in-law of Moses, was a Kenite. His being called a Midianite
(Num. x. 29) does not prove that he was descended from Midian
(Gen. xxv. 2), but is to be accounted for from the fact that he
dwelt in the land of Midian, or among the Midianites (Ex. ii. 15).
This branch of the Kenites went with the Israelites to Canaan,
into the wilderness of Judah (Judg. i. 16), and dwelt even in
Saul's time among the Amalekites on the southern border of
Judah (1 Sam. xv. 6), and in the same towns with members of
the tribe of Judah (1 Sam. xxx. 29). There is nothing either
in this passage, or in Num. xxiv. 21, 22, to compel us to distin-
guish these Midianitish Kenites from those of Canaan. The
Philistines also were not Canaanites, and yet their territory was
assigned to the Israelites. And just as the Philistines had forced
their way into the land, so the Kenites may have taken posses-
sion of certain tracts of the country. All that can be inferred
from the two passages is, that there were Kenites outside Midian,
who were to be exterminated by the Israelites. On the Kenizzites,
all that can be affirmed with certainty is, that the name is neither
to be traced to the Edomitish Kenaz (chap, xxxvi. 15, 42), nor
to be identified with the Kenezite Jephunneh, the father of
Caleb of Judah (Num. xxxii. 12 ; Josh. xiv. 6 : see my Comm.
on Joshua, p. 356, Eng. tr.). — The Kadmonites are never men-
tioned again, and their origin cannot be determined. On the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XVI. 1-14. 219
Perizzites see chap. xiii. 7 ; on the Rephaims, chap. xiv. 5 ; and
on the other names, chap. x. 15, 16.
BIETH OF I8HMAEL. — CHAP. XVI.
Vers. 1—6. As the promise of a lineal heir (chap. xv. 4) did
not seem likely to be fulfilled, even after the covenant had been
made, Sarai resolved, ten years after their entrance into Canaan,
to give her Egyptian maid Hagar to her husband, that if possible
she might " be built up by her" i.e. obtain children, who might
found a house or family (chap. xxx. 3). The resolution seemed
a judicious one, and according to the customs of the East, there
would be nothing wrong in carrying it out. Hence_Abraham
consented without opposition, because, as Malachi (ii. 15) says,
he_sought the seed promised by God. But they were both of
them soon to learn, that their thoughts were the thoughts of man
and not of God, and that their wishes and actions were not in
accordance with the divine promise. Sarai, the originator of the
plan, was the first to experience its evil coriseqnences. When
the maid was with child by AbramT^ Tier mistress became little in
her eyes." When Sarai complained to Abram of the contempt
she received from her maid (saying, " My wrong" the wrong done
to me, " come upon thee" cf. Jer. Ii. 35 ; Gen. xxvii. 13), and
called upon Jehovah to judge between her and her husband, 1
Abram gave her full power to act as mistress towards her maid,
without raising the slave who was made a concubine above her
position. But as soon as Sarai made her feel her power, Hagar
fled. Thus, instead of securing the fulfilment of their wishes,
Sarai and Abram had reaped nothing but grief and vexation,
and apparently had lost the maid through their self-concerted
scheme. But the faithful covenant God turned the whole into
a blessing.
Vers. 7—14. Hagar no doubt intended to escape to Egypt by
a roadu sed from timeimme morial, thj tjSTlrom JttebroiTpast
be ersEeFa, *± by theway of Shur."—Shur, the present Jifar, is
the name given to thenorth-western portion of the desert of
Arabia (cf. Ex. xv. 22). There the angel of the Lord found
1 T^a, with a point over the second Jod, to show that it is irregular
and suspicious ; since pa with the singular suffix is always treated as a sin-
gular, and only with a plural suffix as plural.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
220 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES,
her by a well, and directed her to return to her mistress, and
submit to her ; at the same time he promised her the birth of a
son, and an innumerable multiplication of her descendants. As
the fruit of her womb was the seed of Abram, she was to return
to his house and there bear him a son, who, though not the seed
promised by God, would be honoured for Abram's sake with the
blessing of an innumerable posterity. For this reason also
Jehovah appeared to her in the form of the Angel of Jehovah
(cf. p. 129). rnn is adj. verb, as in chap, xxxviii. 24, etc. : " thou
art witli child and wilt bear ;" W? for nT* (chap. xvii. 19) is
found again in Judg. xiii. 5, 7. This son she was to caU Ishmaef
(" Go d hears "), "for Jehovah hath hearkened to thy distress"
^J? dffticuonem sine dubio vocat, quam Hagar afflictionem sentiebat
esse, netnpe conditionem servitem et quod castigata esset a Sara
(Luther). It was Jehovah, not Elohim, who had heard, although
the latter name was most naturally suggested as the explanation
of Ishmael, because the hearing, i.e. the multiplication of
llshmael's descendants, was the result of the covenant~grace of
I Jehovah. Moreover, in contrast with the oppression^ which she
had endured and still would endure, she received the promise
that her son would endure no such oppression. " HejeiUJje a
wild ass of a ma n." The figure of a K^B, onager, that wild and
untameable animal, roaming at its will in the desert, of which
so highly poetic a description is given in Job xxxix. 5—8, depicts
most aptly " the Bedouin's boundless love of freedom as he rides
about in the desert, spear in hand, upon his camel or his horse,
hardy, frugal, revelling in the varied beauty of nature, and de-
spising town life in every form ;" and the words, " his hand will
be against every man, and every man's hand against him," describe
most trnjy^themc£S5ant^tate^ofjfeud, in which the Ishmaelites
live with one another or with their neighbours. " He will dwell
before the face of all his brethren" \if bv denotes, it is true, to
the east of (cf. chap. xxv. 18), and this meaning is to be retained
/ here; but the geog ra phical n otice of the dwelling-place of the
Ishmaelites hardly~exhausts the force of the expression, which
also indicated that Ishmael would maintain a n indepen dent
- standing before (in the presence of) all the descendants of
Abraham. History has confirmed this promise. The Ish-
maelites have continued to this day in free and undiminished
possession of the extensive peninsula between the Euphrates, the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
JlAk<
CHAP. XVI. 7-14. 221
Straits of Suez, and the Red Sea, from which they have over-
spread both Northern Africa and Southern Asia. — Ver. 13.
In the angel, Hagar recognised God manifesting Himself to her,
the presence of Jehovah, and called Him, " Thou art a God of\
seeing; for she said, Have I also seen here after seeing ?" jS eliev - \ 0* y
i ng that a man must die if he saw God (Ex. xx. 19, xxxiii. 20), \ ^j
Ha gar w as astonished that she had seen God and remained
alive, and called Jehovah, who had spoken to her, "God of
seeing," i.e. who allows Himself to be seen, because here, on the
spot where this sight was granted her, after seeing she still saw,
i.e. remained alive. From this occurrence the well received
the name of " well of the seeing alive" i.e. at which a man saw
God and remained alive. B eer-lahai-r oi : according to Ewald,
'Ki VI is to be regarded as a composite noun, and ? as a sign of
the genitive ; but this explanation, in which ^xi is treated as a
pausal form of *iO, does not suit the form ^ with the accent
upon the last syllable, which points rather tq_the participle ntft
with the first pers. suffix. On this ground Delitzseh and others
have decided in favour of the interpretation given in the Chaldee 6*-^ '
version, " Thou_art^ God of jeeing^ i.e. the all-seeing, from
whose all-seeing eye the helpless and forsaken is not hidden even
in the farthest corner of the desert." "Have I not even here (in
the barren land of solitude) looked after Him, who saw met" and
Beer-lahai-roi, " the well of the Living One who sees me, i.e. of
the omnipresent Providence." But still greater difficulties lie in
the way of this view. It not only overthrows the close connection
between this and the similar passages chap, xxxii. 31, Ex. xxxiii.
20, Judg. xiii. 22, where the sight of God excites a fear of death,
but it renders the name, which the well received from this ap-
pearance of God, an inexplicable riddle. If Hagar called the
God who appeared to her »so btl because she looked after Him
whom she saw, i.e. as we must necessarily understand the word,
saw not His face, but only His back; how could it ever occur ^f [,
to her or to any one else, to caJMhe_jrellJBeer-Jahai-rbi, " well ) ,
o f. the Liv ing One, who sees me," instead of Beer-eKbTT^Sfore-
over, what completely overthrows this explanation, 4s the fact
that neither in Genesis nor anywhere in the P entate uch is God
called "the Living One ;" and throughout the Old Testament it
is only in contrast with the dead gods or idols of the heathen, a
contrast never thought of here, that the expressions VI D'iipM and
Digitized by VjOOQlC
VUJ.VJ
222 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
'P ?K occur, whilst *nn is never used in the Old Testament as a
name of God. For these reasons we must abide byjthe first ex-
planation, and change the reading *K*i into '^J. 1 With regard
to the well, it is still further added that it was between Kadesh
(xiv. 7) and Bered. Though Bered has not been discovered,
Rowland believes, with good reason, that he has found the well
of Hagar, which is mentioned again in chap. xxiv. 62, xxv. 11,
in the spring Ain Kades, to the south of Beersheba, at the lead-
ing place of encampment of the caravans passing from Syria to
Sinai, viz. Moyle, or Moilahi, or Muweilih (Robinson, Pal. i. p.
280), which the Arabs call Moilahi Hagar, and in the neigh-
bourhood of which they point out a rock Beit Hagar. Bered
must lie to the west of this.
Vers. 15—16. Having returned to Abram's house, Hagar bare
him a son in his 86th year. He gave it the name Ishmael, , and
re garded it probably as_ t he promi sed seed, until, t hirteen yea rs
afterwards, the counsel of God was morefclearly unfolded to him.
SEALING OP THE COVENANT BT THE GIVING OF NEW NAMES
AND BY THE RITE OF CIRCUMCISION. — CHAP. XVII.
Vers. 1-14. The covena nt had been made with Abram for
a t least fou rteen years, and yet Abram remained without any
visible sign of its accomplishment, and was merely pointed in
faith to the inviolable character of the promise of God. Jeho-
vah now appeared to Him again, when he was ninety-nine years
old, twe nty-four yea rs .after his migration, and thirteen after the
birth of Ishmael, to give effect to the covenant and prepare for
its execution. Having come down to Abram in a visible form
(ver 22), He said to him, "lam Ej^Shaddai (almighty God):
walk before Me and be blameless." At the establishment of the
1 The objections to this chaDge in the accentuation are entirely counter-
balanced by the grammatical difficulty connected with the second explana-
tion. If, for example, <so is a participle with the 1st pen. suff., it should
be written ys*l (Isa. xxix. 15) or y&h (Isa. xlvii. 10). *vh cannot mean,
" who sees me," but "my s<vr," an expression utterly inapplicable to God,
which cannot be supported by a reference to Job vii. 8, for the accentuation
varies there ; and the derivation of 'Kh from <tn " eye of the seeing," for
the eye which looks after me, is apparently fully warranted by the analo-
gous expression rrh rtt?K in Jer. xiii. 21.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XVIL 1-14.
223
covenant, God had manifested Himself to him as Jehovah (xv.
7); here Jehovah describes Himself as El Shaddai, God the
Mighty One. ^^from T\& t o be strong, with the substantive
termination ai, like *»n the festal, **?& the old man, VD the
thorn-grown, etc. This name is not to be regarded as identical
with Elohim, that is to say, with God as Creator and Preserver
of the world, although in simple narrative Elohim is used for
El Shaddai, which is only employed in the more elevated and
solemn style of writing. ^Jbelonged to the sphere_ofsalvation,
fo rming on e element in the manifestation of Jehovah, and de-
scribing JeEovanJ the coverianfGod, as possessing the power to
realize His promises, even when the order of nature presented
no prospect of their fulfilment, and the powers of nature were
insufficient to secure it. The name which Jehovah thus gave
to Himself was to be a pledge, that in spite of " his own body
now dead," and "the deadness of Sarah's womb" (Bom. iv. 19),
God could and would give him the promised innumerable pos-
terity. On the other hand, God required this of Abram, " Walk
b eforeMe (cf. chap. v. 22") a nd be blameless" ( vi. 9\. " Just as right-
eousness received in faith was necessary for the establishment of
the covenant, so a blameless walk before God was required for the
maintenance and confirmation of the covenant." This introduction
is followed by a more definite account of the new revelation ; first
of the promise involved in the new name of God (vers. 2-8), and
then of the obligation imposed upon Abram (vers. 9-14). " /
will give My covenant" says the Almighty, " between Me and thee,
and multiply thee exceedingly." nnjjro^ signifies, not to make a
covenant, but to give, to put, i.e. t o realize^to set in operation
t he things prom ised in the covenant — equivalent to setting up
the covenant (cf. ver. 7 and ix. 12 with ix. 9). This promise
Abram appropriated to himself by falling upon his face in wor-
ship, upon which God still further expounded the nature of the j ' iA,
covenant about to be executed. — Ver. 4. On the part of God "f/'v '
('IK placed at the beginning absolutely: so far as I am concerned,
for my part) it was to consist of this : (1) that God would, make
A bram the father (3K instead of H 3K chosen with reference to
the name Abram) of~a multitude o f nations, the ancestor of
nations and kings; (2) t hat He would be Gqd * show Himself to
be God, in an eternal covenant relation, to him_andj to his pos-
teri^according to their families, according to all their succes-
/
Digitized by
Google
1
224 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
sive generations ; and (3) that He would give them the land in
which lie had wandered as a foreigner, viz. all' Cana alyFor an
everlasting possession. As a pledge of this promise God changed
I his na me D*ptt. i.e. high father,, into P^ffM, »•<• father of t he
VW) mu ltitude , from 3N and D>Ti, Arab, ruhdm = multitude. In this
— name God gave him a tangible pledge of the fulfilment of His
covenant, inasmuch as a name which God gives cannot be a
mere empty sound, but must be the expression of something
real, or eventually acquire reality. — Vers. 9 sqq. On the part of
I . w \. ^ j Abraham (nnw thou, the antithesis to ^N., as for me, ver. 4) God
' ~ required that he and his descendants in all generations should
. l,vv keep the covenant, and that as a sign he should circumcise him-
self and every male in his house. Tto? Niph. of 7*0, and DFTO3
per/. Niph. for Of^M, from 77D=7tts. As the sign of the covenant,
circumcision is called in ver. 13, "the covenantj n th e flesh" so
far as the nature of the covenant was manifested in the flesh.
It was to be extended not only to the seed, the lineal descend-
ants of Abraham, but to all the males in his house, even to
every foreign slave not belonging to the seed of Abram, whether
born in the house or acquired (i.e. bought) with money, and to
the " son of eight days," i.e. the male child eight days old ; with
the threat that the uncircumcised should be exterminated from
his people, because by neglecting circumcision he had broken
the covenant with God. The form of speech NVinjsjwn ___nrna),
by which many of the laws are enforced (cf. Ex. xii. 15, 19 ;
Lev. vii. 20, 21, 25, etc.), denotes not rejection from the
nation, or banishment, but death, whether by a direct judgment
from God, an untimely deatlTat the hand of God, or by the
punishment of death inflicted by the congregation or the magis-
trates, and that whether no? niD is added, as in Ex. xxxi. 14,
etc, or not. This is very evident from Lev. xvii. 9, 10, where
the extermination to be effected by the authorities is distinguished
from that to be executed by God Himself (see my biblische
Arch&ohgie ii. § 153, 1). In this sense we sometimes find, in the
place of the earlier expression "from his people" i.e. his nation,
such expressions as "from among his people" (Lev. xvii. 4, 10;
Num. xv. 30), "from Israel" (Ex. xii. 15 ; Num. xix. 13), " from
the congregation of Israel" (Ex. xii. 19); and instead of "that
soul," in Lev. xvii. 4, 9 (cf. Ex. xxx. 33, 38), we find "that man."
Vers. 15-21. The appointment of the sign of the covenant
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XVII. 15-2L 225
was followed by this further revelation as to the promised seed,
that Abra m would receive it thr ough his wife Sarai. In confir-
mation of this her exalted destiny, she was no longer to be called
Sarai (*}& , probably from Tie> with the termination at, the / ,
princely), b ut rntP f tbe prince ss ; for she was to become nations, \
themother of kings of nations. Abraham then fell upon his face
and laughed, saying in himself {i.e. thinking), " Shall a child be
born to him that is a hundred years old, or shall SaraJi, that is
ninety years old, bear?" " The promise was so immensely great,
th at he sank inadoration to the ground, and so immensely para-
d oxical, th at he could not~Eelp laughing" {Del.). " Not that he
ei ther ridiculed the promise of God, or treated it as a fable, or
re jected it al together; but, as often happens when thing3 occur
w hich ar e least expected, partly lifted up with joy, partly carried
out of himself with wonder, he burst out into laughter" (Calvin).
In this joyous amazement he said to God (ver. 18), " that
Ishmael might live before Thee ! " To regard these words, with
Calvin and others, as intimating that he should be satisfied with
the prosperity of Ishmael, as though he durst not hope for any-
thing higher, is hardly sufficient. The prayer implies anxiety, Vl*fy
l est Ishmael shonld hxvp. no part in the blessings of the covenant. -^
God answers, " Yes («K into), Sara/t thy wife bears tliee a son,
and thou vrilt call his name Isaac (according to the Greek form
'Icradie, for the Hebrew plTf, i.e. laugher, with reference to
Abraham's laughing; ver. 17, cf. xxi. 6), and I will establish My
covenant with him" i.e. make him the recipient of the covenant
grace. And the prayer for Ishmael God would also grant : He
would mak e him very fruitful, so that he should .beget Jtwelve
princfia_and_b?come a great nation. But the covenant, God
repeated (ver. 21), should be established with Isaac, whom
Sarah was to bear to him at that very time in the following
year. — Since Ishmael therefore was excluded from participating
in the covenant grace, which was ensured to Isaac alone ; and
yet Abraham was to become a multitude of nations, and that
through Sarah, who was to become " nations " through the son
she was to bear (ver. 16); the "multitude of nations" could
not include either the Ishmaelites or the tribes descended from
the sons of Keturah (chap. xxv. 2 sqq.), but the descendants of
Isaac alone ; and as one of Isaac's two sons received no part of
the covenant promise, the descendants of Jacob alone. But the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
226
THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
whole of the twelve sons of Jacob founded only the one nation
of Israel, with which Jehovah established the covenant made
with Abraham (Ex. vi. and xx.-xxiv.), so that Abraham
became through Israel the lineal father of one n ation only.
From thj sjtenecessarily follows, that the posterity of Abraham,
whi ch was to e xpand into a multitude of nations, extends be-
yojuL^thjs one lineal posterity, and embraces the_jspiritual
posterity__ajso, i.e. all nations who are grafted 4k 7rtorea>?
'jQpaajA into the seed of Abraham (Rom. iv. If, 12, and
16, 17). Moreover, the fact that the seed of Abraham was
not to be restricted to his lineal descendants, is evident from
the fact, that circumcision as the covenant sign was not con-
fined to them, but extended to all the inmates of his house, so
that these strangers were received into the fellowship of the
covenant, and reckoned as part of the promised seed. Now, if
the whole land of Canaan was promised to this posterity, which
was to increase into a multitude of nations (ver. 8), it is per-
fectly evident, from what has just been said, that the sum and
substance of the promise was not exhausted by the gift of the
land, whose boundaries are described in chap. xv. 18-21, as a
possession to the nation of Israel, but that the extension of the
idea of the lineal posterity, " Israel after the flesh," to the spi-
ritual posterity, " Israel after the spirit," requires the expansion
of the idea and extent of the earthly Canaan to the full extent
of the spiritual Canaan, whose boundaries reach as widely as the
multitude of nations having Abraham as father ; and, therefore,
that in reality Abraham received the promise " that he should
be the heir of the world" (Rom. iv. 13). 1
And what is true of the seed of Abraham and the land of
Canaan must also hold good of the covenant and the covenant sign.
1 What stands out clearly in this promise — viz. the fact that the expres-
sions " seed of A braham " (people of Israel) and ' ' land of Canaan " are not
exhausted in the physical Israel and earthly Canaan, but are to be under-
stood spiritually, Israel and Canaan acquiring the typical significance of the
people of God and land of the Lord — is still further expanded by the pro-
phets, and most distinctly expressed in the New Testament by Christ and
the apostles. This scriptural and spiritual interpretation of the Old Testa-
ment is entirely overlooked by those who, like Auberlen, restrict all the
promises of God and the prophetic proclamations of salvation to the phy-
sical Israel, and reduce the application of them to the " Israel after the
spirit," i.e. to believing Christendom, to a mere accommodation.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVII. 22-27.
227
Eterna l duration was promised only to the covenant established
by God with the seed of Abraham, which was to grow into a
multitude of nations, b nt not t o the covena nt instit ution which
God establishe d in f»njriTuytipn wi th fli p linga] poftterity_£if Ahrn.
harn^ the twelve tribes of Israel. Everything in this institution
which was of a local and limited character, and only befitted the
physical Israel and the earthly Canaan, existed only so long as
was necessary for the seed of Abraham to expand into a multi-
tude of nations. So again it was only in its essence that circum-
cision could be a sign of the eternal covenant. Circumcision,
whether it passed from Abraham to other nations, or sprang up
among other nations independently of Abraham and his descend-
ants (see my Archaologie, § 63, 1), was based upon the religious
view, that the sin and moral impurity which the fall of Adam
had introduced into the nature of man had concentrated itself
in the sexual organs, because it is in sexual life that it generally
manifests itself with peculiar force ; and, consequently, that for
the sanctification of life, a purification or sanctification of the
organ of generation, by which life is propagated, is especially re-
quired. In this way circumcision in the flesh became a sym-
bol of the circumcision, i.e. the purification, of the heart (Deut.
x. 16, xxx. 6, cf. Lev. xxvi. 41, Jer. iv. 4, ix. 25, Ezek. xliv. 7),
and a covenant sign to those who received it, inasmuch as they
were received into the fellowship of the holy nation (Ex. xix. 6),
and required to sanctify their lives, in other words, to fulfil all
that the covenant demanded. It was to be performed on every
boy on the eighth day after its birth, not because the child, like
its mother, remains so long in a state of impurity, but because,
as the analogous rule with regard to the fitness of young animals
for sacrifice would lead us to conclude, this was regarded as the
first day of independent existence (Lev. xxii. 27 ; Ex. xxii. 29 ;
see my Archdologie, § 63).
Vers. 22-27. When God had finished His address and as-
cended again, Abraham immediately fulfilled the covenant duty
enjoined upon him, by circumcising himself on that very day,
along with all the male members of his house. Because Ishmael
was 13 years old when he was circumcised, the Arabs even now
defer circumcision to a much later period than the Jews, gene-
rally till between the ages of 5 and 13, and frequently even till
the 13th year.
%
Digitized by
Google
228 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
VISIT OF JEHOVAH, WITH TWO ANGELS, TO ABRAHAM S TENT.
CHAP. XVIII.
Having been received into the covenant with God through
the rite of circumcision, Abraham was shortly afterwards hon-
oured by being allowed to receive and entertain the Lord and
two angels in his tent. This fresh manifestation of God had a
double purpose, viz. to establish Sarah's faith in the promise
that she should bear a son in her old age (vers. 1-15), and to
announce the judgment on Sodom and Gomorrah (vers. 16-33).
Vers. 1-15. When sitting, about mid-day, in the grove of
Mamre, in front of his tent, Abraham looked up and unexpect-
edly saw three men standing at some distance from him (V?V
above him, looking down upon him as he sat), vi2. Jehovah (ver.
13) and two angels (xix. 1) ; all three in human form. Per-
ceiving at once that one of them was the Lord ('J^S, t.e. God),
he prostrated himself reverentially before them, and entreated
them not to pass him by, but to suffer him to entertain them as
his guests : " Let a little water be fetched, and wash your feet, and
recline yourselves ($>&>} to recline, leaning upon the arm) under
the tree." — " Comfort your hearts ;" lit. " strengthen the heart,"
i.e. refresh yourselves by eating and drinking (Judg. xix. 5 ;
1 Kings xxi. 7). "For therefore («c. to give me an opportunity to
entertain you hospitably) have ye come over to your servant :" '?
15 by does not stand for '3 t? ?? (Ges. thes. p. 682), but means
" because for this purpose" (vid. Ewald, § 353). — Vers. 6 sqq.
When the three men had accepted the hospitable invitation,
Abraham, jnst like a Bedouin sheikh of the present day, directed
his wife to take three seahs (374 cubic inches each) of fine meal,
and b?ke cakes of it as quickly as possible (T\\i^ round un-
leavened cakes baked upon hot stones) ; he also had a tender
calf killed, and sent for milk and butter, or curdled milk, and
thus prepared a bountiful and savoury meal, of which the guests
partook. The eating of material food on the part of these
heavenly beings was not in appearance only, but was really
eating; an act which may be attributed to the corporeality
assumed, and is to be regarded as analogous to the eating on the
part of the risen and glorified Christ (Luke xxiv. 41 sqq.),
although the miracle still remains physiologically incomprehen-
sible. — Vers. 9-15. During the meal, at which Abraham stood.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XVIIL 16-88. 229
and waited upon them as the host, they asked for Sarah, for
whom the visit was chiefly intended. On being told that she
was in the tent, where she could hear, therefore, all that passed
under the tree in front of the tent, the one whom Abraham ad-
dressed as Adonai (my Lord), and who is called Jehovah in
ver. 13, said, "I will return to thee (Wi njQ) at this time, when it
lives again" (HJRJ reviviscens, without the article, Ges. § 111, 2b),
i.e. at this time next year ; " and, behold, Sarah, thy wife, will
(then) have a son." Sarah heard this at the door of the tent ;
"and it was behind Him" (Jehovah), so that she could not be
seen by Him as she stood at the door. But as the fulfilment of
this promise seemed impossible to her, on account of Abraham's
extreme age, and the fact that her own womb had lost the
power of conception, she laughed within herself, thinking that
she was not observed; But that she might know that the pro-
mise was made by the omniscient and omnipotent God, He
reproved her for laughing, saying, " Is anything too wonderful
(i.e. impossible) for Jelwvali t at the time appointed I will return
unto thee," etc. ; and when her perplexity led her to deny it, He
convicted her of falsehood. Abraham also had laughed at this
promise (chap. xvii. 17), and without receiving any reproof. For
his laughing was the joyous outburst of astonishment ; Sarah's,
on the contrary, the result of doubt and unbelief, which had to
be broken down by reproof, and, as the result showed, really was
broken down, inasmuch as she conceived and bore a son, whom
she could only have conceived in faith (Heb. xi. 11).
Vers. 16-33. After this conversation with Sarah, the hea-
venly guests rose up and turned their faces towards the plain of
Sodom ('JB ??, as in chap. xix. 28 ; Num. xxi. 20, xxiii. 28).
Abraham accompanied them some distance on the road ; accord-
ing to tradition, he went as far as the site of the later Caphar
barucha, from which you can see the Dead Sea through a ravine,
— 8olitudinem ac terras Sodomce. And Jehovah said, " Shall I
hide from Abraham what I propose to do ? Abraham is destined
to be a great nation and a blessing to all nations (xii. 2, 3) ; for
I have known, i.e. acknowledged him (chosen him in anticipative
love, Vjl as in Amos iii. 2 ; Hos. xiii. 4), that he may command
his whole posterity to keep the way of Jehovah, to practise
justice and righteousness, that all the promises may be fulfilled
in them." God then disclosed to Abraham what he was about
Digitized by VjOOQlC
230 THE FIRST BOOK OF HOSES.
to do to Sodom and Gomorrah, not, as Kurtz supposes, because
Abraham had been constituted the hereditary possessor of the
land, and Jehovah, being mindful of His covenant, would not
do anything to it without his knowledge and assent (a thought
quite foreign to the context), but because Jehovah had chosen
him to be the father of the people of God, in order that, by in-
structing his descendants in the fear of God, he might lead them
in the paths of righteousness, so that they might become par-
takers of the promised salvation, and not be overtaken by judg-
ment. The destruction of Sodom and the surrounding cities
was to be a permanent memorial of the punitive righteousness
of God, and to keep the fate of the ungodly constantly before
the mind of Israel. To this end Jehovah explained to Abraham
the cause of their destruction in the clearest manner possible,
that he might not only be convinced of the justice of the divine
government, but might learn that when the measure of iniquity
was full, no intercession could avert the judgment, — a lesson
and a warning to his descendants also. — Ver. 20. " The cry of
Sodom and Gomorrah, yea it is great ; and their sin, yea it is
very grievous." The cry is the appeal for vengeance or punish-
ment, which ascends to heaven (chap. iv. 10). The '? serves to
give emphasis to the assertion, and is placed in the middle of the
sentence to give the greater prominence to the leading thought
(cf. Ewald, § 330). — Ver. 21. God was about to go down, and
convince Himself whether they had done entirely according to
the cry which had reached Him, or not. '"TO <v&y, Ut. to make
completeness, here referring to the extremity of iniquity, gene-
rally to the extremity of punishment (Nahum i. 8, 9 ; Jer. iv.
27, v. 10) : n?| is a noun, as Isa. x. 23 shows, not an adverb, as
in Ex. xi. 1. After this explanation, the men (according to
chap. xix. 1, the two angels) turned from thence to go to Sodom
(ver. 22) ; but Abraham continued standing before Jehovah,
who had been talking with him, and approached Him with ear-
nestness and boldness of faith to intercede for Sodom. He was
urged to this, not by any special interest in Lot, for in that case
he would have prayed for his deliverance ; nor by the circum-
stance that, as he had just before felt himself called upon to
become the protector, avenger, and deliverer of the land from
its foes, so he now thought himself called upon to act as medi-
ator, and to appeal from Jehovah's judicial wrath to Jehovah's
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XVIII. 16-88. 231
covenant grace (Kurtz), for he had not delivered the land from
the foe, hut merely rescued his nephew Lot and all the booty that
remained after the enemy had withdrawn ; nor did he appeal to
the covenant grace of Jehovah, but to His justice alone ; and on
the principle that the Judge of all the earth could not possibly
destroy the righteous with the wicked, he founded his entreaty
that God would forgive the city if there were but fifty righteous
in it, or even if there were only ten. He was led to intercede
in this way, not by "communis erga quinque populos miseri-
cordia" (Calvin), but by the love which springs from the con-
sciousness that one's own preservation and rescue are due to
compassionate grace alone ; love, too, which cannot conceive of
the guilt of others as too great for salvation to be possible. This
sympathetic love, springing from the faith which was counted
for righteousness, impelled him to the intercession which Luther
thus describes : " sexies petiit, et cum tanto ardore ac affectu sic
urgente, ut prce nimia angustia, qua cupit consultum miseris civi-
tatibus, videatur quasi stulte loqui." There may be apparent
folly in the words, " Wilt Thou also destroy the righteous with the
wicked f" but they were only " violenta oratio et impetuosa, quasi
cogens Deum ad ignoscendum" For Abraham added, " perad-
venture there be fifty righteous within the city ; wilt Thou also
destroy and not forgive ("tw, to take away and bear the guilt,
i.e. forgive) the place for the fifty righteous that are therein ?"
and described the slaying of the righteous with the wicked as
irreconcilable with the justice of God. He knew that he was
speaking to the Judge of all the earth, and that before Him he
was " but dust and ashes" — " dust in his origin, and ashes in the
end ;" and yet he made bold to appeal still further, and even as
low as ten righteous, to pray that for their sake He would spare
the city. — DVBn ?|K (ver. 32) signifies " only this (one) time more,"
as in Ex. x. 17. This " seemingly commercial kind of entreaty
is," as Delitzsch observes, " the essence of true prayer. It is
the holy avalBeta, of which our Lord speaks in Luke xi. 8, the
shamelessne8s of faith, which bridges over the infinite distance
of the creature from the Creator, appeals with importunity to
the heart of God, and ceases not till its point is gained. This
would indeed be neither permissible nor possible, had not God,
by virtue of the mysterious interlacing of necessity and freedom
in His nature and operations, granted a power to the prayer of
Digitized by VjOOQlC
232 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
faith, to which He consents to yield ; had He not, bj virtue of
His absoluteness, which is anything but blind necessity, placed
Himself in such a relation to men, that He not merely works
upon them by means of His grace, but allows them to work
upon Him by means of their faith ; had He not interwoven the
life of the free creature into His own absolute life, and accorded
to a created personality the right to assert itself in faith, in dis-
tinction from His own." With the promise, that even for the
sake of ten righteous He would not destroy the city, Jehovah
" went His way," that is to say, vanished ; and Abraham re-
turned to his place, viz. to the grove of Mamre. The judgment
which fell upon the wicked cities immediately afterwards, proves
that there were not ten " righteous persons" in Sodom ; by which
we understand, not merely ten sinless or holy men, but ten who
through the fear of God and conscientiousness had kept them-
selves free from the prevailing sin and iniquity of these cities.
INIQUITY AND DESTRUCTION OF SODOM. ESCAPE OF LOT,
AND HIS SUBSEQUENT HISTORY. — CHAP. XIX.
Vers. 1-11. The messengers (angels) sent by Jehovah to
Sodom, arrived there in the evening, when Lot, who was sitting
at the gate, pressed them to pass the night in his house. The
gate, generally an arched entrance with deep recesses and seats
on either side, was a place of meeting in the ancient towns of
the East, where the inhabitants assembled either for social inter-
course or to transact public business (vid. chap, xxxiv. 20; Deut.
xxi. 19, xsdi. 15, etc.). The two travellers, however (for such
Lot supposed them to be, and only recognised them as angels
when they had smitten the Sodomites miraculously with blind-
ness), said that they would spend the night in the street — 3in")3
the broad open space within the gate — as they had been sent to
inquire into the state of the town. But they yielded to Lot's
entreaty to enter his house; for the deliverance of Lot, after
having ascertained his state of mind, formed part of their
commission, and entering into his house might only serve to
manifest the sin of Sodom in all its heinousness. While Lot
was entertaining his guests with the greatest hospitality, the
people of Sodom gathered round his house, u both old and young,
all people from every quarter" (of the town, as in Jer. li. 31), and
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XIX. 14-22. 233
demanded, with the basest violation of the sacred rite of hos-
pitality and the most shameless proclamation of their sin (Isa.
iii. 9), that the strangers should be brought out, that they
might know them. VT T is applied, as in Judg. xix. 22, to the
carnal sin of poederastia, a crime very prevalent among the
Canaanites (Lev. xviii. 22 sqq., xx. 23), and according to
Horn. i. 27, a curse of heathenism generally. — Vers. 6 sqq.
Lot went out to them, shut the door behind him to protect
his guests, and offered to give his virgin daughters up to
them. " Only to these men (?«n, an archaism for "2*% t occurs
also in ver. 25, chap. xxvi. 3, 4, Lev. xviii. 27, and Deut.
iv. 42, vii. 22, xix. 11 ; and ?K for r&K in 1 Ohron. xx. 8) do
nothing, for tlierefore (viz. to be protected from injury) have
they come under the shadow of my roof." In his anxiety, Lot
was willing to sacrifice to the sanctity of hospitality his duty as
a father, which ought to have been still more sacred, " and com-
mitted the sin of seeking to avert sin by sin." Even if he ex-
pected that his daughters would suffer no harm, as they were
betrothed to Sodomites (ver. 14), the offer was a grievous viola-
tion of his paternal duty. But this offer only heightened the
brutality of the mob. " Stand back " (make way, Isa. xlix. 20),
they said ; " the man, who came as a foreigner, is always wanting
to play the judge" (probably because Lot had frequently reproved
them for their licentious conduct, 2 Pet. ii. 7, 8) : " now will we
deal worse with thee than with them." With these words they
pressed upon him, and approached the door to break it in. The
men inside, that is to say, the angels, then pulled Lot into the
house, shut the door, and by miraculous power smote the people
without with blindness (D*TO? here and 2 Kings vi. 18 for
mental blindness, in which the eye sees, but does not see the
right object), as a punishment for their utter moral blindness,
and an omen of the coming judgment.
Vers. 12-22. The sin of Sodom had now become manifest.
The men, Lot's guests, made themselves known to him as the
messengers of judgment sent by Jehovah, and ordered him to
remove any one that belonged to him out of the city. " Son-
in-law (the singular without the article, because it is only
assumed as a possible circumstance that he may have sons-in-
law), and thy sons, and thy daughters, and all that belongs to tliee"
(sc. of persons, not of things). Sons Lot does not appear to
tent. — VOL. I. Q
Digitized by VjOOQlC
234 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
have had, as we read nothing more about them, but only " sons
in-law (Wfi* '0?') wno t0 « r « about to take his daughters" as
Josephus, the Vulgate, Ewald, and many others correctly render
it. The LXX., Targums, Knobel, and Delitzsch adopt the ren-
dering " who had taken his daughters," in proof of which the
last two adduce JitnttMii in ver. 15 as decisive. But without
reason; for this refers not to the daughters who were still in the
father's house, as distinguished from those who were married,
but to his wife and two daughters who were to be found with
him in the house, in distinction from the bridegrooms, who also
belonged to him, but were not yet living with him, and who
had received his summons in scorn, because in their carnal secu-
rity they did not believe in any judgment of God (Luke xvii.
28, 29). If Lot had had married daughters, he would un-
doubtedly have called upon them to escape along with their
husbands, his sons-in-law. — Ver. 15. As soon as it was dawn,
the angels urged Lot to hasten away with his family; and
when he still delayed, his heart evidently clinging to the earthly
home and possessions which he was obliged to leave, they laid
hold of him, with his wife and his two daughters, v?y rftv roona,
" by virtue of the sparing mercy of Jehovah (which operated)
upon him" and led him out of the city. — Ver. 17. When they
left him here (?T*?» to let loose, and leave, to leave to one's
self), the Lord commanded him, for the sake of his life, not to
look behind him, and not to stand still in all the plain (133,
xiii. 10), but to flee to the mountains (afterwards called the
mountains of Moab). In ver. 17 we are struck by the change
from the plural to the singular : " when they brought them
forth, lie said." To think of one of the two angels — the one, for
example, who led the conversation — seems out of place, not only
because Lot addressed him by the name of God, " Adonai"
(ver. 18), but also because the speaker attributed to himself the
judgment upon the cities (vers. 21, 22), which is described in ver.
24 as executed by Jehovah. Yet there is nothing to indicate
that Jehovah suddenly joined the angels. The only supposi-
tion that remains, therefore, is that Lot recognised in the two
angels a manifestation of God, and so addressed them (ver. 18) as
Adonai (my Lord), and that the angel who spoke addressed him
as the messenger of Jehovah in the name of God, without its
following from this, that Jehovah was present in the two angels.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XIX 28-28. 235
Lot, instead of cheerfully obeying the commandment of the
Lord, appealed to the great mercy shown to him in the preser-
vation of his life, and to the impossibility of his escaping to the
mountains, without the evil overtaking him, and entreated
therefore that he might be allowed to take refuge in the small
and neighbouring city, i.e. in JBela, which received the name of
Zoar (chap. xiv. 2) on account of Lot's calling it little. Zoar,
the Svy^P of the LXX., and Segor of the Crusaders, is hardly
to be sought for on the peninsula which projects a long way
into the southern half of the Dead Sea, in the Ghor of el
Mezraa, as Irby and Robinson (Pal. iii. p. 481) suppose; it is
much more probably to be found on the south-eastern point of
the Dead Sea, in the Ghor of el Szaphia, at the opening of
the Wady el Ahsa (yid. v. Raumer, Pal. p. 273, Anm. 14).
Vers. 23-28. " When the sun had risen and Lot had come
towards Zoar (i.e. was on the way thither, but had not yet
arrived), Jehovah caused it to rain brimstone and fire from Je-
hovah out of heaven, and overthrew those cities, and the whole
plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and the produce of the
earth." In the words "Jehovah caused it to rain from Je-
hovah " there is no distinction implied between the hidden and
the manifested God, between the Jehovah present upon earth
in His angels who called down the judgment, and the Jehovah
enthroned in heaven who sent it down; but the expression "from
Jehovah " is emphatica repetitio, quod non usitato natures ordine
tune Dens pluerit, sed tanquam exerta menu palam fulminaverit
prater solitum morem : ut satis constaret nullis causis naturalibus
conflatam ftdsse pluviam iUam ex igne et sulphur e {Calvin). The
rain of fire and brimstone was not a mere storm with lightning,
which set on fire the soil already overcharged with naphtha and
sulphur. The two passages, Ps. xi. 6 and Ezek. xxxviii. 22,
cannot be adduced as proofs that lightning is ever called fire
and brimstone in the Scriptures, for in both passages there is
an allusion to the event recorded here. The words are to be
understood quite literally, as meaning that brimstone and fire,
ue. burning brimstone, fell from the sky, even though the ex-
amples of burning bituminous matter falling upon the earth
which are given in Oedmann's vermischte Sammlungen (iii. 120)
may be called in question by historical criticism. By this rain
of fire and brimstone not only were the cities and their inhabi-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
236 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
tants consumed, but even the soil, which abounded in asphalt,
was set on fire, so that the entire valley was burned out and
sank, or was overthrown (i|Bn) i.e. utterly destroyed, and the
Dead Sea took its place. 1 In addition to Sodom, which was
probably the chief city of the valley of Siddim, Gomorrah and
the whole valley (t'.e. the valley of Siddim, chap. xiv. 3) are
mentioned ; and along with these the cities of Admah and Ze-
boim, which were situated in the valley (Deut. xxix. 23, cf . Hos.
xi. 8), also perished, Zoar alone, which is at the south-eastern end
of the valley, being spared for Lot's sake. Even to the present
day the Dead Sea, with the sulphureous vapour which hangs
about it, the great blocks of saltpetre and sulphur which lie
on every hand, and the utter absence of the slightest trace of
animal and vegetable life in its waters, are a striking testimony
to this catastrophe, which is held up in both the Old and New
Testaments as a fearfully solemn judgment of God for the
warning of self-secure and presumptuous sinners. — Ver. 26. On
the way, Lot's wife, notwithstanding the divine command, looked
" behind him away" — i.e. went behind her husband and looked
backwards, probably from a longing for the house and the
earthly possessions she had left with reluctance (cf. Luke xvii,
31, 32), — and " became a pillar of salt." We are not to suppose
that she was actually turned into one, but having been killed by
the fiery and sulphureous vapour with which the air was filled,
and afterwards encrusted with salt, she resembled an actual
statue of salt ; just as even now, from the saline exhalation of
the Dead Sea, objects near it are quickly covered with a crust
of salt, so that the fact, to which Christ refers in Luke xvii. 32,
may be understood without supposing a miracle. 2 — In vers. 27,
1 Whether the Dead Sea originated in this catastrophe, or whether there
was previously a lake, possibly a fresh water lake, at the north of the valley
of Siddim, which was enlarged to the dimensions of the existing sea by the
destruction of the valley with its cities, and received its present character
at the same time, is a question which has been raised, since Capt. Lynch has
discovered by actual measurement the remarkable fact, that the bottom of the
lake consists of two totally different levels, which are separated by a penin-
sula that stretches to a very great distance into the lake from the eastern
shore ; so that whilst the lake to the north of this peninsula is, on an
average, from 1000 to 1200 feet deep, the southern portion is at the most
16 feet deep, and generally much less, the bottom being covered with salt
mud, and heated by hot springs from below.
* But when this pillar of salt is mentioned in Wisdom xi. 7 and Clemens
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XIX. 29-88. 237
28, the account closes with a remark which points back to chap,
rviii. 17 sqq., viz. that Abraham went in the morning to the
place where he had stood the day before, interceding with the
Lord for Sodom, and saw how the judgment had fallen upon
the entire plain, since the smoke of the country went up like
the smoke of a furnace. Yet his intercession had not been in
vain.
Vers. 29-38. For on the destruction of these cities, God had
thought of Abraham, and rescued Lot. This rescue is attributed
to Elohim, as being the work of the Judge of the whole earth
(chap, xviii. 25), and not to Jehovah the covenant God, because
Lot was severed from His guidance and care on his separation
from Abraham. The fact, however, is repeated here, for the
purpose of connecting with it an event in the life of Lot of
great significance to the future history of Abraham's seed. — Vers.
30 sqq. From Zoar Lot removed with his two daughters to the
(Moabitish) mountains, for fear that Zoar might after all be
destroyed, and dwelt in one of the caves ("P^o with the generic
article), in which the limestone rocks abound (vid. Lynch), and
so became a dweller in a cave. While there, his daughters re-
solved to procure children through their father ; and to that end
on two successive evenings they made him intoxicated with wine,
and then lay with him in the night, one after the other, that
they might conceive seed. To this accursed crime they were
impelled by the desire to preserve their family, because they
thought there was no man on the earth to come in unto them,
i.e. to marry them, " after the manner of all the earth." Not
that they imagined the whole human race to have perished in
the destruction of the valley of Siddim, but because they were
afraid that no man would link himself with them, the only sur
vivors of a country smitten by the curse of God. If it was not
lust, therefore, which impelled them to this shameful deed, their
conduct was worthy of Sodom, and shows quite as much as their
previous betrothal to men of Sodom, that they were deeply im-
bued with the sinful character of that city. The words of vers.
33 and 35, " And he knew not of her lying down and of her
ad Cor. xi. as still in existence, and Josephus professes to have seen it, this
legend is probably based upon the pillar-like lumps of salt, which are still
to be seen at Mount Usdum (Sodom), on the south-western side of the
Dead Sea.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
238 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
rising up," do not affirm that he was in an unconscious state, as
the Rabbins are said by Jerome to have indicated by the point
over nwpa : " quasi incredibile et quod natura rerum non capiat,
coire quempiam nescientem" They merely mean, that in his in-
toxicated state, though not entirely unconscious, yet he lay with
his daughters without clearly knowing what he was doing. —
Vers. 36 sqq. But Lot's daughters had so little feeling of shame
in connection with their conduct, that they gave names to the
sons they bore, which have immortalized their paternity. Moab,
another form of 3ND " from the father," as is indicated in the
clause appended in the LXX. : Xeryowra etc rov iran-po? ftov, and
also rendered probable by the reiteration of the words " of our
father" and "by their father" (vers. 32, 34, and 36), as well
as by the analogy of the name Ben-Ammi = Amman, 'Afifidv,
Xeyovaa Tw? yevov? fiov (LXX.). For itojf, the sprout of the
nation, bears the same relation to Dp, as ItoJK, the rush or sprout
of the marsh, to D3K (Delitztch). — This account was neither the
invention of national hatred to the Moabites and Ammonites,
nor was it placed here as a brand upon those tribes. These
discoveries of a criticism imbued with hostility to the Bible are
overthrown by the fact, that, according to Deut. ii. 9, 19, Israel
was ordered not to touch the territory of either of these tribes
because of their descent from Lot ; and it was their unbrotherly
conduct towards Israel alone which first prevented their recep-
tion into the congregation of the Lord, Deut. xxiii. 4, 5. — Lot
is never mentioned again. Separated both outwardly and in-
wardly from Abraham, he was of no further importance in
relation to the history of salvation, so that even his death is not
referred to. His descendants, however, frequently came into
contact with the Israelites ; and the history of their descent is
given here to facilitate a correct appreciation of their conduct
towards Israel.
Abraham's sojourn at gerar. — chap. xx.
Vers. 1-7. After the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah,
Abraham removed from the grove of Mamre at Hebron to the
south country, hardly from the same fear as that which led Lot
from Zoar, but probably to seek for better pasture. Here he
dwelt between Kadesh (xiv. 7) and Shur (xvi. 7), and remained
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XX. 1-7. 239
for some time in Gerar, a place the name of which has been
preserved in the deep and broad Wady Jur/el Gerdr (t'.«. torrent
of Gerar) about eight miles S.S.E. of Gaza, near to which Row
land discovered the ruins of an ancient town bearing the name
of Khirbet el Gerdr. Here Abimelech, the Philistine king of
Gerar, like Pharaoh in Egypt, took Sarah, whom Abraham had
again announced to be his sister, into his harem, — not indeed be-
cause he was charmed with the beauty of the woman of 90, which
was either renovated, or had not yet faded (Kurtz), but in all
probability "to ally himself with Abraham, the rich nomad
prince " (Delitesch). From this danger, into which the untruth-
ful statement of both her husband and herself had brought her,
she was once more rescued by the faithfulness of the covenant
God. In a dream by night God appeared to Abimelech, and
threatened him with death (no ^Jn en te moriturum) on account
of the woman, whom he had taken, because she was married to
a husband. — Vers. 4 sqq. Abimelech, who had not yet come
near her, because God had hindered him by illness (vers. 6 and
17), excused himself on the ground that he had done no wrong,
since he had supposed Sarah to be Abraham's sister, according
to both her husband's statement and her own. This plea was
admitted by God, who told him that He had kept him from
sinning through touching Sarah, and commanded him to restore
the woman immediately to her husband, who was a prophet, that
he might pray for him and save his life, and threatened him with
certain death to himself and all belonging to him in case he
should refuse. That Abimelech, when taking the supposed
sister of Abraham into his harem, should have thought that he
was acting " in innocence of heart and purity of hands," i.e. in
perfect innocence, is to be fully accounted for, from his unde-
veloped moral and religious standpoint, by considering the cus-
toms of that day. But that God should have admitted that he
had acted " in innocence of heart," and yet should have pro-
ceeded at once to tell him that he could only remain alive through
the intercession of Abraham, that is to say, through his obtain-
ing forgiveness of a sin that was deserving of death, is a proof
that God treated him as capable of deeper moral discernment
and piety. The history itself indicates this in the very charac-
teristic variation in the names of God. First of all (ver. 3),
Elohirn (without the article, i.e. Deity generally) appears to him
Digitized by VjOOQlC
240 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
in a dream ; but Abimelech recognises the Lord, Adonai, i.e. God
(ver. 4); whereupon the historian represents cri^Kn (Elohirawith
the article), the personal and true God, as speaking to him. The
address of God, too, also shows his susceptibility of divine truth.
Without further pointing out to him the wrong which he had
done in simplicity of heart, in taking the sister of the stranger
who had come into his land, for the purpose of increasing his
own harem, since he must have been conscious of this himself,
God described Abraham as a prophet, whose intercession alone
could remove his guilt, to show him the way of salvation. A
prophet : lit. the God-addressed or inspired, since the " inward
speaking" (Ein-sprache) or inspiration of God constitutes the
essence of prophecy. Abraham was irpo$rfn}<i as the recipient
of divine revelation, and was thereby placed in so confidential a
relation to God, that he could intercede for sinners, and atone
for sins of infirmity through his intercession.
Vers. 8-15. Abimelech carried out the divine instructions.
The next morning he collected his servants together and related
what had occurred, at which the men were greatly alarmed.
He then sent for Abraham, and complained most bitterly of his
conduct, by which he had brought a great sin upon him and his
kingdom. — Ver. 10. " What sawest thou" i.e. what hadst thou in
thine eye, with thine act (thy false statement)? Abimelech did
this publicly in the presence of his servants, partly for his own
justification in the sight of his dependants, and partly to put
Abraham to shame. The latter had but two weak excuses : (1)
that he supposed there was no fear of God at all in the land,
and trembled for his life because of his wife ; and (2) that when
he left his father's house, he had arranged with his wife that in
every foreign place she was to call herself his sister, as she really
was his half-sister. On the subject of his emigration, he expressed
himself indefinitely and with reserve, accommodating himself to
the polytheistic standpoint of the Philistine king : " when God (or
the gods, Elohim) caused me to wander" i.e. led me to commence
an unsettled life in a foreign land ; and saying nothing about
Jehovah, and the object of his wandering as revealed by Him. —
Vers. 14 sqq. Abimelech then gave him back his wife with a
liberal present of cattle and slaves, and gave him leave to dwell
wherever he pleased in his land. To Sarah he said, " Behold, I
have given a thousand shekele of silver to thy brother; behold, it is
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XX. 8-16. 241
to thee a covering of the eyes (i.e. an expiatory gift) with regard
to all that are %oith thee ("because in a mistress the whole
family is disgraced," Del.), and vrith all — so art thou justified."
The thousand shekels (about £131) were not a special present
made to Sarah, but indicate the value of the present made
to Abraham, the amount of which may be estimated by this
standard, that at a later date (Ex. xxi. 32) a slave was reckoned
at 30 shekels. By the "covering of the eyes" we are not to
understand a veil, which Sarah was to procure for 1000 shekels;
but it is a figurative expression for an atoning gift, and is to be
explained by the analogy of the phrase 'D '3B IBS u to cover any
one's face," so that he may forget a wrong done (cf . chap, xxxii.
21 ; and Job ix. 24, " he covereth the faces of the judges," i.e.
he bribes them), nrota can only be the 2 pers. fern. sing. perf.
Niphal, although the Dagesh lene is wanting in the n ; for the
rules of syntax will hardly allow us to regard this form as a
participle, unless we imagine the extremely harsh ellipsis of nrou
for JjH* nnafo. The literal meaning is u so thou art judged," i.e.
justice has been done thee. — Vers. 17, 18. After this reparation,
God healed Abimelech at Abraham's intercession ; also his wife
and maids, so that they could bear again, for Jehovah had closed
up every womb in Abimelech's house on Sarah's account. nviDK,
maids whom the king kept as concubines, are to be distinguished
from nines? female slaves (ver. 14). That there was a material
difference between them, is proved by 1 Sam. xxv. 41. IXP
DrrrTS does not mean, as is frequently supposed, to prevent actual
childbirth, but to prevent conception, i.e. to produce barrenness
(1 Sam. i. 5, 6). This is evident from the expression " He hath
restrained me from bearing" in chap. xvi. 2 (cf. Isa. lxvi. 9, and
1 Sam. xxi. 6), and from the opposite phrase, " open the womb,"
so as to facilitate conception (chap. xxix. 31, and xxx. 22). The
plague brought upon Abimelech's house, therefore, consisted of
some disease which rendered the begetting of children (the
coitus) impossible. This might have occurred as soon as Sarah
was taken into the royal harem, and therefore need not presup-
pose any lengthened stay there. There is no necessity, therefore,
to restrict VDJJ to the women and regard it as equivalent to nriprrj,
which would be grammatically inadmissible ; for it may refer to
Abimelech also, since 1? T signifies to beget as well as to bear.
We may adopt KnobeVs explanation, therefore, though without
Digitized by VjOOQlC
242 THE FIBST BOOK OF MOSES.
approving of the inference that ver. 18 was an appendix of the
Jehovist, and arose from a misunderstanding of the word WJ in
ver. 17. A later addition ver. 18 cannot be; for the simple
reason, that without the explanation given there, the previous
verse would be unintelligible, so that it cannot have been want-
ing in any of the accounts. The name Jehovah, in contrast
with Elohim and Ha-Elohim in ver. 17, is obviously significant.
The cure of Abimelech and his wives belonged to the Deity
(Elohim). Abraham directed his intercession not to Elohim, an
indefinite and unknown God, but to D'n^tcn ; for the God, whose
prophet he was, was the personal and true God. It was He
too who had brought the disease upon Abimelech and his house,
not as Elohim or Ha-Elohim, but as Jehovah, the God of salva-
tion ; for His design therein was to prevent the disturbance or
frustration of His saving design, and the birth of the promised
son from Sarah.
But if the divine names Elohim and Ha-Elohim indicate
the true relation of God to Abimelech, and here also it was
Jehovah who interposed for Abraham and preserved the mother
of the promised seed, our narrative cannot be merely an Elohistic
side-piece appended to the Jehovistic account in chap. xii. 14
sqq., and founded upon a fictitious legend. The thoroughly
distinctive character of this event is a decisive proof of the
fallacy of any such critical conjecture. Apart from the one
point of agreement — the taking of Abraham's wife into the royal
harem, because he said she was his sister in the hope of thereby
saving his own life (an event, the repetition of which in the
space of 24 years is by no means startling, when we consider the
customs of the age) — all the more minute details are entirely
different in the two cases. In king Abimelech we meet with a
totally different character from that of Pharaoh. We see in
him a heathen imbued with a moral consciousness of right, and
open to receive divine revelation, of which there is not the
slightest trace in the king of Egypt. And Abraham, in spite
of his natural weakness, and the consequent confusion which he
manifested in the presence of the pious heathen, was exalted by
the compassionate grace of God to the position of His own
friend, so that even the heathen king, who seems to have been
in the right in this instance, was compelled to bend before him
and to seek the removal of the divine punishment, which had
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXI. 1-7. 243
fallen upon him and his house, through the medium of his inter-
cession. In this way God proved to the Philistine king, on the one
hand, that He suffers no harm to befall His prophets (Ps. cv. 15),
and to Abraham, on the other, that He can maintain His cove-
nant and secure the realization of His promise against all oppo-
sition from the sinful desires of earthly potentates. It was in this
respect that the event possessed a typical significance in relation
to the future attitude of Israel towards surrounding nations.
BIRTH OF ISAAC. EXPULSION OF ISHMAEL. ABIMELECH'S
TREATY WITH ABRAHAM. CHAP. XXI.
Vers. 1-7. Birth of Isaac. — Jehovah did for Sarah what
God had promised in chap. xvii. 6 (cf . xviii. 14) : she conceived,
and at the time appointed bore a son to Abraham, when he was
100 years old. Abraham gave it the name of Jizchak (or Isaac),
and circumcised it on the eighth day. The name for the pro-
mised son had been selected by God, in connection with Abra-
ham's laughing (chap. xvii. 17 and 19), to indicate the nature
of his birth and existence. For as his laughing sprang from
the contrast between the idea and the reality; so through a
miracle of grace the birth of Isaac gave effect to this contrast
between the promise of God and the pledge of its fulfilment on
the one hand, and the incapacity of Abraham for begetting
children, and of Sarah for bearing them, on the other; and
through this name, Isaac was designated as the fruit of omni-
potent grace working against and above the forces of nature.
Sarah also, who had previously laughed with unbelief at the
divine promise (xviii. 12), found a reason in the now accom-
plished birth of the promised son for laughing with joyous
amazement ; so that she exclaimed, with evident allusion to his
name, " A laughing hath God prepared for me; every one who
heart it will laugh to me" {i.e. will rejoice with me, in amaze-
ment at the blessing of God which has come upon me even in
my old age), and gave a fitting expression to the joy of her
heart, in this inspired tristich (ver. 7) : " Who would have mid
unto Abraham: Sarah is giving suck; for I have born a son to
his old age." Sw is the poetic word for "i? , J, and '? before the
perfect has the sense of — whoever has said, which we should ex-
press as a subjunctive ; cf. 2 Kings xx. 9 ; Ps. xi. 3, etc.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
244 THE FIRST BOOK OF M0SE8.
Vers. 8-21. Expulsion op Ishmael. — The weaning of the
child, which was celebrated with a feast, furnished the outward
occasion for this. Sarah saw Ishmael mocking, making ridicule
on the occasion. " Isaac, the object of holy laughter, was made
the butt of unholy wit or profane sport. He did not laugh (pnv),
but he made fun (P<[WD). The little helpless Isaac a father of
nations ! Unbelief, envy, pride of carnal superiority, were the
causes of his conduct. Because he did not understand the sen-
timent, 'Is anything too wonderful for the Lord?' it seemed to
him absurd to link so great a thing to one so small" (Hengsten-
berg). Paul calls this the persecution of him that was after the
Spirit by him that was begotten after the flesh (Gal. iv. 29), and
discerns in this a prediction of the persecution, which the Church
of those who are born after the spirit of faith endures from those
who are in bondage to the righteousness of the law. — Ver. 9.
Sarah therefore asked that the maid and her son might be sent
away, saying, the latter " shall not be heir with Isaac." The de-
mand, which apparently proceeded from maternal jealousy, dis-
pleased Abraham greatly u because of his son," — partly because in
Ishmael he loved his own flesh and blood, and partly on account of
the promise received for him (chap. xvii. 18 and 20). But God
(Elohim, since there is no appearance mentioned, but the divine
will was made known to him inwardly) commanded him to com-
ply with Sarah's demand : "for in Isaac shall seed (posterity) be
called to thee." This expression cannot mean " thy descendants
will call themselves after Isaac," for in that case, at all events,
lO would be used ; nor "in (through) Isaac shall seed be called
into existence to thee," for trip does not mean to call into exist-
ence ; but, " in the person of Isaac shall there be posterity to
thee, which shall pass as such," for tnp,? includes existence and
the recognition of existence. Though the noun is not defined by
any article, the seed intended must be that to which all the pro
raises of God referred, and with which God would establish His
covenant (chap. xvii. 21, cf. Bom. ix. 7, 8 ; Heb. xi. 18). To
make the dismissal of Ishmael easier to the paternal heart, God
repeated to Abraham (ver. 13) the promise already given him
with regard to this son (chap. xvii. 20). — Vers. 14 sqq. The next
morning Abraham sent Hagar away with Ishmael. The words,
" he took bread and a bottle of water and gave it to Hagar, putting
it (DB' participle, not perfect) upon her shoulder, and the boy, and
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXI. 8-81. 245
tent her away" do not state that Abraham gave her Ishmael also
to carry. For "WrTwn does not depend upon Qt? and JRJJ because
of the copula \ but upon R$\, the leading verb of the sentence,
although it is separated from it by the parenthesis " putting it
upon her shoulder." It does not follow from these words, there-
fore, that Ishmael is represented as a little child. Nor is this
implied in the statement which follows, that Hagar, when wan-
dering about in the desert, " cast the boy under one of the shrubs,"
because the water in the bottle was gone. For *i£ like "*OT does
not mean an infant, but a boy, and also a young man (iv. 23) ; —
Ishmael must have been 15 or 16 years old, as he was 14 before
Isaac was born (cf. ver. 5, and xvi. 16) ; — and lyffy " to throw,"
signifies that she suddenly left hold of the boy, when he fell ex-
hausted from thirst, just as in Matt. xv. 30 plirretv is used for
laying hastily down. Though despairing of his life, the mother
took care that at least he should breathe out his life in the
shade, and she sat over against him weeping, "in the distance as
archers," i.e. according to a concise simile very common in He-
brew, as far off as archers are accustomed to place the target.
Her maternal love could not bear to see him die, and yet she
would not lose sight of him. — Vers. 17 sqq. Then God heard the
voice (the weeping and crying) of the boy, and the angel of God
called to Hagar from heaven, " What aileih thee, Hagar t Fear
not, for God hath heard the voice of the boy, where he is" (nettt
for ">&*! tfp!??, 2 Sam. xv. 21), i.e. in his helpless condition :
" arise, lift up the lad" etc. It was Elohim, not Jehovah, who
heard the voice of the boy, and appeared as the angel of Elohim,
not of Jehovah (as in chap. xvi. 7), because, when Ishmael and
Hagar had been dismissed from Abraham's house, they were
removed from the superintendence and care of the covenant
God to the guidance and providence of God the ruler of all
nations. God then opened her eyes, and she saw what she had
not seen before, a well of water, from which she filled the bottle
and gave her son to drink. — Ver. 20. Having been miraculously
saved from perishing by the angel of God, Ishmael grew up
under the protection of God, settled in the wilderness of Paran,
and " became as he grew tip an archer." Although preceded by
•V, the TO*) is not tautological ; and there is no reason for attri-
buting to it the meaning of " archer," in which sense 33T alone
occurs in the one passage Gen. xlix. 23. The desert of Paran
Digitized by VjOOQlC
246 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
is the present large desert of et-Tih, which stretches along the
southern border of Canaan, from the western fringe of the
Arabah, towards the east to the desert of Shur (Jifar), on the
frontier of Egypt, and extends southwards to the promontories
of the mountains of Horeb (yid. Num. x. 12). On the northern
edge of this desert was Beersheba (proleptically so called in ver.
14), to which Abraham had removed from Gerar ; so that in all
probability Hagar and Ishmael were sent away from his abode
there, and wandered about in the surrounding desert, till Hagar
was afraid that they should perish with thirst. Lastly, in pre-
paration for chap. xxv. 12-18, it is mentioned in ver. 21 that
Ishmael married a wife out of Egypt.
Vers. 22-34. Abimelech's Tbeatt with Abraham. —
Through the divine blessing which visibly attended Abraham,
the Philistine king Abimelech was induced to secure for himself
and his descendants the friendship of a man so blessed ; and for
that purpose he went to Beersheba, with his captain Phicol, to
conclude a treaty with him. Abraham was perfectly ready to
agree to this ; but first of all he complained to him about a well
which Abimelech's men had stolen, i.e. had unjustly appro-
priated to themselves. Abimelech replied that this act of
violence had never been made known to him till that day, and
as a matter of course commanded the well to be returned.
After the settlement of this dispute the treaty was concluded,
and Abraham presented the king with sheep and oxen, as a
material pledge that he would reciprocate the kindness shown,
and live in friendship with the king and his descendants. Out
of this present he selected seven lambs and set them by them-
selves ; and when Abimelech inquired what they were, he told
him to take them from his hand, that they might be to him
(Abraham) for a witness that he had digged the well. It was
not to redeem the well, but to secure the well as his property
against any fresh claims on the part of the Philistines, that the
present was given ; and by the acceptance of it, Abraham's
right of possession was practically and solemnly acknowledged. —
Ver. 31. From this circumstance, the place where it occurred
received the name 1'3B> ">K3, i.e. seven-well, " because there they
sware both of them." It does not follow from this note, that
the writer interpreted the name "oath-well," and took JOB* in the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXI. 22-84. 247
sense of '*W3B?. The idea is rather the following : the place re-
ceived its name from the seven lambs, by which Abraham
secured to himself possession of the well, because the treaty was
sworn to on the basis of the agreement confirmed by the seven
lambs. There is no mention of sacrifice, however, in connection
with the treaty (see chap. xxvi. 33). MtM to swear, lit. to
seven one's self, not because in the oath the divine number 3 is
combined with the world-number 4, but because, from the
sacredness of the number 7, the real origin and ground of
which are to be sought in the number 7 of the work of creation,
seven things were generally chosen to give validity to an oath,
as was the case, according to Herodotus (3, 8), with the Arabians
among others. Beersheba was in the Wady es-Seba, the broad
channel of a winter-torrent, 12 hours' journey to the south of
Hebron on the road to Egypt and the Dead Sea, where there
are still stones to be found, the relics of an ancient town, and
two deep wells with excellent water, called Bit es Seba, i.e.
seven-well (not lion-well, as the Bedouins erroneously interpret
it) : cf. Bobituon's Pal. i. pp. 300 sqq. — Ver. 33. Here Abraham
planted a tamarisk and called upon the name of the Lord (vid.
chap. iv. 26), the everlasting God. Jehovah is called the ever-
lasting God, as the eternally true, with respect to the eternal
covenant, which He established with Abraham (chap. xvii. 7).
The planting of this long-lived tree, with its hard wood, and its
long, narrow, thickly clustered, evergreen leaves, was to be a
type of the ever-enduring grace of the faithful covenant God. —
Ver. 34. Abraham sojourned a long time there in the Philistines'
land. There Isaac was probably born, and grew up to be a
young man (xxii. 6), capable of carrying the wood for a sacri-
fice ; cf. xxii. 19. The expression " in the land of the Philis-
tines" appears to be at variance with ver. 32, where Abimelech
and Phicol are said to have returned to the land of the Philistines.
But the discrepancy is easily reconciled, on the supposition that
at that time the land of the Philistines had no fixed boundary,
at all events, towards the desert. Beersheba did not belong to
Gerar, the kingdom of Abimelech in the stricter sense ; but the
Philistines extended their wanderings so far, and claimed the
district as their own, as is evident from the fact that Abime-
lech's people had taken the well from Abraham. On the other
hand, Abraham with his numerous flocks would not confine him
Digitized by VjOOQlC
248 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES
self to the Wady es Seba, but must have sought for pasture-
ground in the whole surrounding country ; and as Abiraelech
had given him full permission to dwell in his land (xx. 15), he
would still, as heretofore, frequently come as far as Gerar, so
that his dwelling at Beersheba (xxii. 19) might be correctly
described as sojourning (nomadizing) in the land of the Philis-
tines.
OFFERING UP OF ISAAC UPON MORIAH. FAMILY OF NAHOB. —
CHAP. XXII.
Vers. 1-19. Offering up of Isaac. — For many years had
Abraham waited for the promised seed, in which the divine
promise was to be fulfilled. At length the Lord had given him
the desired heir of his body by his wife Sarah, and directed him
to send away the son of the maid. And now that this son had
grown into a young man, the word of God came to Abraham to
offer up this very son, who had been given to him as the heir of
the promise, for a burnt-offering, upon one Of the mountains
which should be shown him. This word did not come from his
own heart, — was not a thought suggested by the sight of the
human sacrifices of the Canaanites, that he would offer a similar
sacrifice to his God ; nor did it originate with the tempter to
evil. The word came from Ha-Elohim, the personal, true God,
who tried him ("B?), i.e. demanded the sacrifice of the only, be-
loved son, as a proof and attestation of his faith. The issue
shows, that God did not desire the sacrifice of Isaac by slaying
and burning him upon the altar, but his complete surrender,
and a willingness to offer him up to God even by death. Never-
theless the divine command was given in such a form, that
Abraham could not understand it in any other way than as re-
quiring an outward burnt-offering, because there was no other
way in which Abraham could accomplish the complete surrender
of Isaac, than by an actual preparation for really offering the
desired sacrifice. This constituted the trial, which necessarily
produced a severe internal conflict in his mind. Ratio humana
eimpliciter eoncluderet aut mentiri promissionem aut mandatum
non esse Dei sed Diaboli ; est enim contradictio manifesto. Si enitn
debet occidi Isaac, irrita est promissio ; sin rata est promissio, im-
possibile est hoe esse Dei mandatum (Luther). But Abraham
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXII. 1-19. 249
brought his reason into captivity to the obedience of faith. He
did not question the truth of the word of God, which had been
addressed to him in a mode that was to his mind perfectly in-
fallible (not in a vision of the night, however, of which there is
not a syllable in the text), but he stood firm in his faith, " ac-
counting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead"
Heb. xi. 19). Without taking counsel with flesh and blood,
Abraham started early in the morning (vers. 3, 4), with his son
Isaac and two servants, to obey the divine command ; and on the
third day (for the distance from Beersheba to Jerusalem is about
20£ hours ; Rob. Pal. iii. App. 66, 67) he saw in the distance the
place mentioned by God, the land of Moriah, i.e. the moun-
tainous country round about Jerusalem. The name <l*pp, com-
posed of the Hophal partic. of ritn and the divine name n*, an
abbreviation of nirv (lit. " the shown of Jehovah," equivalent to
the manifestation of Jehovah), is no doubt used proleptically in
ver. 2, and given to the mountain upon which the sacrifice was
to be made, with direct reference to this event and the ap-
pearance of Jehovah to Abraham there. This is confirmed by
ver. 14, where the name is connected with the event, and ex-
plained in the fuller expression Jehovah-jireh. On the ground
of this passage the mountain upon which Solomon built the
temple is called rnlBn -with reference to the appearance of the
angel of the Lord to David on that mountain at the threshing-
floor of Araunah (2 Sam. xxiv. 16, 17), the old name being re-
vived by this appearance.
Ver. 5. When in sight of the distant mountain, Abraham left
the servants behind with the ass, that he might perform the last
and hardest part of the journey alone with Isaac, and, as he said
to the servants, " worship yonder and then return? The servants
were not to see what would take place there ; for they could not
understand this " worship," and the issue even to him, notwith-
standing his saying " we will come again to you," was still in-
volved in the deepest obscurity. This last part of the journey
is circumstantially described in vers. 6-8, to show how strong a
conflict every step produced in the paternal heart of the patri-
arch. They go both together, he with the fire and the knife in
his hand, and his son with the wood for the sacrifice upon his
shoulder. Isaac asks his father, where is the lamb for the burnt-
offering ; and the father replies, not " Thou wilt be it, my son,"
PENT. — VOL. I. B
Digitized by VjOOQlC
250 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
but " God (Elohim without the article — God as the all-pervading
supreme power) will provide it;" for he will not and cannot
yet communicate the divine command to his son. Non vult
filium macerare longa cruce et tentatione (Luther). — Vers. 9, 10.
Having arrived at the appointed place, Abraham built an altar,
arranged the wood upon it, bound bis son and laid him upon the
wood of the altar, and then stretched out his hand and took the
knife to slay his son. — Vers. 11 sqq. In this eventful moment,
when Isaac lay bound like a lamb upon the altar, about to receive
the fatal stroke, the angel of the Lord called down from heaven
to Abraham to stop, and do his son no harm. For the Lord now
knew that Abraham was DWK tcv God-fearing, and that his obe-
dience of faith did extend even to the sacrifice of his own beloved
son. The sacrifice was already accomplished in his heart, and
he had fully satisfied the requirements of God. He was not to
slay his son: therefore God prevented the outward fulfilment of
the sacrifice by an immediate interposition, and showed him a
ram, which he saw, probably being led to look round through a
rustling behind him, with its horns fast in a thicket ("ins adv.
behind, in the background) ; and as an offering provided by God
Himself, he sacrificed it instead of his son. — Ver. 14. From this
interposition of God, Abraham called the place Jehovdh-jireh,
" Jehovah sees," i.e. according to ver. 8, provides, providet ; so
that C 1 ^?, as in chap. xiii. 16, is equivalent to 1? ?{?, x. 9) men arc
still accustomed to say, " On the mountain where Jehovah appears"
(n*£V), from which the name Moriah arose. The rendering " on
the mount of Jehovah it is provided" is not allowable, for the
Niphal of the verb does not mean provideri, but " appear."
Moreover, in this case the medium of God's seeing or interposi-
tion was His appearing. — Vers. 15-19. After Abraham had offered
the ram, the angel of the Lord called to him a second time from
heaven, and with a solemn oath renewed the former promises, as
a reward for this proof of his obedience of faith (cf. xii. 2, 3).
To confirm their unchangeableness, Jehovah swore by Himself
(cf. Heb. vi. 13 sqq.), a thing which never occurs again in His
intercourse with the patriarchs ; so that subsequently not only do
we find repeated references to this oath (chap. xxiv. 7, xxvi. 3,
L 24 ; Ex. xiii. 5, It., xxxui. 1, etc.), but, as Luther observes, all
that is said in Ps. lxxxix. 36, cxxxii. 11, ex. 4 respecting the oath
given to David, is founded upon this. Stem enim promissio
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXII. 1-19. 251
aeminis AbrahcB derivata est in semen Davidis, ita Scriptura S.jus-
jurandum Abrahae datum in personam Davidis trans/ert. For in
the promise upon which these psalms are based nothing is said
about an oath (cf. 2 Sam. vii. ; 1 Chron. xvii.). The declara-
tion on oath is still further confirmed by the addition of nto Dtu
" edict (Ausspruch) of JehovaJi," which, frequently as it occurs
in the prophets, is met with in the Pentateuch only in Num. xiv.
28, and (without Jehovah) in the oracles of Balaam, Num. xxiv.
3, 15, 16. As the promise was intensified in form, so was it also
in substance. To express the innumerable multiplication of the
seed in the strongest possible way, a comparison with the sand
of the sea-shore is added to the previous simile of the stars. And
this seed is also promised the possession of the gate of its ene-
mies, i.e. the conquest of the enemy and the capture of his cities
(cf. xxiv. 60).
This glorious result of the test so victoriously stood by Abra-
ham, not only sustains the historical character of the event itself,
but shows in the clearest manner that the trial was necessary to
the patriarch's life of faith, and of fundamental importance to
his position in relation to the history of salvation. The question,
whether the true God could demand a human sacrifice, was
settled by the fact that God Himself prevented the completion
of the sacrifice ; and the difficulty, that at any rate God contra-
dicted Himself, if He first of all demanded a sacrifice and then
prevented it from being offered, is met by the significant inter-
change of the names of God, since God, who commanded Abra-
ham to offer up Isaac, is called Ha-Elohim, whilst the actual
completion of the sacrifice is prevented by u the angel of Jeho-
vah," who is identical with Jehovah Himself. The sacrifice of
the heir, who had been both promised and bestowed, was de-
manded neither by Jehovah, the God of salvation or covenant
God, who had given Abraham this only son as the heir of the
promise, nor by Elohim, God as creator, who has the power
to give life and take it away, but by Ha-Elohim, the true
God, whom Abraham had acknowledged and adored as his per-
sonal God, and with whom he had entered into a personal rela-
tion. Coming from the true God whom Abraham served, the
demand could have no other object than to purify and sanctify
the feelings of the patriarch's heart towards his son and towards
his God, in accordance with the great purpose of his call. It
Digitized by VjOOQlC
252 THE FIRST BOOK OF HOSES.
was designed to purify his love to the son of his body from all
the dross of carnal self-love and natural selfishness which might
still adhere to it, and so to transform it into love to God, from
whom he had received him, that he should no longer love the
beloved son as his flesh and blood, but simply and solely as a
gift of grace, as belonging to his God, — a trust committed to
him, which he should be ready at any moment to give hack to
God. As he had left his country, kindred, and father's house
at the call of God (xii. 1), so was he in his walk with God
cheerfully to offer up even his only son, the object of all his
longing, the hope of his life, the joy of his old age. And still
more than this, not only did he possess and love in Isaac the heir
of his possessions (xv. 2), but it was upon him that all the promises
of God rested : in Isaac should his seed be called (xxi. 12). By
the demand that he should sacrifice to God this only son of his
wife Sarah, in whom his seed was to grow into a multitude of
nations (xvii. 4, 6, 16), the divine promise itself seemed to be
cancelled, and the fulfilment not only of the desires of his heart,
but also of the repeated promises of his God, to be frustrated.
And by this demand his faith was to be perfected into uncondi-
tional trust in God, into the firm assurance that God could even
raise him up from the dead. — But this trial was not. only one of
significance to Abraham, by perfecting him, through the conquest
of flesh and blood, to be the father of the faithful, the progenitor
of the Church of God ; Isaac also was to be prepared andsancti
fied by it for his vocation in connection with the history of
salvation. In permitting himself to be bound and laid upon the
altar without resistance, he gave up his natural life to death, to
rise to a new life through the grace of God. On the altar he
was sanctified to God, dedicated as the first beginning of the
holy Church of God, and thus " the dedication of the first-born,
which was afterwards enjoined in the law, was perfectly fulfilled
in him." If therefore the divine command exhibits in the most
impressive way the earnestness of the demand of God upon His
people to sacrifice all to Him, not excepting the dearest of their
possessions (cf. Matt. x. 37, and Luke xiv. 26) ; the issue of the
trial teaches that the true God does not demand a literal human
sacrifice from His worshippers, but the spiritual sacrifice of an
unconditional denial of the natural life, even to submission to
death itself. By the sacrifice of a ram as a burnt-offering in the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXII. 20-24. 253
place of his son, under divine direction, not only was animal
sacrifice substituted for human, and sanctioned as an acceptable
symbol of spiritual self-sacrifice, but the offering of human
sacrifices by the heathen was condemned and rejected as an un-
godly i6eXo0prj<TKeui. And this was done by Jehovah, the God
of salvation, who prevented the outward completion of the sacri-
fice. By this the event acquires prophetic importance for the
Church of the Lord, to which the place of sacrifice points with
peculiar clearness, viz. Mount Moriali, upon which under the legal
economy all the.typical sacrifices were offered to Jehovah ; upon
which also, in the fulness of time, God the Father gave up His
only-begotten Son as an atoning sacrifice for the sins of the
whole world, that by this one true sacrifice the shadows of the
typical sacrifices might be rendered both real and true. If
therefore the appointment of Moriah as the scene of the sacrifice
of Isaac, and the offering of a ram in his stead, were primarily
only typical in relation to the significance and intent of the Old
Testament institution of sacrifice ; this type already pointed to
the antitype to appear in the future, when the eternal love of
the heavenly Father would perform what it had demanded of
Abraham ; that is to say, when God would not spare His only
Son, but give Him up to the real death, which Isaac suffered
only in spirit, that we also might die with Christ spiritually, and
rise with Him to everlasting life (Rom. viii. 32, vi. 5, etc.).
Vers. 20-24. Descendants of Nahor. — With the sacri-
fice of Isaac the test of Abraham's faith was now complete, and
the purpose of his divine calling answered : the history of his
life, therefore, now hastens to its termination. But first of all
there is introduced quite appropriately an account of the family
of his brother Nahor, which is so far in place immediately after
the story of the sacrifice of Isaac, that it prepares the way for
the history of the marriage of the heir of the promise. The con-
nection is pointed out in ver. 20, as compared with chap. xi. 29,
in the expression, " she also." Nahor, like Ishmael and Jacob,
had twelve sons, eight by his wife Milcah and four by his con-
cubine ; whereas Jacob had his by two wives and two maids, and
Ishmael apparently all by one wife. This difference with regard
to the mothers proves that the agreement as to the number twelve
rests upon a good historical tradition, and is no product of a later
Digitized by VjOOQlC
254 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
myth, which traced to Nahor the same number of tribes as to
Ishmael and Jacob. For it is a perfectly groundless assertion
or assumption, that Nailer's twelve sons were the fathers of as
many tribes. There are only a few names, of which it is pro-
bable that their bearers were the founders of tribes of the same
name. On Uz, see chap. x. 23. Buz is mentioned in Jer. xxv.
23 along with Dedan and Tema as an Arabian tribe; and
Elihu was a Buzite of the family of Ram (Job xxxii. 2).
Kemuel, the father of Aram, was not the founder of the Ara-
maeans, but the forefather of the family of Ram, to which the
Buzite Elihu belonged, — Aram being written for Bam, like
Arammim in 2 Kings viii. 29 for Rammim in 2 Chron. xxii. 5.
Chesed again was not the father of the Chasdim (Chaldeans),
for they were older than Chesed; at the most he was only
the founder of one branch of the Chasdim, possibly those who
stole Job's camels (Knobel; vid. Job i. 17). Of the remaining
names, Bethuel was not the founder of a tribe, but the father of
Laban and Bebekah (chap. xxv. 20). The others are never met
with again, with the exception of Maachah, from whom pro-
bably the Maachites (Deut. iii. 14 ; Josh. xii. 5) in the land of
Maacah, a small Arabian kingdom in the time of David (2 Sam.
x. 6, 8 ; 1 Chron. xix. 6), derived their origin and name ; though
Maachah frequently occurs as the name of a person (1 Kings
ii. 39 ; 1 Chron. xi. 43, xxvii. 16).
DEATH OF SARAH ; AND PURCHASE OP THE CAVE AT
MACHPELAH. CHAP. XXIII.
Vers. 1, 2. Sarah is the only woman whose age is men-
tioned in the Scriptures, because as the mother of the pro-
mised seed she became the mother of all believers (1 Pet. iii. 6).
She died at the age of 127, thirty-seven years after the birth of
Isaac, at Hebron, or rather in the grove of Mamre near that
city (xiii. 18), whither Abraham had once more returned after a
lengthened stay at Beersheba (xxii. 19). The name Kirjath
Arba, t.«. the city of Arba, which Hebron bears here and also
in chap. xxxv. 27, and other passages, and which it still bore at
the time of the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites (Josh. xiv.
15), was not the original name of the city, but was first given to
it by Arba the Anakite and his family, who had not yet arrived
Digitized by VjOOQlC
chap. xxm. 3-1& 255
there in the time of the patriarchs. It was probably given by
them when they took possession of the city, and remained until
the Israelites captured it and restored the original name. The
place still exists, as a small town on the road from Jerusalem to
Beersheba, in a valley surrounded by several mountains, and is
called by the Arabs, with allusion to Abraham's stay there, el
Khalil, i.e. the friend (of God), which is the title given to
Abraham by the Mohammedans. The clause "in the land of
Canaan" denotes, that not only did Sarah die in the land
of promise, but Abraham as a foreigner acquired a burial-
place by purchase there. "And Abraham came" (not from
Beersheba, but from the field where he may have been with the
flocks), " to mourn for Sarah and to weep for her," i.e. to arrange
for the customary mourning ceremony.
Vers. 3-16. He then went to the Hittites, the lords and
possessors of the city and its vicinity at that time, to procure
from them " a possession of a burying-place." The negotiations
were carried on in the most formal style, in a public assembly
"of the people of the land," i.e. of natives (ver. 7), in the gate
of the city (ver. 10). As a foreigner and sojourner, Abraham
presented his request in the most courteous manner to all the
citizens ( " all that went in at the gate," vers. 10, 18 ; a phrase
interchangeable with "all that went out at the gate," chap,
xxxiv. 24, and those who " go oat and in," Jer. xvii. 19). The
citizens with the greatest readiness and respect offered "the
prince of God," i.e. the man exalted by God to the rank of a
prince, " the choice " ("IITO?, ue. the most select) of their graves
for his use (ver. 6). But Abraham asked them to request
Ephron, who, to judge from the expression " his city " in ver.
10, was then ruler of the city, to give him for a possession the
cave of Machpelah, at the end of his field, of which he was the
owner, " for full silver," ue. for its full worth. Ephron there-
upon offered to make him a present of both field and cave.
This was a turn in the affair which is still customary in the
East ; the design, so far as it is seriously meant at all, being
either to obtain a present in return which will abundantly
compensate for the value of the gift, or, what is still more fre-
quently the case, to preclude any abatement in the price to be
asked. The same design is evident in the peculiar form in
which Ephron stated the price, in reply to Abraham's repeated
Digitized by VjOOQlC
256 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
declaration that he was determined to buy the piece of land :
"a piece of land of 400 shekels of silver, what is that between
ine and thee" (ver. 15) ? Abraham understood it so (l"?t!^ ver.
16), and weighed him the price demanded. The shekel of
silver " current with the merchant," i.e. the shekel which passed
in trade as of standard weight, was 274 Parisian grains, so that
the price of the piece of land was £52, 10s.; a very considerable
amount for that time.
Vers. 17-20. "Thus arose (DjW) the field . . . to Abraham
for a possession ;" i.e. it was conveyed to him in all due legal
form. The expression " the field of Ephron which is at Mach-
pelah " may be explained, according to ver. 9, from the fact that
the cave of Machpelah was at the end of the field , the field,
therefore, belonged to it. In ver. 19 the shorter form, u cave of
Machpelah," occurs ; and in ver. 20 the field is distinguished
from the cave. The name Machpelah is translated by the
LXX. as a common noun, to ctr^Kcuov to BittXovp, from
«"6b3D doubling; but it had evidently grown into a proper
name, since it is used not only of the cave, but of the adjoining
field also (chap. xlix. 30, 1. 13), though it undoubtedly origi-
nated in the form of the cave. The cave was before, i.e. pro-
bably to the east of, the grove of Mamre, which was in the
district of Hebron. This description cannot be reconciled with
the tradition, which identifies Mamre and the cave with Harriet
el Khalil, where the strong foundation-walls of an ancient
heathen temple (according to Rosenmtiller's conjecture, an Idu-
msean one) are still pointed out as Abraham's house, and where
a very old terebinth stood in the early Christian times ; for this
is an hour's journey to the north of modern Hebron, and even
the ancient Hebron cannot have stretched so far over the
mountains which separate the modern city from Rameh, but
must also, according to chap, xxxvii. 14, have been situated
in the valley (see Robinson's later Biblical Researches, pp.
365 sqq.). There is far greater probability in the Moham-
medan tradition, that the Harem, built of colossal blocks
with grooved edges, which stands on the western slope of the
Geabireh mountain, in the north-western portion of the present
town, contains hidden within it the cave of Machpelah with
the tomb of the patriarchs (cf. Robinson, Pal. ii. 435 sqq.); and
Rosen, is induced to look for Mamre on the eastern slope of
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXIV. 1-9. 257
the Bumeidi hill, near to the remarkable well Ain el Jedid. —
Ver. 20. The repetition of the statement, that the field with the
cave in it was conveyed to Abraham by the Hittites for a burial-
place, which gives the result of the negotiation that has been
described with, so to speak, legal accuracy, shows the great im-
portance of the event to the patriarch. The fact that Abraham
purchased a burying-place in strictly legal form as an hereditary
possession in the promised land, was a proof of his strong faith
in the promises of God and their eventual fulfilment. In this
grave Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebekah, were buried ;
there Jacob buried Leah ; and there Jacob himself requested
that he might be buried, thus declaring his faith in the promises,
even in the hour of his death.
ISAAC 8 MARRIAGE. — CHAP. XXIV.
Vers. 1-9. After the death of Sarah, Abraham had still to
arrange for the marriage of Isaac. He was induced to provide
for this in a mode in harmony with the promise of God, quite
as much by his increasing age as by the blessing of God in
everything, which necessarily instilled the wish to transmit that
blessing to a distant posterity. He entrusted this commission to
his servant, " the eldest of his house," — i.e. his upper servant,
who had the management of all his house (according to general
opinion, to Eliezer, whom he had previously thought of as the
heir of his property, but who would now, like Abraham, be ex-
tremely old, as more than sixty years had passed since the occur-
rence related in chap. xv. 2), — and made him swear that he would
not take a wife for his son from the daughters of the Canaanites,
but would fetch one from his (Abraham's) native country, and
his kindred. Abraham made the servant take an oath in order
that his wishes might be inviolably fulfilled, even if he himself
should die in the interim. In swearing, the servant put his
hand under Abraham's hip. This custom, which is only men-
tioned here and in chap, xlvii. 29, the so-called bodily oath,
was no doubt connected with the significance of the hip as the
part from which the posterity issued (xlvi. 26), and the seat of
vital power ; but the early Jewish commentators supposed it to
be especially connected with the rite of circumcision. The oath
was by "Jehovah, God of heaven and earth," as the God who
Digitized by VjOOQlC
258 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
rules in heaven and on earth, not by Elohim ; for it had respect
not to an ordinary oath, but to a question of great importance in
relation to the kingdom of God. " Isaac was not regarded as
a merely pious candidate for matrimony, but as the heir of the
promise, who must therefore be kept from any alliance with the
race whose possessions were to come to his descendants, and which
was ripening for the judgment to be executed by those descend-
ants" (ffengstenberg, Dissertations i. 350). For this reason the rest
of the negotiation was all conducted in the name of Jehovah. —
Vers. 5 sqq. Before taking the oath, the servant asks whether,
in case no woman of their kindred would follow him to Canaan,
Isaac was to be conducted to the land of his fathers. But Abra-
ham rejected the proposal, because Jehovah took him from his
father's house, and had promised him the land of Canaan for a
possession. He also discharged the servant, if that should be the
case, from the oath which he had taken, in the assurance that
the Lord through His angel would bring a wife to his son from
thence.
Vers. 10-28. The servant then went, with ten camels and
things of every description belonging to his master, into Meso-
potamia to the city of Nahor, i.e. Haran, where Nahor dwelt
(xi. 31, and xii. 4). On his arrival there, he made the camels
kneel down, or rest, without the city by the well, " at the time of
evening, the time at which the women come out to draw water" and
at which, now as then, women and girls are in the habit of fetch-
ing the water required for the house (vid. Bobimoris Pales-
tine ii. 368 sqq.). He then prayed to Jehovah, the God of
Abraham, u Let there come to meet me to-day," sc. the person de-
sired, the object of my mission. He then fixed upon a sign con-
nected with the custom of the country, by the occurrence of which
he might decide upon the maiden ("iJJ|n puella, used in the Pen-
tateuch for both sexes, except in Deut. xxii. 19, where •TJJU occurs)
whom Jehovah had indicated as the wife appointed for His ser-
vant Isaac, n* 1 ?^ (ver. 14) to set right, then to point out as
right; not merely to appoint. He had scarcely ended his prayer
when his request was granted. Rebekah did just what he had
fixed upon as a token, not only giving him to drink, but offer-
ing to water his camels, and with youthful vivacity carrying
out her promise. Niebuhr met with similar kindness in those
regions (see also Robinson, Pal. ii. 351, etc.). The servant did
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXIV. 20-54 259
not give himself blindly up to first impressions, however, but
tested the circumstances. — Ver. 21. " The man, wondering at
her, stood silent, to know whether Jehovah had made his journey
prosperous or not? ntwefoj from ru<B> to be desert, inwardly
laid waste, i.e. confused. Others derive it from nKK>=nye>to
' TT T ▼
see; but in the Hithpael this verb signifies to look restlessly
about, which is not applicable here. — Vers. 22 sqq. After the
watering of the camels was over, the man took a golden nose-
ring of the weight of a beka, i.e. half a shekel (Ex. xxxviii. 26),
and two golden armlets of 10 shekels weight, and (as we find
from vers. 30 and 47) placed these ornaments upon her, not as
a bridal gift, but in return for her kindness. He then asked
her about her family, and whether there was room in her
father's house for him and his attendants to pass the night
there ; and it was not till after Rebekah had told him that she
was the daughter of Bethuel, the nephew of Abraham, and had
given a most cheerful assent to his second question, that he felt
sure that this was the wife appointed by Jehovah for Isaac. He
then fell down and thanked Jehovah for His grace and truth,
whilst Rebekah in the meantime had hastened home to relate
all that had occurred to " her mother's house" i.e. to the female
portion of her family, ion the condescending love, JlDK the
truth which God had displayed in the fulfilment of His promise,
and here especially manifested to him in bringing him to the
home of his master's relations.
Vers. 29-54. As soon as Laban her brother had seen the
splendid presents and heard her account, he hurried out to the
stranger at the well, to bring him to the house with his attend-
ants and animals, and to show to him the customary hospitality
of the East. The fact that Laban addressed him as the
blessed of Jehovah (ver. 31), may be explained from the
words of the servant, who had called his master's God Jehovah.
The servant discharged his commission before he partook of the
food set before him (the Kethibh qewi in ver. 33 is the imperf.
Kal of DB'J = D«?) ; and commencing with his master's posses-
sions and family affairs, he described with the greatest minute-
ness his search for a wife, and the success which he had thus
far met with, and then (in ver. 49) pressed his suit thus:
" And now, if ye will show kindness and truth to my lord,
tell me; and if not, tell me; that I may turn to the right hand or
Digitized by VjOOQlC
260 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
to the left" »e. to seek in other families a wife for Isaac. — Ver.
50. Laban and Bethuel recognised in this the guidance of God,
and said, " From Jehovah (the God of Abraham) the tiling pro-
ceedeth; we cannot speak unto thee bad or good" i.e. cannot add a
word, cannot alter anything (Num. xxiv. 13 ; 2 Sam. xiii. 22).
That Kebekah's brother Laban should have taken part with her
father in deciding, was in accordance with the usual custom (cf .
xxxiv. 5, 11, 25, Judg. xxi. 22, 2 Sam. xiii. 22), which may
have arisen from the prevalence of polygamy, and the readiness
of the father to neglect the children (daughters) of the wife he
cared for least. — Ver. 52. After receiving their assent, the ser-
vant first of all offered thanks to Jehovah with the deepest
reverence ; he then gave the remaining presents to the bride,
and to her relations (brother and mother) ; and after everything
was finished, partook of the food provided.
Vers. 54-60. The next morning he desired at once to set off
on the journey home; but her brother and mother wished to
keep her with them "riby it< D'O', "some days, or ratlier ten" but
when she was consulted, she decided to go, se. without delay.
a Then they sent away Rebekali their sister (Laban being chiefly
considered, as the leading person in the affair) and her nurse "
(Deborah; Ch. xxxv. 8), with the parting wish that she might be-
come the mother of an exceedingly numerous and victorious pos-
terity. " Become thousands of myriads" is a hyperbolical expression
for an innumerable host of children. The second portion of the
blessing (ver. 606) is almost verbatim the same as chap. xxii. 17,
but is hardly borrowed thence, as the thought does not contain
anything specifically connected with the history of salvation.
Vers. 61-67. When the caravan arrived in Canaan with
Rebekah and her maidens, Isaac had just come from going to
the well Lahai-Roi (xvi. 14), as he was then living in the south
country ; and he went towards evening (a^y rriJDp, at the turn-
ing, coming on, of the evening, Deut. xxiii. 12) to the field " to
meditate." It is impossible to determine whether Isaac had been
to the well of Hagar which called to mind the omnipresence of
God, and there, in accordance with his contemplative character,
had laid the question of his marriage before the Lord (Delitzsch),
or whether he had merely travelled thither to look after his
(locks and herds (Knobel). But the object of his going to the
field to meditate, was undoubtedly to lay the question of his mar-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXV. 1-4. 261
riage before God in solitude, rnb, meditari, is rendered " to
pray " in the Chaldee, and by Luther and others, with substantial
correctness. The caravan arrived at the time ; and Rebekah, as
soon as she saw the man in the field coming to meet them, sprang
(7B3 signifying a hasty descent, 2 Kings v. 21) from the camel
to receive him, according to Oriental custom, in the most respect-
ful manner. She then inquired the name of the man ; and as
soon as she heard that it was Isaac, she enveloped herself in her
veil, as became a bride when meeting the bridegroom. VJW,
depurrpov, the cloak-like veil of Arabia (see my ArcJidologie,
§ 103, 5). The servant then related to Isaac the result of his
journey ; and Isaac conducted the maiden, who had been brought
to him by God, into the tent of Sarah his mother, and she be-
came his wife, and he loved her, and was consoled after his
mother, i.e. for his mother's death. n?Pikn with n local, in the
construct state, as in chap. xx. 1, xxviii. 2, etc. ; and in addition to
that, with the article prefixed (cf. Ges. Gram. § 110, 2bc).
Abraham's marriage to keturah — his death and
burial. — chap. xxv.
Vers. 1-4. Abraham's marriage to Keturah is gene-
rally supposed to have taken place after Sarah's death, and his
power to beget six sons at so advanced an age is attributed to
the fact, that the Almighty had endowed him with new vital
and reproductive energy for begetting the son of the promise.
Bnt there is no firm ground for this assumption ; as it is not
stated anywhere, that Abraham did not take Keturah as his wife
till after Sarah's death. It is merely an inference drawn from
the fact, that it is not mentioned till afterwards ; and it is taken
for granted that the history is written in strictly chronological
order. But this supposition is precarious, and is not in harmony
with the statement, that Abraham sent away the sons of the
concubines with gifts during his own lifetime ; for in the case
supposed, the youngest of Keturah' s sons would not have been
more than twenty-five or thirty years old at Abraham's death ;
and in those days, when marriages were not generally contracted
before the fortieth year, this seems too young for them to have
been sent away from their father's house. This difficulty, how-
ever, is not decisive. Nor does the fact that Keturah is called
Digitized by VjOOQlC
262 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
a concubine in ver. 6, and 1 Chron. i. 32, necessarily show that
she was cotemporaxy with Sarah, but may be explained on the
ground that Abraham did not place her on the same footing as
Sarah, his sole wife, the mother of the promised seed. Of the
sons and grandsons of Keturah, who are mentioned in 1 Chron. i.
32 as well as here, a few of the names maj r still be found among
the Arabian tribes, but in most instances the attempt to trace
them is very questionable. This remark applies to the identifi-
cation of Zimran with Zafipdft (Ptol. vi. 7, 5), the royal city of
the KtvcuZoKoKirh-cu to the west of Mecca, on the Red Sea ; of
Jokshan with the KaaaavlTtu, on the Red Sea (Ptol. vi. 7, 6),
or with the Himyaritish tribe of Jakish in Southern Arabia ; of
lshbak with the name Shobek, a place in the Edomitish country
first mentioned by Abulfeda ; of Shuah with the tribe Syayhe
to the east of Aila, or with Szyhhan in Northern Edom {Burck-
hardt, Syr. 692, 693, and 945), although the epithet the Shuhite,
applied to Bildad, points to a place in Northern Idumaea. There
is more plausibility in the comparison of Medan and Midian
with MoSidva on the eastern coast of the Elanitic Gulf, and
Ma&iava, a tract to the north of this (Ptol. vi. 7, 2, 27 ; called
by Arabian geographers Madyan, a city five days' journey to
the south of Aila). The relationship of these two tribes will
explain the fact, that the Midianim, chap, xxxvii. 28, are called
Medanim in ver. 36. — Ver. 3. Of the sons of Jokshan, Slieba
was probably connected with the Sabaeans, who are associated
in Job vi. 19 with Tema, are mentioned in Job i. 15 as having
stolen Job's oxen and asses, and, according to Slrabo (xvi. 779),
were neighbours of the Nabataeans in the vicinity of Syria.
Dedan was probably the trading people mentioned in Jer. xxv.
23 along with Tema and Bus (Isa. xxi. 13 ; Jer. xlix. 8), in
the neighbourhood of Edom (Ezek. xxv. 13), with whom the
tribe of Banu Dudan, in Hejas, has been compared. On their
relation to the Cushites of the same name, vid. chap. x. 7 and
28. — Of the sons of Dedan, the Asshurim have been associated
with the warlike tribe of the Anr to the south of Hejas, the
Letushim with the Banu Leits in Hejas, and the Leummun with
the tribe of the Banu Lam, which extended even to Babylon
and Mesopotamia. Of the descendants of Midian, JEphah is
mentioned in Isa. Ix. 6, in connection with Midian, as a people
trading in gold and incense. Epher has been compared with the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXV. 6-11. 263
JBanu Gifar in Hejas ; Hanoch, with the place called Hanakye,
three days' journey to the north of Medinah ; Abidah and El-
daak, with the tribes of Abide and Vadaa in the neighbourhood
of Asir. But all this is very uncertain.
Vers. 5-11. Before his death, Abraham made a final dispo-
sition of his property. Isaac, the only son of his marriage with
Sarah, received all his possessions. The sons of the concubines
(Hagar and Keturah) were sent away with presents from their
father's house into the east country, ue. Arabia in the widest
sense, to the east and south-east of Palestine. — Vers. 7, 8.
Abraham died at the good old age of 175, and was "gathered to
his people." This expression, which is synonymous with " going
to his fathers" (xv. 15), or "being gathered to his fathers"
(Judg. ii. 10), but is constantly distinguished from departing
this life and being buried, denotes the reunion in Sheol with
friends who have gone before, and therefore presupposes faith
in the personal continuance of a man after death, as a presenti-
ment which the promises of God had exalted in the case of the
patriarchs into a firm assurance of faith (Heb. xi. 13). — Vers.
9, 10. The burial of the patriarch in the cave of Machpelah
was attended to by Isaac and Ishmael ; since the latter, although
excluded from the blessings of the covenant, was acknowledged
by God as the son of Abraham by a distinct blessing (xvii. 20),
and was thus elevated above the sons of Keturah. — Ver. 11.
After Abraham's death the blessing was transferred to Isaac,
who took up his abode by Hagar' s well, because he had already
been there, and had dwelt in the south country (xxiv. 62).
The blessing of Isaac is traced to JElohim, not to Jehovah ;
because it referred neither exclusively nor pre-eminently to the
gifts of grace connected with the promises of salvation, but
quite generally to the inheritance of earthly possessions, which
Isaac had received from his father.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
264 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES
VII. HISTORY OF ISHMAEL.
Chap. xxv. 12-18.
(Compare 1 Chron. i. 28-31.)
To show that the promises of God, which had been made to
Ishmael (chap. xvi. 10 sqq. and xvii. 20), were fulfilled, a short
account is given of his descendants ; and according to the settled
plan of Genesis, this account precedes the history of Isaac.
This is evidently the intention of the list which follows of the
twelve sons of Ishmael, who are given as princes of the tribes
which sprang from them. Nebajoth and Kedar are mentioned
in Isa. lx. 7 as rich possessors of flocks, and, according to the
current opinion which Wetzstein disputes, are the Nabatcri et
Cedrei of Pliny (h. n. 5, 12). The Nabatceans held possession
of Arabia Petraa, with Petra as their capital, and subsequently
extended toward the south and north-east, probably as far as
Babylon ; so that the name was afterwards transferred to all
the tribes to the east of the Jordan, and in the Nabataean
writings became a common name for Chaldeans (ancient Baby-
lonians), Syrians, Canaanites, and others. The Kedarenes are
mentioned in Isa. xxi. 17 as good bowmen. They dwelt in the
desert between Arabia Petraea and Babylon (Isa. xlii. 11 ; Ps.
cxx. 5). According to Wetzstein, they are to be found in the
nomad tribes of Arabia Petraea up to Harra. The name DumaJi,
Aovfieda, AovfiaiBa (Ptol. v. 19, 7, Steph. Byz.\ Domata (Plin.
6, 32), has been retained in the modern Dumat el Jendel in
Nejd, the Arabian highland, four days' journey to the north of
Taima. — Tema: a trading people (Job vi. 19; Isa. xxi. 14;
mentioned in Jer. xxv. 23, between Dedan and Bus) in the
land of Taima, on the border of Nejd and the Syrian desert.
According to Wetzstein, Duma and T&ma are still two important
places in Eastern Hauran, three-quarters of an hour apart.
Jetur and Naphish were neighbours of the tribes of Israel to
the east of the Jordan (1 Chron. v. 19), who made war upon
them along with the Hagrites, the 'Aypalot of Ptol. and Strabo.
From Jetur sprang the Iturasans, who lived, according to Strabo,
near the Trachonians in an almost inaccessible, mountainous,
Digitized by VjOOQlC
chap. xxvi. l-i. 269
archs it embraced the chieftainship, the rule over the brethren
and the entire family (xxvii. 29), and the title to the blessing of
the promise (xxvii. 4, 27-29), which included the future posses-
sion of Canaan and of covenant fellowship with Jehovah (xxviii.
4). Jacob knew this, and it led him to anticipate the purposes
of God. Esau also knew it, but attached no value to it. There
is proof enough that he knew he was giving away, along with
the birthright, blessings which, because they were not of a mate-
rial but of a spiritual nature, had no particular value in his
estimation, in the words he made use of: "Behold lam going to
die (to meet death), and what is the birthright to me?" The only
thing of value to him was the sensual enjoyment of the present;
the spiritual blessings of the future his carnal mind was unable
to estimate. In this he showed himself to be /3e/3ijKo<s (Heb.
xii. 16), a profane man, who cared for nothing but the moment-
ary gratification of sensual desires, who " did eat and drink, and
rote up, and went his way, and so despised his birthright " (ver.
34). With these words the Scriptures judge and condemn the
conduct of Esau. Just as Ishmael was excluded from the pro-
mised blessing because he was begotten "according to the
flesh," so Esau lost it because his disposition was according to
the flesh. The frivolity with which he sold his birthright to his
brother for a dish of lentils, rendered him unfit to be the heir
and possessor of the promised grace. But this did not justify
Jacob's conduct in the matter. Though not condemned here,
yet in the further course of the history it is shown to have been
wrong, by the simple fact that he did not venture to make this
transaction the basis of a claim.
Isaac's jots and sorrows.— chap. xxvi.
The incidents of Isaac's life which are collected together in
this chapter, from the time of his sojourn in the south country,
resemble in many respects certain events in the life of Abra-
ham ; but the distinctive peculiarities are such as to form a true
picture of the dealings of God, which were in perfect accord-
ance with the character of the patriarch.
Vers. 1-5. Renewal of the promise. — A famine " in the
land " (i.e. Canaan, to which he had therefore returned from
Digitized by VjOOQlC
270 THE FIBST BOOK OF MOSES.
Hagar*s well ; xxv. 11), compelled Isaac to leave Canaan, as it
had done Abraham before. Abraham went to Egypt, where
his wife was exposed to danger, from which she could only be
rescued by the direct interposition of God. Isaac also intended
to go there, but on the way, viz. in Gerar, he received instruc-
tion through a divine manifestation that he was to remain there.
As he was the seed to whom the land of Canaan was promised,
he was directed not to leave it. To this end Jehovah assured
him of the fulfilment of all the promises made to Abraham on
oath, with express reference to His oath (xxii. 16) to him
and to his posterity, and on account of Abraham's obedience of
faith. The only peculiarity in the words is the plural, " all these
lands." This plural refers to all the lands or territories of the
different Canaanitish tribes, mentioned in chap. xv. 19-21, like
the different divisions of the kingdom of Israel or Judah in 1
Chron. xiii. 2, 2 Chron. xi. 23. wn ; an antique form of n?ttn
occurring only in the Pentateuch. The piety of Abraham is
described in words that indicate a perfect obedience to all the
commands of God, and therefore frequently recur among the
legal expressions of a later date, njr^ HTDB>D "IDE> '< to take care
of Jehovah's care," ix. to observe Jehovah, His person, and His
will. Mishmereth, reverence, observance, care, is more closely
defined by " commandments, statutes, laws" to denote constant
obedience to all the revelations and instructions of God.
Vers. 6-11. Protection op Rebekah at Gekar. — As
Abraham had declared his wife to be his sister both in Egypt
and at Gerar, so did Isaac also in the latter place. But the
manner in which God protected Rebekah was very different from
that in which Sarah was preserved in both instances. Before
any one had touched Rebekah, the Philistine king discovered
the untruthfulness of Isaac's statement, having seen Isaac "sport-
ing with Rebekah," se. in a manner to show that she was his
wife ; whereupon he reproved Isaac for what he had said, and
forbade any of his people to touch Rebekah on pain of death.
Whether this was the same Abimelech as the one mentioned in
chap. xx. cannot be decided with certainty. The name proves
nothing, for it was the standing official name of the kings of
Gerar (cf. 1 Sam. xxi. 11 and Ps. xxxiv.), as Pharaoh was of
the kings of Egypt. The identity is favoured by the pious con-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXVI. 12-22. 271
duct of Abimelech in both instances ; and no difficulty is caused
either by the circumstance that 80 years had elapsed between
the two events (for Abraham had only been dead five years,
and the age of 150 was no rarity then), or by the fact, that
whereas the first Abimelech had Sarah taken into his harem, the
second not only bad no intention of doing this, but was anxious
to protect her from his people, inasmuch as it would be all the
easier to conceive of this in the case of the same king, on the
ground of his advanced age.
Vers. 12—17. Isaac's increasing wealth. — As Isaac had
experienced the promised protection (" I will be with thee," ver.
3) in the safety of his wife, so did he receive while in Gerar
the promised blessing. He sowed and received in that year u a
hundred measures," i.e. a hundred-fold return. This was an un-
usual blessing, as the yield even in very fertile regions is not
generally greater than from twenty-five to fifty-fold (Niebultr
and Burckhardt), and it is only in the Ruh.be, that small and
most fruitful plain of Syria, that wheat yields on an average
eighty, and barley a hundred-fold. Agriculture is still practised
by the Bedouins, as well as grazing (Robinson, Pal. i. 77, and
Seetzeri) ; so that Isaac's sowing was no proof that he had been
stimulated by the promise of Jehovah to take up a settled abode
in the promised land. — Vers. 13 sqq. Being thus blessed of Jeho-
vah, Isaac became increasingly (w?, vid. chap. viiL 3) greater
(i.e. stronger), until he was very powerful and his wealth very
great ; so that the Philistines envied him, and endeavoured to do
him injury by stopping up and filling with rubbish all the wells
that had been dug in his father's time ; and even Abimelech
requested him to depart, because he was afraid of his power.
Isaac then encamped in the valley of Gerar, i.e. in the " undu-
lating land of Gerar," through which the torrent (Jurf) from
Gerar flows from the south-east (Ritter, Erdk. 14, pp. 1084—5).
Vers. 18-22. Reopening and discovert of wells. — In
this valley Isaac dug open the old wells which bad existed from
Abraham's time, and gave them the old names. His people also
dug three new wells. But Abimelech' s people raised a contest
about two of these ; and for this reason Isaac called them Esek
and Sitnah, strife and opposition. The third there was no dis-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
272 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
pute about ; and it received in consequence the name Rehoboth,
" breadths," for Isaac said, " Yea now (fW$P?)> as in chap. xxix.
32, etc.) Jehovah has provided for us a broad space, that we may
be fruitful (multiply) in Hie land" This well was probably not
in the land of Gerar, as Isaac had removed thence, but in the
Wady Ruhaibeh, the name of which is suggestive of Rehoboth,
which stands at the point where the two roads from Gaza and
Hebron meet, about 3 hoars to the south of Elusa, 8^ to the south
of Beersheba, and where there are extensive ruins of the city of
the same name upon the heights, also the remains of wells
(Robinson, Pal. i. 289 sqq. ; Strauss, Sinai and Golgotha) ; where
too the name Sitnah seems to have been retained in the Wady
Shutein, with ruins on the northern hills between RuJiaibeh and
Khulasa (Elusa).
Vers. 23-25. Isaac's journey to Beebsheba. — Here,
where Abraham had spent a long time (xxi. 33 sqq.), Jehovah
appeared to him during the night and renewed the promises al-
ready given ; upon which, Isaac built an altar and performed a
solemn service. Here his servants also dug a well near to the tents.
Vers. 26-33. Abimelech's treatt with Isaac. — The
conclusion of this alliance was substantially only a repetition
or renewal of the alliance entered into with Abraham ; but the
renewal itself arose so completely out of the circumstances, that
there is no ground whatever for denying that it occurred, or for
the hypothesis that our account is merely another form of the
earlier alliance; to say nothing of the fact, that besides the
agreement in the leading event itself, the attendant circum-
stances are altogether peculiar, and correspond to the events
which preceded. Abimelech not only brought his chief captain
Phicol (supposed to be the same as in chap. xxi. 22, if Phicol is
not also an official name), but his jn? "friend," i.e. his privy
councillor, Ahuzzath. Isaac referred to the hostility they had
shown; to which Abimelech replied, that they (he and his people)
did not smite him (VM), i.e. drive him away by force, but let
him depart in peace, and expressed a wish that there might be
an oath between them. n?K the oath, as an act of self-impreca-
tion, was to form the basis of the covenant to be made. From
this n?K came also to be used for a covenant sanctioned by an
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXVIL 1-4. 273
oath (Deut. xxix. 11, 13). nfc^n DK " that thou do not : " DK a
particle of negation used in an oath (xiv. 23, etc.). (On the verb
with zere, see Qes. § 75, Anm. 17 ; Ewald, § 224.) — The same
day Isaac's servants informed him of the well which they had
dag ; and Isaac gave it the name Shebah ( n Wtr, oath), in com-
memoration of the treaty made on oath. " Therefore the city
teas called Bcerslieba." This derivation of the name does not
shut the other (xxi. 31) out, but seems to confirm it. As the
treaty made on oath between Abimelech and Isaac was only a
renewal of his covenant concluded before with Abraham, so the
name Beersheba was also renewed by the well Shebah. The
reality of the occurrence is supported by the fact that the two
wells are in existence still (vid. chap. xxi. 31).
Vers. 34, 35. Esau's Marriage. — To the various troubles
which the Philistines prepared for Isaac, but which, through
the blessing of God, only contributed to the increase of his
wealth and importance, a domestic cross was added, which
caused him great and lasting sorrow. Esau married two wives
in the 40th year of his age, the 100th of Isaac's life (xxv. 26);
and that not from his own relations in Mesopotamia, but from
among the Canaanites whom God had cast off. On their names,
see chap, xxxvi. 2, 3. They became " bitterness of spirit" the
cause of deep trouble, to his parents, viz. on account of their
Canaanitish character, which was so opposed to the vocation of
the patriarchs; whilst Esau by these marriages furnished another
proof, how thoroughly his heart was set upon earthly things.
Isaac's blessing. — chap, xxvii.
Vers. 1-4. When Isaac had grown old, and his eyes were
dim, so that he could no longer see (ntoo from seeing, with the
neg. JO as in chap. xvi. 2, etc.), he wished, in the consciousness of
approaching death, to give his blessing to his elder son. Isaac
was then in his 137th year, at which age his half-brother
Ishmael had died fourteen years before ; * and this, with the
increasing infirmities of age, may have suggested the thought
1 Cf. Lightfoot, opp. 1, p. 19. This correct estimate of Luther's is based
npon the following calculation: — When Joseph was introduced to Pharaoh-
he was thirty years old (xli. 46), and when Jacob went into Egypt, thirty-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
274 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
of death, though he did not die till forty-three years afterwards
(xxxv. 28). Without regard to the words which were spoken
by God with reference to the children before their birth, and
without taking any notice of Esau's frivolous barter of his
birthright and his ungodly connection with Canaanites, Isaac
maintained his preference for Esau, and directed him therefore
to take his things (By?, hunting gear), his quiver and bow, to
hunt game and prepare a savoury dish, that he might eat, and
his soul might bless him. As his preference for Esau was fos-
tered and strengthened by, if it did not spring from, his liking
for game (xxv. 28), so now he wished to raise his spirits for
imparting the blessing by a dish of venison prepared to his
taste. In this the infirmity of his flesh is evident. At the
same time, it was not merely because of his partiality for Esau,
but unquestionably on account of the natural rights of the first-
born, that he wished to impart the blessing to him, just as the
desire to do this before his death arose from the consciousness
of his patriarchal call.
Vers. 5-17. Rebekah, who heard what he said, sought to
frustrate this intention, and to secure the blessing for her
(favourite) son Jacob. Whilst Esau was away hunting, she
told Jacob to take his father a dish, which she would prepare
from two kids according to his taste; and, having introduced
himself as Esau, to ask for the blessing u before Jehovah."
Jacob's objection, that the father would know him by his smooth
skin, and so, instead of blessing him, might pronounce a curse
upon him as a mocker, i.e. one who was trifling with his blind
father, she silenced by saying, that she would take the curse
upon herself. She evidently relied upon the word of promise,
and thought that she ought to do her part to secure its fulfil-
ment by directing the father's blessing to Jacob; and to this
end she thought any means allowable. Consequently she was
so assured of the success of her stratagem as to have no fear of
the possibility of a curse. Jacob then acceded to her plan, and
nine, as the seven years of abundance and two of famine had then passed
by (xlv. 6). But Jacob -was at that time 180 years old (xlvii. 9). Conse-
quently Joseph was born before Jacob was ninety-one ; and as his birth
took place in the fourteenth year of Jacob's sojourn in Mesopotamia (cf-
xxx. 25, and xxix. 18, 21, and 27), Jacob's flight to Laban occurred in
the seventy-seventh year of his own life, and the 187th of Isaac's.
Digitized by VjOOQlC .
CHAP. XXVIL 18-29. 27.')
fetched the goats. Rebekah prepared them according to her
husband's taste; and having told Jacob to put on Esau's best
clothes which were with her in the dwelling (the tent, not the
house), she covered his hands and the smooth (i.e. the smooth
parts) of his neck with the skins of the kids of the goats, 1 and
sent him with the savoury dish to his father.
Vers. 18-29. But Jacob had no easy task to perform before
his father. As soon as he had spoken on entering, his father
asked him, " Who art thou, my son f " On his replying, " lam
Esau, thy first-born" the father expressed his surprise at the
rapid success of his hunting; and when he was satisfied with
the reply, " Jehovah tliy God sent it (the thing desired) to meet
me," he became suspicious about the voice, and bade him come
nearer, that he might feel him. But as his hands appeared hairy
like Esau's, he did not recognise him ; and " so lie blessed him."
In this remark (ver. 23) the writer gives the result of Jacob's
attempt ; so that the blessing is merely mentioned proleptically
here, and refers to the formal blessing described afterwards, and
not to the first greeting and salutation. — Vers. 24 sqq. After his
father, in order to get rid of his suspicion about the voice, had
asked him once more, "Art thou really my son Esau?" and
Jacob had replied, " I am" 0?$j=yes), he told him to hand him
the savoury dish that he might eat. After eating, he kissed his
son as a sign of his paternal affection, and in doing so he smelt
the odour of his clothes, i.e. the clothes of Esau, which were
thoroughly scented with the odour of the fields, and then im-
parted his blessing (vers. 27—29). The blessing itself is
thrown, as the sign of an elevated state of mind, into the poetic
style of parallel clauses, and contains the peculiar forms of
poetry, such as n«"j for nan, rnn for rrn, etc. The smell of the
clothes with the scent of the field suggested to the patriarch's
mind the image of his son's future prosperity, so that he saw him
in possession of the promised land and the full enjoyment of
its valuable blessings, having the smell of the field which
Jehovah blessed, i.e. the garden of paradise, and broke out into
the wish, " God (Ha-Elohim, the personal God, not Jehovah, the
1 We must not think of oar European goats, whose skins would be
quite unsuitable for any such deception. "It is the camel-goat of the
East, whose black, silk -like hair was used even by the Romans as a substi-
tute for human hair. Martial zii. 46." — Tuch on ver. 16.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
276 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
covenant God) give thee from the dew of lieaven, and tlie fat
fields of the earth, and plenty of corn and wine" i.e. a land
blessed with the dew of heaven and a fruitful soil. In Eastern
countries, where there is so little rain, the dew is the most im-
portant prerequisite for the growth of the fruits of the earth,
and is often mentioned therefore as a source of blessing (Deut.
xxxiii. 13, 28; Hos. xiv. 6; Zech. viii. 12). In 'joeto, not-
withstanding the absence of the Dagesh from the E?, the D is the
prep. 19, as the parallel 7t9tp proves ; and D S 3DB> both here and in
ver. 39 are the fat (fertile) districts of a country. The rest of
the blessing had reference to the future pre-eminence of his
son. He was to be lord not only over his brethren (i.e. over
kindred tribes), but over (foreign) peoples and nations also.
The blessing rises here to the idea of universal dominion, which
was to be realized in the fact that, according to the attitude
assumed by the people towards him as their lord, it would
secure to them either a blessing or a curse. If we compare this
blessing with the promises which Abraham received, there are
two elements of the latter which are very apparent ; viz. the
possession of the land, in the promise of the rich enjoyment of
its produce, and the numerous increase of posterity, in the pro-
mised dominion over the nations. The third element, however,
the blessing of the nations in and through the seed of Abra-
ham, is so generalized in the expression, which is moulded
according to chap. xii. 3, " Cursed be every one that curseth
thee, and blessed be he that blesseth thee," that the person
blessed is not thereby declared to be the medium of salvation to
the nations. Since the intention to give the blessing to Esau
the first-born did not spring from proper feelings towards
Jehovah and His promises, the blessing itself, as the use of the
word Elohim instead of Jehovah or El Shaddai (cf. xxviii. 3)
clearly shows, could not rise to the full height of the divine
blessings of salvation, but referred chiefly to the relation in
which the two brothers and their descendants would stand to
one another, the theme with which Isaac's soul was entirely
filled. It was only the painful discovery that, in blessing
against his will, he had been compelled to follow the saving
counsel of God, which awakened in him the consciousness of
his patriarchal vocation, and gave him the spiritual power to
impart the " blessing of Abraham " to the son whom he had
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXVIL 80-40. 277
kept back, but whom Jehovah had chosen, when he was about
to s.end him away to Haran (xxviii. 3, 4).
Vers. 30-40. Jacob had hardly left his father, after receiving
the blessing (K£ *|N, was only gone out), when Esau returned
and came to Isaac, with the game prepared, to receive the bless-
ing. The shock was inconceivable which Isaac received, when
he found that lie had blessed another, and not Esau — that, in
fact, he had blessed Jacob. At the same time he neither could
nor would, either curse him on account of the deception which
he had practised, or withdraw the blessing imparted. For he
could not help confessing to himself that he had sinned and
brought the deception upon himself by his carnal preference for
Esau. Moreover, the blessing was not a matter of subjective
human affection, but a right entrusted by the grace of God to
paternal supremacy and authority, in the exercise of which the
person blessing, being impelled and guided by a higher autho-
rity, imparted to the person to be blest spiritual possessions and
powers, which the will of man could not capriciously withdraw.
Regarding this as the meaning of the blessing, Isaac necessarily
saw in what had taken place the will of God, which had directed
to Jacob the blessing that he had intended for Esau. He there-
fore said, " / have blessed him ; yea, he will be (remain) blessed"
(cf. Heb. xii. 17). Even the great and bitter lamentation into
which Esau broke out could not change his father's mind. To
his entreaty in ver. 34, " Bless me, even me also, my father !"
he replied, " Thy brother came with subtilty, and hath taken away
thy blessing" Esau answered, " Is it that (W) they have named
him Jacob (overreacher), and he has overreaclied me twice?" i.e.
has he received the name Jacob from the fact that he has twice
outwitted me ? *3H is used " when the cause is not rightly
known" (cf. chap. xxix. 15). To his further entreaty, "Hast
thou not reserved a blessing for me ?" (/**, lit. to lay aside), Isaac
repeated the substance of the blessing given to Jacob, and added,
" and to thee (p 3? for 1? as in chap. iii. 9), now, what can I do, my
son f" When Esau again repeated, with tears, the entreaty that
Isaac would bless him also, the father gave him a blessing (vers.
39, 40), but one which, when compared with the blessing of
Jacob, was to be regarded rather as " a modified curse," and
which is not even described as a blessing, but "introduced a
disturbing element into Jacob's blessing, a retribution for the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
278 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
impure means by which he had obtained it." "Behold? it
states, "from the fat fields of the earth will thy dwelling be, and
from Hie dew of lieaven from above" By a play upon the words
Isaac uses the same expression as in ver. 28, " from the fat fields
of the earth, and from the dew," but in the opposite sense, p
being partitive there, and privative here, " from=away from."
The context requires that the words should be taken thus, and
not in the sense of " thy dwelling shall partake of the fat of the
earth and the dew of heaven" (Vulg., Luth., etc.). 1 Since Isaac
said (ver. 37) he had given Jacob the blessing of the super-
abundance of corn and wine, he could not possibly promise Esau
also fat fields and the dew of heaven. Nor would this agree
with the words which follow, "By thy sword wilt thou live."
Moreover, the privative sense of P is thoroughly poetical (cf .
2 Sam. i. 22; Job xi. 15, etc.). The idea expressed in the
words, therefore, was that the dwelling-place of Esau would be
the very opposite of the land of Canaan, viz. an unfruitful land.
This is generally the condition of the mountainous country of
Edom, which, although not without its fertile slopes and valleys,
especially in the eastern portion (cf . Robinson, Pal. ii. p. 552), is
thoroughly waste and barren in- the western ; so that Seetzen says
it consists of " the most desolate and barren mountains probably
in the world." The mode of life and occupation of the inhabit-
ants were adapted to the country. " By (lit. on) thy sword thou
wilt live ;" i.e. thy maintenance will depend on the sword (?V as
in Deut. viii. 3 cf. Isa. xxxviii. 16), " live by war, rapine, and
freebooting" (Knobel). " And thy brother thou wilt serve ; yet it
will come to pass, as (wto, lit. in proportion as, cf . Num. xxvii.
14) thou shakest (tossest), thou wilt break his yoke from thy neck"
TVl, " to rove about" (Jer. ii. 31 ; Hos. xii. 1), Hiphil " to cause
(the thoughts) to rove about" (Ps. lv. 3) ; but Hengstenberg' s
rendering is the best here, viz. " to shake, sc. the yoke." In the
wild, sport-loving Esau there was aptly prefigured the character
of his posterity. Josephus describes the Idumsean people as " a
tumultuous and disorderly nation, always on the watch on every
1 I cannot discover, however, in Mai. i. 3 an authentic proof of the pri-
vative meaning, as Kurtz and Delitzsch do, since the prophet's words, " I
have hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste," are not
descriptive of the natural condition of Idumaa, but of the desolation to
which the land was given up.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXVII. 80-4(1. 279
motion, delighting in mutations" ( Whiston's tr. : de bell Jud. 4,
4, 1). The mental eye of the patriarch discerned in the son his
whole future family in its attitude to its brother-nation, and he
promised Edom, not freedom from the dominion of Israel (for
Esau was to serve his brother, as Jehovah had predicted before
their birth), but only a repeated and not unsuccessful struggle
for freedom. And so it was ; the historical relation of Edom to
Israel assumed the form of a constant reiteration of servitude,
revolt, and reconquest. After a long period of independence at
the first, the Edomites were defeated by Saul (1 Sam. xiv. 47)
and subjugated by David (2 Sam. viii. 14) ; and, in spite of an
attempt at revolt under Solomon (1 Kings xi. 14 sqq.), they
remained subject to the kingdom of Judah until the time of
Joram, when they rebelled. They were subdued again by
Amaziah (2 Kings xiv. 7; 2 Chron. xxv. 11 sqq.), and remained
in subjection under Uzziah and Jotham (2 Kings xiv. 22 ;
2 Chron. xxvi. 2). It was not till the reign of Ahaz that they
shook the yoke of Judah entirely off (2 Kings xvi. 6 ; 2 Chron.
xxviii. 17), without Judah being ever able to reduce them again.
At length, however, they were completely conquered by John
Hyrcanus about B.C. 129, compelled to submit to circumcision,
and incorporated in the Jewish state (Jo&ephus, Ant. xiii. 9, 1,
xv. 7, 9). At a still later period, through Antipater and Herod,
they established an Idumsean dynasty over Judea, which lasted
till the complete dissolution of the Jewish state.
Thus the words of Isaac to his two sons were fulfilled, —
words which are justly said to have been spoken " in faith con-
cerning things to come" (Heb. xi. 20). For the blessing was a
prophecy, and that not merely in the case of Esau, but in that
of Jacob also ; although Isaac was deceived with regard to the
person of the latter. Jacob remained blessed, therefore, because,
according to the predetermination of God, the elder was to serve
the younger ; but the deceit by which his mother prompted him
to secure the blessing was never approved. On the contrary,
the sin was followed by immediate punishment. Rebekah was
obliged to send her pet son into a foreign land, away from his
father's house, and in an utterly destitute condition. She did
not see him for twenty years, even if she lived till his return,
and possibly never saw again. Jacob had to atone for his sin
against Doth brother and father by a long and painful exile, in the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
280 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
midst of privation, anxiety, fraud, and want. Isaac was punished
for retaining his preference for Esau, in opposition to the revealed
will of Jehovah, by the success of Jacob's stratagem 5 and Esau
for his contempt of the birthright, by the loss of the blessing of
the first-born. In this way a higher hand prevailed above the
acts of sinful men, bringing the counsel and will of Jehovah to
eventual triumph, in opposition to human thought and will.
Vers. 41-46. Esau's complaining and weeping were now
changed into mortal hatred of his brother. " TJie days of mourn-
ing" he said to himself, "for my father are at hand, and I will
kill my brother Jacob" '38 ?3« : genit. obj. as in Amos viii. 10 ;
Jer. vi. 26. He would put off his intended fratricide that he
might not hurt his father's mind. — Ver. 42. When Rebekah
was informed by some one of Esau's intention, she advised Jacob
to protect himself from his revenge (DO? 1 ?"? *° procure comfort
by retaliation, equivalent to " avenge himself," Di??riri, Isa. i. 24 1 ),
by Seeing to her brother Laban in Haran, and remaining there
" some days," as she mildly puts'it, until his brother's wrath was
subdued. " For why should I lose you both in one day?" viz.
Jacob through Esau's vengeance, and Esau as a murderer by
the avenger of blood (chap. ix. 6, cf. 2 Sam. xiv. 6, 7). In
order to obtain Isaac's consent to this plan, without hurting his
feelings by telling him of Esau's murderous intentions, she spoke
to him of her troubles on account of the Hittite wives of Esau,
and the weariness of life that she should feel if Jacob also were
to marry one of the daughters of the land, and so introduced the
idea of sending Jacob to her relations in Mesopotamia, with a
view to his marriage there.
Jacob's flight to haran and dream in bethel. — chap.
xxviii.
Vers. 1-9. Jacob's departure from his parents' house.
— Rebekah' s complaint reminded Isaac of his own call, and his
consequent duty to provide for Jacob's marriage in a manner
corresponding to the divine counsels of salvation. — Vers. 1-5.
He called Jacob, therefore, and sent him to Padan-Aram to his
mother's relations, with instructions to seek a wife there, and not
1 This reference is incorrect ; the Niphal is used in Isa. i. 24, the
HiOipael in Jer. v. 9-29. Tr.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXVIII. 10-22. 281
among the daughters of Canaan, giving him at the same time
the " blessing of Abraham" i.e. the blessing of promise, which
Abraham had repeatedly received from the Lord, but which is
more especially recorded in chap. xvii. 2 sqq., and xxii. 16-18. —
Vers. 6-9. When Esau heard of this blessing and the sending
away of Jacob, and saw therein the displeasure of his parents
at his Hittite wives, he went to Ishmael — i.e. to the family of Ish-
mael, for Ishmael himself had been dead fourteen years (p. 273) —
and took as a third wife Mahalath, a daughter of Ishmael (called
Bashemath in chap, xxxvi. 3, a descendant of Abraham there-
fore), a step by which he might no doubt ensure the approval
of his parents, but in which he failed to consider that Ishmael
had been separated from the house of Abraham and family of
promise by the appointment of God ; so that it only furnished
another proof that he had no thought of the religious interests of
the chosen family, and was unfit to be the recipient of divine
revelation.
Vers. 10—22. Jacob's dream at Bethel. — As he was
travelling from Beersheba, where Isaac was then staying (xxvi.
25), to Haran, Jacob came to a place where he was obliged to
stop all night, because the sun had set. The words " he hit
(lighted) upon the place" indicate the apparently accidental, yet
really divinely appointed choice of this place for his night-
quarters ; and the definite article points it out as having become
well known through the revelation of God that ensued. After
making a pillow with the stones (nfe^OD, head-place, pillow), he
fell asleep and had a dream, in which he saw a ladder resting
upon the earth, with the top reaching to heaven ; and upon
it angels of God going up and down, and Jehovah Himself
standing above it. The ladder was a visible symbol of the real
and uninterrupted fellowship between God in heaven and His
people upon earth. The angels upon it carry up the wants of
men to God, and bring down the assistance and protection of
God to men. The ladder stood there upon the earth, just where
Jacob was lying in solitude, poor, helpless, and forsaken by men.
Above in heaven stood Jehovah, and explained in words the
symbol which he saw. Proclaiming Himself to Jacob as the
God of his fathers, He not only confirmed to him all the pro-
mises of the fathers in their fullest extent, but promised him
pent. — VOL. I. I
Digitized by VjOOQlC
282 THE FIHST BOOK OK MOSES.
protection on his journey and a safe return to his home (vers.
13-15). But as the fulfilment of this promise to Jacob was still
far off, God added the firm assurance, " / will not leave thee till
I have done (carried out) wltat I have told thee" — Vers. 16 sqq.
Jacob gave utterance to the impression made by this vision as
soon as he awoke from sleep, in the words, " Surely Jehovah is
in this place, and I knew it not." Not that the omnipresence of
God was unknown to him ; but that Jehovah in His condescend-
ing mercy should be near to him even here, far away from his
father's house and from the places consecrated to His worship, —
it was this which he did not know or imagine. The revelation
was intended not only to stamp the blessing, with which Isaac
had dismissed him from his home, with the seal of divine approval,
but also to impress upon Jacob's mind the fact, that although
Jehovah would be near to protect and guide him even in a
foreign land, the land of promise was the holy ground on which
the God of his fathers would set up the covenant of His grace.
On his departure from that land, he was to carry with him a
sacred awe of the gracious presence of Jehovah there. To that
end the Lord proved to him that He was near, in such a way
that the place appeared " dreadful," inasmuch as the nearness
of the holy God makes an alarming impression upon unholy
man, and the consciousness of sin grows into the fear of death.
But in spite of this alarm, the place was none other than " the
house of God and the gate of heaven," i.e. a place where God dwelt,
and a way that opened to Him in heaven. — Ver. 18. In the
morning Jacob set up the stone at his head, as a monument
(rnxo) to commemorate the revelation he had received from God ;
and poured oil upon the top, to consecrate it as a memorial of
the mercy that had been shown him there (visionis insigne
fivnfioawov, Calvin), not as an idol or an object of divine wor-
ship (yid. Ex. xxx. 26 sqq.). — He then gave the place the name
of Bethel, i.e. House of God, whereas (WW) the town had been
called Luz before. This antithesis shows that Jacob gave the
name, not to the place where the pillar was set up, but to the
town, in the neighbourhood of which he had received the divine
revelation. He renewed it on his return from Mesopotamia
(xxxv. 15). This is confirmed by chap, xlviii. 3, where Jacob,
like the historian in chap. xxxv. 6, 7, speaks of Luz as the place
of this revelation. There is nothing at variance with this in
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXIX. 1-14. 283
.-.' Josh. xvi. 2, xviii. 13; for it is not Bethel as a city, but the
/* mountains of Bethel, that are there distinguished from Luz (see
/ my Commentary on Josh. xvi. 2). 1 — Ver. 20. Lastly, Jacob
made a vow : that if God would give him the promised protec-
tion on his journey, and bring him back in safety to his father's
house, Jehovah should be his God (rrorj in ver. 21 commences
the apodosis), the stone which he had set up should be a house
of God, and Jehovah should receive a tenth of all that He gave
to him. It is to be noticed here, that Elohim is used in the pro-
tasis instead of Jehovah, as constituting the essence of the vow :
if Jehovah, who had appeared to him, proved Himself to be God
by fulfilling His promise, then he would acknowledge and worship
Him as his God, by making the stone thus set up into a house
of God, i.e. a place of sacrifice, and by tithing all his possessions.
With regard to the fulfilment of this vow, we learn from chap.
xxxv. 7 that Jacob built an altar, and probably also dedicated
the tenth to God, i.e. offered it to Jehovah ; or, as some have
supposed, applied it partly to the erection and preservation of
the altar, and partly to burnt and thank-offerings combined with
sacrificial meals, according to the analogy of Deut. xiv. 28, 29
(cf. chap. xxxi. 54, xlvi. 1).
Jacob's stay in haran. his double marriage and
children. — chap. xxix. and xxx.
Vers. 1-14. Arrival in Haran, and reception by
Laban. — Being strengthened in spirit by the nocturnal vision,
Jacob proceeded on his journey into " the land of the sons of
the East ;" by which we are to understand, not so much the
1 The fact mentioned here has often been cited as the origin of the
anointed stones (/Wri/Xo<) of the heathen, and this heathen custom has been
regarded as a degeneration of the patriarchal. But apart from this essential
difference, that the Baetulian worship was chiefly connected with meteoric
stones (cf . F. von Dalberg, lib. d. Meteor-cuUus d. Alteri), which were sup-
posed to have come down from some god, and were looked upon as deified,
this opinion is at variance with the circumstance, that Jacob himself, in
consecrating the stone by pouring oil upon it, only followed a custom already
established, and still more with the fact, that the name /WtvXo;, jimn-vXttc,
notwithstanding its sounding like Bethel, can hardly have arisen from the
name Beth-El, Gr. B«<4qx, since the r for t would be perfectly inexplicable.
Dietrich derives /3<un/A<o» from ^93, to render inoperative, and interpret* it
amulet.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
284 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES. ^
Arabian desert, that reaches to the Euphrates, as Mesopotamia,
which lies on the other side of that river. For there he saw
the well in the field (ver. 2), by which three flocks were lying,
waiting for the arrival of the other flocks of the place, before
they could be watered. The remark in ver. 2, that the stone
upon the well's mouth was large (n?* 1 ? without the article is a
predicate), does not mean that the united strength of all the
shepherds was required to roll it away, whereas Jacob rolled it
away alone (ver. 10) ; but only that it was not in the power of
every shepherd, much less of a shepherdess like Rachel, to roll
it away. Hence in all probability the agreement that had been
formed among them, that they would water the flocks together.
The scene is so thoroughly in harmony with the customs of the
East, both ancient and modern, that the similarity to the one
described in chap. xxiv. 11 sqq. is by no means strange (yid.
Rob. Pal. i. 301, 304, ii. 351, 357, 371). Moreover the well
was very differently constructed from that at which Abraham's
servant met with Rebekah. There the water was drawn at once
from the (open) well and poured into troughs placed ready for
the cattle, as is the case now at most of the wells in the East ;
whereas here the well was closed up with a stone, and there is
no mention of pitchers and troughs. The well, therefore, was
probably a cistern dug in the ground, which was covered up or
closed with a large stone, and probably so constructed, that after
the stone had been rolled away the flocks could be driven to the
edge to drink. 1 — Vers. 5, 6. Jacob asked the shepherds where
they lived ; from which it is probable that the well was not
situated, like that in chap. xxiv. 11, in the immediate neigh-
bourhood of the town of Haran ; and when they said they were
from Haran, he inquired after Laban, the son, i.e. the descen-
dant, of Nahor, and how he was (v OVfn : is he well ?) ; and
received the reply, " Well; and behold Rachel, his daughter, is just
coming (HN3 particip.) with the flock? When Jacob thereupon
told the shepherds to water the flocks and feed them again, for
1 Like the cistern Bir Beskat, described by Rosen., in the valley of Hebron,
or those which Robinson found in the desert of Judah (Pal. ii. 165), hol-
lowed out in the great mass of rock, and covered with a large, thick, flat
stone, in the middle of which a round hole had been left, which formed the
opening of the cistern, and in many cases was closed up with a heavy stone,
which it would take two or three men to roll away.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXIX. 15-80. 285
the day was still " great," — i.e. it wanted a long while to the
evening, and was not yet time to drive them in (to the folds to
rest for the night), — he certainly only wanted to get the shep-
herds away from the well, that he might meet with his cousin
alone. But as Rachel came up in the meantime, he was so
carried away hy the feelings of relationship, possibly by a certain
love at first sight, that he rolled the stone away from the well,
watered her flock, and after kissing her, introduced himself
with tears of joyous emotion as her cousin (TO* 1 W, brother,
i.e. relation of her father) and Rebekah's son. What the other
shepherds thought of all this, is passed over as indifferent to the
purpose of the narrative, and the friendly reception of Jacob
by Laban is related immediately afterwards. When Jacob had
told Laban " all these things" — i.e. hardly " the cause of his
journey, and the things which had happened to him in relation
to the birthright" (Rosenmuller), but simply the things men-
tioned in vers. 2-12, — Laban acknowledged him as his relative :
" Yes, thou art my bone and my flesh " (cf . ii. 23 and Judg. ix.
2) ; and thereby eo ipso ensured him an abode in his house.
Vers. 15-30. Jacob's double marriage. — After a full
month (" a month of days," chap. xli. 1 ; Num. xi. 20, etc.),
during which time Laban had discovered that he was a good
and useful shepherd, he said to him, "Shouldst thou, because
thou art my relative, serve me for nothing ? fix me thy wages''
Laban's selfishness comes out here under the appearance of
justice and kindness. To preclude all claim on the part of. his
sister's son to gratitude or affection in return for his services, he
proposes to pay him like an ordinary servant. Jacob offered
to serve him seven years for Rachel, the younger of his two
daughters, whom he loved because of her beauty ; i.e. just as
many years as the week has days, that he might bind himself
to a complete and sufficient number of years of service. For
the elder daughter, Leah, had weak eyes, and consequently was
not so good-looking ; since bright eyes, with fire in them, are
regarded as the height of beauty in Oriental women. Laban
agreed. He would rather give his daughter to him than to a
stranger. 1 Jacob's proposal may be explained, partly on the
1 This is the case still with the Bedouins, the Druses, and other Eastern
tribes. (Burckhardt, Volney, Layard, and Lane.)
Digitized by VjOOQlC
286 THE FIBST BOOK OF MOSES.
ground that he was not then in a condition to give the cus-
tomary dowry, or the usual presents to relations, and partly also
from the fact that his situation with regard to Esau compelled
him to remain some time with Laban. The assent on the part
of Laban cannot be accounted for from the custom of selling
daughters to husbands, for it cannot be shown that the pur-
chase of wives was a general custom at that time ; but is to be
explained solely on the ground of Laban' s selfishness and avarice,
which came out still more plainly afterwards. To Jacob, how-
ever, the seven years seemed but u a few days, because he loved
Rachel." This is to be understood, as C. a JLapide observes,
" not affective, but appretiative," i.e. in comparison with the re-
ward to be obtained for his service. — Vers. 21 sqq. But when
Jacob asked for his reward at the expiration of this period, and
according to the usual custom a great marriage feast had been
prepared, instead of Rachel, Laban took his elder daughter
Leah into the bride-chamber, and Jacob went in unto her,
without discovering in the dark the deception that had been
practised. Thus the overreacher of Esau was overreached him-
self, and sin was punished by sin. — Vers. 25 sqq. But when
Jacob complained to Laban the next morning of his deception,
he pleaded the custom of the country : 15 Tfepg t6, " it is not
accustomed to be so in our place, to give the younger be/ore the
Jirst-bom." A perfectly worthless excuse ; for if this had really
been the custom in Haran as in ancient India and elsewhere,
he ought to have told Jacob of it before. But to satisfy Jacob,
he promised him that in a week he would give him the younger
also, if he would serve him seven years longer for her. — Ver.
27. u Fulfil her week ;" i.e. let Leah's marriage-week pass over.
The wedding feast generally lasted a week (cf. Judg. xiv. 12 ;
Job xi. 19). After this week had passed, he received Rachel
also : two wives in eight days. To each of these Laban gave
one maid-servant to wait upon her ; less, therefore, than Bethuel
gave to his daughter (xxiv. 61). — This bigamy of Jacob must
not be judged directly by the Mosaic law, which prohibits mar-
riage with two sisters at the same time (Lev. xviii. 18), or set
down as incest (Calvin, etc.), since there was no positive law on
the point in existence then. At the same time, it is not to be
justified on the ground, that the blessing of God made it the
means of the fulfilment of His promise, viz. the multiplication
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXIX. 81-85, XXX. 1-8. 287
of the seed of Abraham into a great nation. Just as it had
arisen from Laban's deception and Jacob's love, which regarded
outward beauty alone, and therefore from sinful infirmities, so
did it become in its results a true school of affliction to Jacob, in
which God showed to him, by many a humiliation, that such
conduct as his was quite unfitted to accomplish the divine coun-
sels, and thus condemned the ungodliness of such a marriage,
and prepared the way for the subsequent prohibition in the law.
Vers. 31-35. Leah's first sons. — Jacob's sinful weakness
showed itself even after his marriage, in the fact that he loved
Rachel more than Leah ; and the chastisement of God, in the
fact that the hated wife was blessed with children, whilst Rachel
for a long time remained unfruitful. By this it was made appa-
rent once more, that the origin of Israel was to be a work not of
nature, but of grace. Leah had four sons in rapid succession,
and gave them names which indicated her state of mind :
(1) Reuben, " see, a son ! " because she regarded his birth as
a pledge that Jehovah had graciously looked upon her misery,
for now her husband would love her ; (2) Simeon, i.e. " hear-
ing," for Jehovah had heard, i.e. observed that she was hated ;
(3) Levi, i.e. attachment, for she hoped that this time, at least,
after she had born three sons, her husband would become
attached to her, i.e. show her some affection ; (4) Judah ('TJW,
verbal, of the fut. hoph. of rxv), i-e. praise, not merely the praised
one, but the one for whom Jehovah is praised. After this fourth
birth there was a pause (ver. 31), that she might not be unduly
lifted up by her good fortune, or attribute to the fruitfulness of
her own womb what the faithfulness of Jehovah, the covenant
God, had bestowed upon her.
Chap. xxx. 1-8. Bilhah's sons. — When Rachel thought of
her own barrenness, she became more and more envious of her
sister, who was blessed with sons. But instead of praying, either
directly or through her husband, as Rebekah had done, to
Jehovah, who had promised His favour to Jacob (xxviii. 13 sqq.)
she said to Jacob, in passionate displeasure, " Get me children,
or I shall die ;" to which he angrily replied, " Am I in God's
stead {i.e. equal to God, or God), who hath withheld from thee the
fruit of the womb ? " i.e., Can I, a powerless man, give thee what
Digitized by VjOOQlC
288 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
the Almighty God has withheld? Almighty like God Jacob
certainly was not ; but he also wanted the power which he might
have possessed, the power of prayer, in firm reliance upon the
promise of the Lord. Hence he could neither help nor advise
his beloved wife, but only assent to her proposal, that he should
beget children for her through her maid Bilhah (cf. xvi. 2),
through whom two sons were born to her. The first she named
Dan, i.e. judge, because God had judged her, i.e. procured her
justice, hearkened to her voice (prayer), and removed the re-
proach of childlessness ; the second Naphtali, i.e. my conflict, or
my fought one, for "fightings of God, she said, have I fought
with my sister, and also prevailed? O^K vtflB? are neither
luctationes quam maxima, nor " a conflict in the cause of God,
because Rachel did not wish to leave the founding of the nation
of God to Leah alone " (Knobel), but " fightings for God and
His mercy " {Hengstenberg), or, what comes to the same thing,
" wrestlings of prayer she had wrestled with Leah ; in reality,
however, with God Himself, who seemed to have restricted His
mercy to Leah alone" (Delitzsch). It is to be noticed, that
Rachel speaks of Elohim only, whereas Leah regarded her first
four sons as the gift of Jehovah. In this variation of the names,
the attitude of the two women, not only to one another, but also
to the cause they served, is made apparent. It makes no dif-
ference whether the historian has given us the very words of the
women on the birth of their children, or, what appears more
probable, since the name of God is not introduced into the names
of the children, merely his own view of the matter as related by
him (chap. xxix. 31, xxx. 17, 22). Leah, who had been forced
upon Jacob against his inclination, and was put by him in the
background, was not only proved by the four sons, whom she
bore to him in the first years of her marriage, to be the wife
provided for Jacob by Elohim, the ruler of human destiny ; but
by the fact that these four sons formed the real stem of the
promised numerous seed, she was proved still more to be the wife
selected by Jehovah, in realization of His promise, to be the
tribe-mother of the greater part of the covenant nation. But
this required that Leah herself should be fitted for it in heart and
mind, that she should feel herself to be the handmaid of Jeho-
vah, and give glory to the covenant God for the blessing of chil-
dren, or 6ee in her children actual proofs that Jehovah had
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXX. 9-21. 289
accepted her and would bring to her the affection of her hus-
band. It was different, with Rachel, the favourite and there-
fore high-minded wife. Jacob should give her, what God alone
could give. The faithfulness and blessing of the covenant God
were still hidden from her. Hence she resorted to such earthly
means as procuring children through her maid, and regarded
the desired result as the answer of God, and a victory in her
contest with her sister. For such a state of mind the term
Elohim, God the sovereign ruler, was the only fitting expression.
Vei-s. 9-13. Zilpah's Sons. — But Leah also was not con-
tent with the divine blessing bestowed upon her by Jehovah.
The means employed by Rachel to retain the favour of her hus-
band made her jealous ; and jealousy drove her to the employ-
ment of tne same means. Jacob begat two sons by Zilpah her
maid. The one Leah named Gad, i.e. " good fortune," saying,
1J3, " with good fortune," according to the Chethib, for which
the Masoretic reading is "H N3, " good fortune has come," — not,
however, from any ancient tradition, for the Sept. reads iv rvjffi,
but simply from a subjective and really unnecessary conjecture,
since "US = " to my good fortune," sc. a son is born, gives a very
suitable meaning. The second she named Asher, i.e. the happy
one, or bringer of happiness ; for she said, , "!^?, " to my hap«
piness, for daughters call me happy," i.e. as a mother with
children. The perfect Wt^ relates to " what she had now
certainly reached " (Del.). Leah did not think of God in con-
nection with these two births. They were nothing more than the
successful and welcome result of the means she had employed.
Vers. 14-21. The other children op Leah. — How
thoroughly henceforth the two wives were carried away by con-
stant jealousy of the love and attachment of their husband, is
evident from the affair of the love-apples, which Leah's son Reu-
ben, who was then four years old, found in the field and brought
to his mother. D'tnn, fiijKa fiavhpar/opatv (LXX.), the yellow
apples of the alraun (Mandragora vernalis), a mandrake very
common in Palestine. They are about the size of a nutmeg, with
a strong and agreeable odour, and were used by the ancients, as
they still are by the Arabs, as a means of promoting child-bear-
ing. To Rachel's request that she would give her some, Leah re-
plied (ver. 15) : " Is it too little, that thou hast taken (drawn away
Digitized by VjOOQlC
290 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
from me) my husband, to take also" (nn^ infiru), i.e. that thou
wouldst also take, " my son's mandrakes ?" At length she parted
with them, on condition that Rachel would let Jacob sleep with
her the next night. After relating how Leah conceived again,
and Rachel continued barren in spite of the mandrakes, the writer
justly observes (ver. 17), " Elohim hearkened imto Leah," to show
that it was not from such natural means as love-apples, but
from God the author of life, that she had received such fruit-
fulness. Leah saw in the birth of her fifth son a divine reward
for having given her maid to her husband — a recompense, that
is, for her self-denial ; and she named him on that account
Issaschar, "^E^, a strange form, to be understood either accord-
ing to the Chethib ~OW & " there is reward," or according to the
Keri ">3fe> Ntf " he bears (brings) reward." At length she bore
her sixth son, and named him Zebulun, i.e. "dwelling ;" for she
hoped that now, after God had endowed her with a good portion,
her husband, to whom she had born six sons, would dwell with
her, i.e. become more warmly attached to her. The name is
from ??J to dwell, with ace. constr. " to inhabit," formed with a
play upon the alliteration in the word 13J to present — two Snraf
Xeyofieva. In connection with these two births, Leah mentions
Elohim alone, the supernatural giver, and not Jehovah, the
covenant God, whose grace had been forced out of her heart by
jealousy. She afterwards bore a daughter, Dinali, who is men-
tioned simply because of the account in chap, xxxiv. ; for, ac-
cording to chap, xxxvii. 35 and xlvi. 7, Jacob had several
daughters, though they are nowhere mentioned by name.
Vers. 22-24. Bibth of Joseph. — At length God gave
Rachel also a son, whom she named Joseph, 1?^, i.e. taking away
(= f\Dk>, cf. 1 Sam. xv. 6 ; 2 Sam. vi. 1 ; Ps. civ. 29) and add-
ing (from 1?}), because his birth not only furnished an actual
proof that God had removed the reproach of her childlessness,
but also excited the wish, that Jehovah might add another son.
The fulfilment of this wish is recorded in chap. xxxv. 16 sqq.
The double derivation of the name, and the exchange of Elohim
for Jehovah, may be explained, without the hypothesis of a
double source, on the simple ground, that Rachel first of all
looked back at the past, and, thinking of the earthly means that
had been applied in vain for the purpose of obtaining a child.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXX 22-24. 291
regarded the son as a gift of God. At the same time, the good
fortune which had now come to her banished from her heart
her envy of her sister (ver. 1), and aroused belief in that God,
who, as she had no doubt heard from her husband, had given
Jacob such great promises ; so that in giving the name, pro-
bably at the circumcision, she remembered Jehovah and prayed
for another son from His covenant faithfulness.
After the birth of Joseph, Jacob asked Laban to send him
away, with the wives and children for whom he had served him
(ver. 25). According to this, Joseph was born at the end of the
14 years of service that had been agreed upon, or seven years
after Jacob had taken Leah and (a week later) Rachel as his
wives (xxix. 21-28). Now if all the children, whose births are
given in chap. xxix. 32-xxx. 24, had been born one after another
during the period mentioned, not only would Leah have had
seven children in 7, or literally 6£ years, but thei'e would have been
a considerable interval also, during which Rachel's maid and her
own gave birth to children. But this would have been impos-
sible ; and the text does not really state it. When we bear in
mind that the imperf. e. i consee. expresses not only the order of
time, but the order of thought as well, it becomes apparent that
in the history of the births, the intention to arrange them ac-
cording to the mothers prevails over the chronological order, so
that it by no means follows, that because the passage, " when
Rachel saw that she bare Jacob no children," occurs after Leah
is said to have had four sons, therefore it was not till after the
birth of Leah's fourth child that Rachel became aware of her
own barrenness. There is nothing on the part of the grammar
to prevent our arranging the course of events thus. Leah's first
four births followed as rapidly as possible one after the other, so
that four sons were born in the first four years of the second period
of Jacob's service. In the meantime, not necessarily after the
birth of Leah's fourth child, Rachel, having discovered her
own barrenness, had given her maid to Jacob ; so that not only
may Dan have been born before Judah, but Naphtali also not
long after him. The rapidity and regularity with which Leah
had born her first four sons, would make her notice all the more
quickly the cessation that took place ; and jealousy of Rachel, as
well as the success of the means she had adopted, would impel
her to attempt in the same way to increase the number of her
Digitized by LaOCKMC
292 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
children. Moreover, Leah herself may have conceived again
before the birth of her maid's second son, and may have given
birth to her last two sons in the sixth and seventh years of their
marriage. And contemporaneously with the birth of Leah's
last son, or immediately afterwards, Rachel may have given
birth to Joseph. In this way Jacob may easily have had eleven
sons within seven years of his marriage. But with regard to
the birth of Dinah, the expression "afterwards" (ver. 21) seems
to indicate, that she was not born during Jacob's years of ser-
vice, but. during the remaining six years of his stay with Laban.
Vers. 25—43. New contract of service between
Jacob and Laban. — As the second period of seven years ter-
minated about the time of Joseph's birth, Jacob requested
Laban to let him return to his own place and country, i.e. to
Canaan. Laban, however, entreated him to remain, for he
had perceived that Jehovah, Jacob's God, had blessed him for
his sake ; and told him to fix his wages for further service. The
words, " if I have found favour in thine eyes" (ver. 27), contain
an aposiopesis, sc. then remain. wro " a heathen expression,
like avgurando cognovi" (Delitzsch). v}> T]3B> thy wages, which
it will be binding upon me to give. Jacob reminded him, on the
other hand, what service he had rendered him, how Jehovah's
blessing had followed " at his foot," and asked when he should
begin to provide for his own house. But when Laban repeated
the question, what should he give him, Jacob offered to feed and
keep his flock still, upon one condition, which was founded upon
the fact, that in the East the goats, as a rule, are black or dark-
brown, rarely white or spotted with white, and that the sheep
for the most part are white, very seldom black or speckled.
Jacob required as wages, namely, all the speckled, spotted, and
black among the sheep, and all the speckled, spotted, and white
among the goats; and offered "even to-day" to commence
separating them, so that " to-morrow" Laban might convince
himself of the uprightness of his proceedings, "ipn (ver. 32)
cannot be imperative, because of the preceding "frVN, but must
be infinitive : " I will go through the whole flock to-day to re-
move from thence all . . ;" and *~0\& njn signifies " what is re-
moved shall be my wages," but not everything of an abnormal
colour that shall hereafter be found in the flock. This was no
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXX. 25-48. 293
doubt intended by Jacob, as the further course of the narrative
shows, but it is not involved in the words of ver. 32. Either
the writer has restricted himself to the main fact, and omitted
to mention that it was also agreed at the same time that the
separation should be repeated at certain regular periods, and
that all the sheep of an abnormal colour in Laban's flock should
also be set aside as part of Jacob's wages; or this point was
probably not mentioned at first, but taken for granted by both
parties, since Jacob took measures with that idea to his own ad-
vantage, and even Laban, notwithstanding the frequent alteration
of the contract with which Jacob charged him (xxxi. 7, 8, and
41), does not appear to have disputed this right. — Vers. 34 sqq.
Laban cheerfully accepted the proposal, but did not leave Jacob
to make the selection. He undertook that himself, probably to
make more sure, and then gave those which were set apart as
Jacob's wages to his own sons to tend, since it was Jacob's
duty to take care of Laban's flock, and " set three days' journey
betwixt himself and Jacob" i.e. between the flock to be tended
by himself through his sons, and that to be tended by Jacob,
for the purpose of preventing any copulation between the
animals of the two flocks. Nevertheless he was overreached by
Jacob, who adopted a double method of increasing the wages
agreed upon. In the first place (vers. 37-39), he took fresh
rods of storax, maple, and walnut-trees, all of which have a
dazzling white wood under their dark outside, and peeled white
stripes upon them, J3?n *|eriD (the verbal noun instead of the
inf. abs. *prt), "peeling the white naked in the rods." These
partially peeled, and therefore mottled rods, he placed in the
drinking-troughs (O'Biri lit. gutters, from orn=:jn to run, is ex-
plained by cnsn ninj>e> water-troughs), to which the flock came
to drink, in front of the animals, in order that, if copulation took
place at the drinking time, it might occur near the mottled
sticks, and the young be speckled and spotted in consequence.
naorn a rare, antiquated form for njonn] from Don, and *orm for
iDrm imperf. Kal of Dnj=DDn. This artifice was founded upon
a fact frequently noticed, particularly in the case of sheep, that
whatever fixes their attention in copulation is marked upon the
young (see the proofs in Bochart, Hieroz. 1, 618, and Friedreich
zur Bibel 1, 37 sqq.). — Secondly (ver. 40), Jacob separated the
speckled animals thus obtained from those of a normal colour,
Digitized byLaOOQlC
294 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
and caused the latter to feed so that the others would be con-
stantly in sight, in order that he might in this way obtain a con-
stant accession of mottled sheep. As soon as these had multi-
plied sufiiciently, he formed separate flocks (viz. of the speckled
additions), "and put them not unto Laban's cattle;" i.e. he kept
them apart in order that a still larger number of speckled ones
might be procured, through Laban's one-coloured flock having
this mottled group constantly in view. — Vers. 41, 42. He did
not adopt the trick with the rods, however, on every occasion of
copulation, for the sheep in those countries lamb twice a year,
but only at the copulation of the strong sheep (rriiB>j?ipri the
bound ones,i.e. firm and compact), — Luther, "the spring flock;"
naorv? inf. Pi. " to conceive it (the young) ;" — but not " in the
weakening of the sheep," i.e. when they were weak, and would
produce weak lambs. The meaning is probably this : he only
adopted this plan at the summer copulation, not the autumn ;
for, in the opinion of the ancients (Pliny, Columella), lambs that
were conceived in the spring and born in the autumn were
stronger than those born in the spring (cf. Bochart I.e. p. 582).
Jacob did this, possibly, less to spare Laban, than to avoid excit-
ing suspicion, and so leading to the discovery of his trick. — In
ver. 43 the account closes with the remark, that the man in-
creased exceedingly, and became rich in cattle (ni3T flftf many
head of sheep and goats) and slaves, without expressing appro-
bation of Jacob's conduct, or describing his increasing wealth as
a blessing from God. The verdict is contained in what follows.
Jacob's flight, and fakewell of laban. — chap. xxxi.
Vers. 1-21. The flight. — Through some angry remarks
of Laban's sons with reference to his growing wealth, and the
evident change in the feelings of Laban himself towards him
(vers. 1, 2), Jacob was inwardly prepared for the termination of
his present connection with Laban ; and at the same time he re-
ceived instructions from Jehovah, to return to his home, together
with a promise of divine protection. In consequence of this, he
sent for Rachel and Leah to come to him in the field, and ex-
plained to them (vers. 4—13), how their father's disposition had
changed towards him, and how he had deceived him in spite of
the service he had forced out of him, and had altered his wages ten
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAT. XXXI. 1-21. 295
times ; but that the God of his father had stood by him, ana nad
transferred to him their father's cattle, and now at length had
directed him to return to his home. — Ver. 6. njnK : the original
form of the abbreviated JfW, which is merely copied from the
Pentateuch in Ez. xiii. 11, 20, xxxiv. 17. Ver. 9. D^3K : for
J3'3K as in chap, xxxii. 16, etc. — " Ten times :" i.«. as often as pos-
sible, the ten as a round number expressing the idea of complete-
ness. From the statement that Laban had changed his wages ten
times, it is evident that when Laban observed, that among his
sheep and goats, of one colour only, a large number of mottled
young were born, he made repeated attempts to limit the original
stipulation by changing the rule as to the colours of the young,
and so diminishing Jacob's wages. But when Jacob passes over
his own stratagem in silence, and represents all that he aimed at
and secured by crafty means as the fruit of God's blessing, this
differs no doubt from the account in chap. xxx. It is not a con-
tradiction, however, pointing to a difference in the sources of the
two chapters, but merely a difference founded upon actual fact,
viz. the fact that Jacob did not tell the whole truth to his wives.
Moreover self-help and divine help do not exclude one another.
Hence his account of the dream, in which he saw that the rams
that leaped upon the cattle were all of various colours, and heard
the voice of the angel of God calling his attention to what had been
seen, in the words, " Ihave seen all that Laban hath done to thee"
may contain actual truth ; and the dream may be regarded as a
divine revelation, which was either sent to explain to him now,
at the end of the sixth year, " that it was not his stratagem, but
the providence of God which had prevented him from falling a
victim to Laban' s avarice, and had brought him such wealth"
(JDelitzscK) ; or, if the dream occurred at an earlier period, was
meant to teach him, that " the help of God, without any such
self-help, could procure him justice and safety in spite of Laban' s
selfish covetousness" {Kurtz). It is very difficult to decide be-
tween these two interpretations. As Jehovah's instructions to
him to return were not given till the end of his period of service,
and Jacob connects them so closely with the vision of the rams
that they seem contemporaneous, DeliizscKs view appears to
deserve the preference. But the nfefy in ver. 12, " all that Laban
is doing to thee," does not exactly suit this meaning ; and we
should rather expect to find nfeflj used at the end of the time of
Digitized by VjOOQlC
296 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES
service. The participle rather favours Kurtz's view, that Jacob
had the vision of the rams and the explanation from the angel
at the beginning of the last six years of service, but that in his
communication to his wives, in which there was no necessity to
preserve a strict continuity or distinction of time, he connected
it with the divine instructions to return to his home, which he
received at the end of his time of service. But if we decide in
favour of this view, we have no further guarantee for the ob-
jective reality of the vision of the rams, since nothing is said
about it in the historical account, and it is nowhere stated that
the wealth obtained by Jacob's craftiness was the result of the
divine blessing. The attempt so unmistakeably apparent in
Jacob's whole conversation with his wives, to place his dealings
with Laban in the most favourable light for himself, excites the
suspicion, that the vision of which he spoke was nothing more
than a natural dream, the materials being supplied by the three
thoughts that were most frequently in his mind, by night as well
as by day, viz. (1) his own schemes and their success ; (2) the
promise received at Bethel ; (3) the wish to justify his actions
to his own conscience ; and that these were wrought up by an
excited imagination into a visionary dream, of the divine origin
of which Jacob himself may not have had the slightest doubt. —
In ver. 13 ?xn has the article in the construct state, contrary to
the ordinary rule ; cf. Ges. § 110, 25 ; Ewald, § 290.
Vers. 14 sqq. The two wives naturally agreed with their
husband, and declared that they had no longer any part or in-
heritance in their father's house. For he had not treated them
as daughters, but sold them like strangers, i.e. servants. " And
he has even constantly eaten our money" i.e. consumed the pro-
perty brought to him by our service. The inf. abs. TO* after
the finite verb expresses the continuation of the act, and is in-
tensified by dj "yes, even." '3 in ver. 16 signifies "so that,"
as in Deut. xiv. 24, Job x. 6. — Vers. 17-19. Jacob then set
out with his children and wives, and all the property that he had
acquired in Padan-Aram, to return to his father in Canaan ;
whilst Laban had gone to the sheep-shearing, which kept him
some time from his home on account of the size of his flock.
Rachel took advantage of her father's absence to rob him of his
teraphim (penates), probably small images of household gods in
human form, which were worshipped as givers of earthly pros-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXXI. 22-64. 297
perity, and also consulted as oracles (see my Archdologie, § 90). —
Ver. 20. " Thus Jacob deceived Laban the Syrian, in that he told
him not that he fled;" — 3? 331 to steal the heart (as the seat of the
understanding), like tcKhrreiv voov, and 3U with the simple accus.
pen., ver. 27, like xKeirreiv riva, signifies to take the know-
ledge of anything away from a person, to deceive him ; — " and
passed over the river (Euphrates), and took the direction to the
mountains of Gilead"
Vers. 22-54. Laban's pursuit, reconciliation, and
covenant with Jacob. — As Laban was not told till the third
day after the flight, though he pursued the fugitives with his
brethren, i.e. his nearest relations, he did not overtake Jacob for
seven days, by which time he had reached the mountains of
Gilead (vers. 22-24). The night before he overtook them, he
was warned by God in a dream, " not to speak to Jacob from
good to bad" i.e. not to say anything decisive and emphatic for
the purpose of altering what had already occurred (vid. ver. 29,
and the note on xxiv. 50). Hence he confined himself, when they
met, " to bitter reproaches combining paternal feeling on the one
hand with hypocrisy on the other ;" in which he told them that
he had the power to do them harm, if God had not forbidden
hiin, and charged them with stealing his gods (the teraphim). —
Ver. 26. " Like sword-booty ;" i.e. like prisoners of war (2 Kings
vi. 22) carried away unwillingly and by force. — Ver. 27. " So I
might liave conducted thee with tnirtli and songs, with tabret and
harp," i.e. have sent thee away with a parting feast. Ver. 28.
ft"J| : an old form of the infinitive for rrtfc'y as in chap, xlviii.
llj 1. 20.— Ver. 29. nj *?vb & : "there is' to God my hand"
(Mic. ii. 1 ; cf. Deut. xxviii. 32 ; Neh. v. 5), i.e. my hand
serves me as God (Hab. i. 11 ; Job xii. 6), a proverbial expres-
sion for "the power lies in my hand." — Ver. 30. "And now
thou art gone (for, if thou art gone), because thou hngedst after
thy father's house, why hast thou stolen my gods f" The mean-
ing is this : even if thy secret departure can be explained, thy
stealing of my gods cannot. — Vers. 31, 32. The first, Jacob met
by pleading his fear lest Laban should take away his daughters
(keep them back by force). " For I said:" equivalent to "for
I thought." But Jacob knew nothing of the theft ; hence he
declared, that with whomsoever he might find the gods he should
PENT. — VOL. I. U
Digitized by VjOOQlC
298 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
be put to death, and told Laban to make the strictest search
among all the things that he had with him. "Before our brethren?
i.e. the relations who had come with Laban, as being impartial
witnesses (cf. ver. 37) ; not, as Knobel thinks, before Jacob's
horde of male and female slaves, of women and of children. —
Vers. 33 sqq. Laban looked through all the tents, but did not
find his teraphim ; for Rachel had put them in the saddle of her
camel and was sitting upon them, and excused herself to her
lord (Adonai, ver. 35), on the ground that the custom of women
was upon her. " The camel's furniture" i.e. the saddle (not
"the camel's litter :" Luther), here the woman's riding saddle,
which had a comfortable seat formed of carpets on the top of the
packsaddle. The fact that Laban passed over Rachel's seat
because of her pretended condition, does not presuppose the
Levitical law in Lev. xv. 19 sqq., according to which, any one
who touched the couch or seat of such a woman was rendered un-
clean. For, in the first place, the view which lies at the founda-
tion of this law was much older than the laws of Moses, and is
met with among many other nations (cf . Bdhr, Symbolik ii. 466,
etc.) ; consequently Laban might refrain from making further ex-
amination, less from fear of defilement, than because he regarded
it as impossible that any one with the custom of women upon
her should sit upon his gods. — Vers. 36 sqq. As Laban found
nothing, Jacob grew angry, and pointed out the injustice of his
hot pursuit and his search among all his things, but more espe-
cially the harsh treatment he had received from him in return for
the unselfish and self-denying services that he had rendered him
for twenty years. Acute sensibility and elevated self -conscious-
ness give to Jacob's words a rhythmical movement and a poetical
form. Hence such expressions as ^nK pTj u hotly pursued,"
which is only met with in 1 Sam. xvii. 53 ; ra^nst for niKtariK " J
had to atone for it," i.e. to bear the loss ; " the Fear of Isaac" used
as a name for God, *ins, <7q8a$ = o-efiaafia, the object of Isaac's
fear or sacred awe. — Ver. 40. " / liave been ; by day (i.e. I have
been in this condition, that by day) heat has consumed (prostrated)
me, and cold by night" — for it is well known, that in the East
the cold by night corresponds to the heat by day ; the hotter the
day the colder the night, as a rule. — Ver. 42. " Except the God
of my father . . . had been for me, surely thou wouldst note
have sent me away empty. God has seen mine affliction and ike
Digitized by VjOOQlC
/
CHAP. XXXI. 43-64. 299
labour of my hands, and last night He judged it." By the warn-
ing given to Laban, God pronounced sentence upon the matter
between Jacob and Laban, condemning the course which Laban
had pursued, and still intended to pursue, towards Jacob ; but
not on that account sanctioning all that Jacob had done to in-
crease his own possessions, still less confirming Jacob's assertion
that the vision mentioned by Jacob (vers. 11, 12) was a revelation
from God. But as Jacob had only met cunning with cunning,
deceit with deceit, Laban had no right to punish him for what
he had done. Some excuse may indeed be found for Jacob's
conduct in the heartless treatment he received from Laban, but
the fact that God defended him from Laban' s revenge did not
prove it to be right. He had not acted upon the rule laid down
in Prov. xx. 22 (cf. Kom. xii. 17 ; 1 Thess. v. 15).
Vers. 43-54. These words of Jacob " cut Laban to tho
heart with their truth, so that he turned round, offered his
hand, and proposed a covenant." Jacob proceeded at once to
give a practical proof of his assent to this proposal of his father-
in-law, by erecting a stone as a memorial, and calling upon his
relations also (" his brethren," as in ver. 23, by whom Laban and
the relations who came with him are intended, as ver. 54 shows)
to gather stones into a heap, which formed a table, as is briefly
observed in ver. 466, for the covenant meal (ver. 54). This
stone-heap was called Jegar-Sahadutha by Laban, and Galeed
by Jacob (the former is the Chaldee, the latter the Hebrew ;
they have both the same meaning, viz. " heaps of witness" *),
because, as Laban, who spoke first, as being the elder, explained,
the heap was to be a " witness between him and Jacob." The
historian then adds this explanation : " there/ore they called his
name Gated," and immediately afterwards introduces a second
name, which the heap received from words that were spoken
by Laban at the conclusion of the covenant (ver. 49) : " And
Miipah," i.e. watch, watch-place (so. he called it), "for he
(Laban) said, Jehovah watch between me and thee ; for we are
hidden from one another (from the face of one another), if thou
1 These -words are the oldest proof, that in the native country of the
patriarchs, Mesopotamia, Aramean or Chaldnan was spoken, and Hebrew
in Jacob's native country, Canaan; from which we may conclude that
Abraham's family first acquired the Hebrew in Canaan from the Canaanite*
(Phoenicians).
)Q-tC
300 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
shall oppress »n t v daughters, and if thou shall tale wives to my
daughters I No man is with us, behold God is witness between
me and thee ! " (vers. 49, 50). After these words of Laban,
which are introduced parenthetically, 1 and in which he enjoined
upon Jacob fidelity to his daughters, the formation of the cove-
nant of reconciliation and peace between them is first described,
according to which, neither of them (sive ego sive tu, as in Ex.
xix. 13) was to pass the stone-heap and memorial-stone with a
hostile intention towards the other. Of this the memorial was
to serve as a witness, and the God of Abraham and the God of
Nahor, the God of their father (Terah), would be umpire be-
tween them. To this covenant, in which Laban, according to
his polytheistic views, placed the God of Abraham upon the
same level with the God of Nahor and Terah, Jacob swore by
" the Fear of Isaac " (ver. 42), the God who was worshipped by
his father with sacred awe. He then offered sacrifices upon
the mountain, and invited his relations to eat, i.e. to partake of
a sacrificial meal, and seal the covenant by a feast of love.
The geographical names G-ilead and Ramath-Mizpeh (Josh,
xiii. 26), also Mizpeh-Gilead (Judg ii. 29), sound so obviously
like GaCed and Mizpah, that they are no doubt connected, and
owe their origin to the monument erected by Jacob and Laban ;
so that it was by prolepsis that the scene of this occurrence was
called " the mountains of Gilead " in vers. 21, 23, 25. By the
mount or mountains of Gilead we are not to understand the
mountain range to the south of the Jabbok (Zerka), the
present Jebel Jelaad, or Jebel es Salt. The name Gilead has a
much more comprehensive signification in the Old Testament ;
and the mountains to the south of the Jabbok are called in
Deut. iii. 12 the half of Mount Gilead ; the mountains to the
1 There can be no doubt that vers. 49 and 50 bear the marks of a subse-
quent insertion. But there is nothing in the nature of this interpolation
to indicate a compilation of the history from different sources. That
Laban, when making this covenant, should have spoken of the future treat-
ment of his daughters, is a thing so natural, that there would have been
something strange in the omission. And it is not less suitable to the cir-
cumstances, that he calls upon the God of Jacob, i.e. Jehovah, to watch
in this affair. And apart from the use of the name Jehovah, which is per-
fectly suitable here, there is nothing whatever to point to a different source ;
to say nothing of the fact that the critics themselves cannot agree as to the
nature of the source supposed.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXXII. 1-8. 301
north of the Jabbok, the JebeLAjlun, forming the other half.
In this chapter the name is used in the broader sense, and refers
primarily to the northern half of the mountains (above the
Jabbok) ; for Jacob did not cross the Jabbok till afterwards
(xxxii. 23, 24). There is nothing in the names Ramath-
Mizpeh, which Ramoth in Gilead bears in Josh. xiii. 26, and
Mizpeh-Gilead, which it bears in Judg. xi. 29, to compel us to
place Laban's meeting with Jacob in the southern portion of
the mountains of Gilead. For even if this city is to be found
in the modern Salt, and was called Ramath-Mizpeh from the
event recorded here, all that can be inferred from that is, that
the tradition of Laban's covenant with Jacob was associated in
later ages with Ramoth in Gilead, without the correctness of the
association being thereby established.
THE CAMP OP GOD AND JACOB'S AVRESTLING. — CHAP. XXXII.
Vers. 1-3. The host of God. — When Laban had taken
his departure peaceably, Jacob pursued his journey to Canaan.
He was then met by some angels of God, in whom he discerned
an encampment of God ; and he called the place where they
appeared Mahanaim, i.e. double camp or double host, because
the host of God joined his host as a safeguard. This appear-
ance of angels necessarily reminded him of the vision of the
ladder, on his flight from Canaan. Just as the angels ascend-
ing and descending had then represented to him the divine
protection and assistance during his journey and sojourn in a
foreign land, so now the angelic host was a signal of the help
of God for the approaching conflict witb Esau of which he
was in fear, and a fresh pledge of the pwmise (chap, xxviii.
15), "I will bring thee back to the land,' etc. Jacob saw
it during his journey ; in a waking condition, therefore, not
internally, but out of or above himself : but whether with the
eyes of the body or of the mind (cf. 2 Kings vi. 17), cannot be
determined. Mahanaim was afterwards a distinguished city,
which is frequently mentioned, situated to the north of the
Jabbok ; and the name and remains are still preserved in the
place called Malineh (Robinson, Pal. Appendix, p. 1G6), the site
of which, however, has not yet been minutely examined (see
my Comm. on Joshua, p. 259).
Digitized by VjOOQlS""
302 THE FIEST BOOK OF MOSES.
Vers. 4-13. From this point Jacob sent messengers forward
to his brother Esau, to make known his return in such a style
of humility (" thy servant," " my lord ") as was adapted to con-
ciliate him. 1HN (ver. 5) is the first pers. imperf. Kal for
"intJK, from int* to delay, to pass a time; cf. Prov. viii. 17, and
Ges. § 68, 2. The statement that Esau was already in the land
of Seir (ver. 4), or, as it is afterwards called, the field of Edom,
is not at variance with chap, xxxvi. 6, and may be very naturally
explained on the supposition, that with the increase of his
family and possessions, he severed himself more and more from
his father's house, becoming increasingly convinced, as time
went on, that he could hope for no change in the blessings pro-
nounced by his father upon Jacob and himself, which excluded
him from the inheritance of the promise, viz. the future posses-
sion of Canaan. Now, even if his malicious feelings towards
Jacob had gradually softened down, he had probably never said
anything to his parents on the subject, so that Rebekah had
been unable to fulfil her promise (chap, xxvii. 45) ; and Jacob,
being quite uncertain as to his brother's state of mind, was
thrown into the greatest alarm and anxiety by the report of the
messengers, that Esau was coming to meet him with 400 men.
The simplest explanation of the fact that Esau should have had
so many men about him as a standing army, is that given by
Delitzsch ; namely, that he had to subjugate the Horite popula-
tion in Seir, for which purpose he might easily have formed
such an army, partly from the Canaanitish and Ishmaelitish
relations of his wives, and partly from his own servants. His
reason for going to meet Jacob with such a company may have
been, either to show how mighty a prince he was, or with the
intention of making his brother sensible of his superior power,
and assuming a hostile attitude if the circumstances favoured it,
even though the lapse of years had so far mitigated his anger,
that he no longer seriously thought of executing the vengeance
he had threatened twenty years before. For we are warranted
in regarding Jacob's fear as no vain, subjective fancy, but as
having an objective foundation, by the fact that God endowed
him with courage and strength for his meeting with Esau,
through the medium of the angelic host and the wrestling at
the Jabbok ; whilst, on the other hand, the brotherly affection
and openness with which Esau met him, are to be attributed
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXXII. 14-88. 303
partly to Jacob's humble demeanour, and still more to the fact,
that by the influence of God, the still remaining malice had
been rooted out from his heart. — Vers. 8 sqq. Jacob, fearing
the worst, divided his people and flocks into two camps, that if
Esau smote the one, the other might escape. He then turned
to the Great Helper in every time of need, and with an earnest
prayer besought the God of his fathers, Abraham and Isaac,
who had directed him to return, that, on the ground of the
abundant mercies and truth (cf. xxiv. 27) He had shown him
thus far, He would deliver him out of the hand of his brother,
and from the threatening destruction, and so fulfil His promises.
— Ver. 12. "For lam in fear of him, that (fB ne) he come and
smite me, mother with children." 0^3 <>P DK is a proverbial ex-
pression for unsparing cruelty, taken from the bird which
covers its young to protect them (Deut. xxii. 6, cf. Hos. x. 14).
7? super, una cum, as in Ex. xxxv. 22.
Vers. 14-22. Although hoping for aid and safety from the
Lord alone, Jacob neglected no means of doing what might help
to appease his brother. Having taken up his quarters for the
night in the place where he received the tidings of Esau's ap-
proach, he selected from his flocks (" of that which came to his
Jiand," i.e. which he had acquired) a very respectable present of
550 head of cattle, and sent them in different detachments to
meet Esau, " as a present from his servant Jacob," who was
coming behind. The selection was in harmony with the general
possessions of nomads (cf. Job i. 3, xliii. 12), and the proportion
of male to female animals was arranged according to the agri-
cultural rule of Varro (de re rustica 2, 3). The division of the
present, " drove and drove separately," i.e. into several separate
droves which followed one another at certain intervals, was to
serve the purpose of gradually mitigating the wrath of Esau.
D'JB 1B3, ver 21, to appease the countenance ; D^D XOT to raise
any one's countenance, i.e. to receive him in a friendly manner.
This present he sent forward; and he himself remained the
same night (mentioned in ver. 14) in the camp.
Vers. 23-33. The wrestling with God. — The same
night, he conveyed his family with all his possessions across the
ford of the Jabbok. Jabbok is the present Wady es Zerka (i.«.
the blue), which flows from the east towards the Jordan, and
Digitized by '
Google
30-1 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
with its deep rocky valley formed at that time the boundary be-
tween the kingdoms of Sihon at Heshbon and Og of Bashan.
It now separates the countries of Moerad or Ajlun and Belka.
The ford by which Jacob crossed was hardly the one which he
took on his outward journey, upon the Syrian caravan-road by
Kahat-Zerka, but one much farther to the west, between Jebel
Ajlun and Jebel Jelaad, through which Buckingham, Burckhardt,
and Seetzen passed, and where there are still traces of walls and
buildings to be seen, and other marks of cultivation. — Ver. 25.
When Jacob was left alone on the northern side of the Jabbok,
after sending all the rest across, " there wrestled a man with him
until the breaking of the day." P?W, an old word, which only oc-
curs here (vers. 25, 26), signifying to wrestle, is either derived
from p?K to wind, or related to p?n to contract one's self, to
plant limb and limb firmly together. From this wrestling the
river evidently received its name of Jabbok (P3* = P*K*). — Ver.
26. "And when He (the unknown) saw that He did not overcome
him, He touched his hip-socket; and his hip-socket was put out of
joint Qljxn from ypj) as He wrestled with him." Still Jacob
would not let Him go until He blessed him. He then said to
Jacob, " Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel (^Pj^?»
God's fighter, from n"ifc> to fight, and ?N God); for thou hast
fought with God and with men, and luist prevailed" When
Jacob asked Him His name, He declined giving any definite
answer, and "blessed him there." He did not tell him His
name ; not merely, as the angel stated to Manoah in reply to a
similar question (Judg. xiii. 18), because it was tOB wonder, i.e.
incomprehensible to mortal man, but still more to fill Jacob's
soul with awe at the mysterious character of the whole event,
and to lead him to take it to heart. What Jacob wanted to
know, with regard to the person of the wonderful Wrestler,
and the meaning and intention of the struggle, he must
already have suspected, when he would not let Him go until
He blessed him; and it was put before him still more plainly
in the new name that was given to him with this explana-
tion, " Thou hast fought with Elohim and with men, and hast
conquered" God had met him in the form of a man :
God in the angel, according to Hos. xii. 4, 5, i.e. not in a
created angel, but in the Angel of Jehovah, the visible mani-
festation of the invisible God. Our history does not speak of
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXXII. 23-88. 305
Jshevab, or the Angel of Jehovah, bat of Elohim, for the par-
pose of bringing out the contrast between God and the creature.
This remarkable occurrence is not to be regarded as a dream
or an internal vision, but fell within the sphere of sensuous per-
ception. At the same time, it was not a natural or corporeal wres-
tling, but a " real conflict of both mind and body, a work of the
spirit with intense effort of the body" (Delitzsch), in which Jacob
was lifted up into a highly elevated condition of body and mind
resembling that of ecstasy, through the medium of the manifesta-
tion of God. In a merely outward conflict, it is impossible to
conquer through prayers and tears. As the idea of a dream or
vision has no point of contact in the history ; so the notion, that
the outward conflict of bodily wrestling, and the spiritual conflict
with prayer and tears, are two features opposed to one another and
spiritually distinct, is evidently at variance with the meaning of
the narrative and the interpretation of the prophet Hosea. Since
Jacob still continued his resistance, even after his hip had been
put out of joint, and would not let Him go till He had blessed
him, it cannot be said that it was not till all hope of maintaining
the conflict by bodily strength was taken from him, that he had
recourse to the weapon of prayer. And when Hosea (xii. 4, 5)
points his contemporaries to their wrestling forefather as an ex-
ample for their imitation, in these words, " He took his brother
by the heel in the womb, and in his human strength he fought
with God ; and he fought with the Angel and prevailed ; he wept
and made supplication unto Him," the turn by which the ex-
planatory periphrasis of Jacob's words, " I will not let Thee go
except Thou bless me," is linked on to the previous clause by naa
without a copula or vav consec, is a proof that the prophet did
not regard the weeping and supplication as occurring after the
wrestling, or as only a second element, which was subsequently
added to the corporeal struggle. Hosea evidently looked upon
the weeping and supplication as the distinguishing feature in the
conflict, without thereby excluding the corporeal wrestling. At
the same time, by connecting this event with what took place at
the birth of the twins (xxv. 26), the prophet teaches that Jacob
merely completed, by his wrestling with God, what he had
already been engaged in even from his mother's womb, viz. his
striving for the birthright ; in other words, for the possession of
the covenant promise and the covenant blessing. This meaning
Digitized by VjOOQlC
306 THE FIBST BOOK OF HOSES.
is also indicated by the circumstances under which the event
took place. Jacob had wrested the blessing of the birthright from
his brother Esau ; but it was by cunning and deceit, and he had
been obliged to flee from his wrath in consequence. And now
that he desired to return to the land of promise and his father's
house, and to enter upon the inheritance promised him in his
father's blessing ; Esau was coming to meet him with 400 men,
which filled him with great alarm. As he felt too weak to enter
upon a conflict with him, he prayed to the covenant God for
deliverance from the hand of his brother, and the fulfilment of
the covenant promises. The answer of God to this prayer was
the present wrestling with God, in which he was victorious
indeed, but not without carrying the marks of it all his life long
in the dislocation of his thigh. Jacob's great fear of Esau's
wrath and vengeance, which he could not suppress notwith-
standing the divine revelations at Bethel and Mahanaim, had its
foundation in his evil conscience, in the consciousness of the sin
connected with his wilful and treacherous appropriation of the
blessing of the first-born. To save him from the hand of his
brother, it was necessary that God should first meet him as an
enemy, and show him that his real opponent was God Himself,
and that he must first of all overcome Him before he could hope
to overcome his brother. And Jacob overcame God ; not with
the power of the flesh however, with which he had hitherto
wrestled for God against man (God convinced him of that by
touching his hip, so that it was put out of joint), but by the
power of faith and prayer, reaching by firm hold of God even
to the point of being blessed, by which he proved himself to be
a true wrestler of God, who fought with God and with men, i.e.
who by his wrestling with God overcame men as well. And
whilst by the dislocation of his hip the carnal nature of his pre-
vious wrestling was declared to be powerless and wrong, he
received in the new name of Israel the prize of victory, and at
the same time directions from God how he was henceforth to
strive for the cause of the Lord. — By his wrestling with God,
Jacob entered upon a new stage in his life. As a sign of this,
he received a new name, which indicated, as the result of this
conflict, the nature of his new relation to God. But whilst
Abram and Sarai, from the time when God changed their names
(xvii. 5 and 15), are always called by their new names; in the his-
Digitized by CjOOQIC
\
i
> CHAP. XXXIII. 1-17. 307
Sory of Jacob we find the old name used interchangeably with the
new. " For the first two names denoted a change into a new
and permanent position, effected and intended by the will and
promise of God ; consequently the old names were entirely abo-
lished. But the name Israel denoted a spiritual state determined
by faith ; and in Jacob's life the natural state, determined by
flesh and blood, still continued to stand side by side with this.
Jacob's new name was transmitted to his descendants, however,
who were called Israel as the covenant nation. For as the
blessing of their forefather's conflict came down to them as a
spiritual inheritance, so did they also enter upon the duty of
preserving this inheritance by continuing in a similar conflict.
Ver. 31. The remembrance of this wonderful conflict Jacob
perpetuated in the name which he gave to the place where it
had occurred, viz. Pniel or Pnuel (with the connecting sound '
or '), because there ho had seen Elohim face to face, and his soul
had been delivered (from death, xvi. 13). — Vers. 32, 33. With
the rising of the sun after the night of his conflict, the night
of anguish and fear also passed away from Jacob's mind, so
that he was able to leave Pnuel in comfort, and go forward on
his journey. The dislocation of the thigh alone remained. For
this reason the children of Israel are accustomed to avoid eating
the nervus ischiadicus, the principal nerve in the neighbourhood
of the hip, which is easily injured by any violent strain in wres-
tling. " Unto this day :" the remark is applicable still.
Jacob's reconciliation with esatt and ketukn to
canaan. — chap. xxxiii.
Vers. 1-17. Meeting with Esau. — Vers. 1 sqq. As
Jacob went forward, he saw Esau coming to meet him with
his 400 men. He then arranged his wives and children in such
a manner, that the maids with their children went first, Leah
with hers in the middle, and Rachel with Joseph behind, thus
forming a long procession. But he himself went in front, and
met Esau with sevenfold obeisance. WW VWB* does not denote
complete prostration, like rRfiK D?BK in chap. xix. 1, but a deep
Oriental bow, in which the head approaches the ground, but does
not touch it. By this manifestation of deep reverence, Jacob
hoped to win his brother's heart. He humbled himself before
Digitized by VjOOQlC
T
\
308 " THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES. f
him as the elder, with the feeling that he had formerly sinneli
against him. Esau, on the other hand, " had a comparatively
better, but not so tender a conscience." At the sight of Jacob
he was carried away by the natural feelings of brotherly affec-
tion, and running up to him, embraced him, fell on his neck,
and kissed him ; and they both wept. The puncta extraordi-
naria above V^B* are probably intended to mark the word as
suspicious. They " are like a note of interrogation, questioning
the genuineness of this kiss ; but without any reason " (Del.).
Even if there was still some malice in Esau's heart, it was over-
come by the humility with which his brother met him, so that
he allowed free course to the generous emotions of his heart ; all
the more, because the " roving life " which suited his nature
had procured him such wealth and power, that he was quite equal
to his brother in earthly possessions. — Vers. 5-7. When his eyes
fell upon the women and children, he inquired respecting them,
" Whom hast thou here ? " And Jacob replied, " T7ie children
wiiJi wliom Elohim hath favoured me" Upon this, the mothers
and their children approached in order, making reverential obei-
sance. I?n with double ace. " graciously to present." Elohim :
" to avoid reminding Esau of the blessing of Jehovah, which had
occasioned his absence" (Del.). — Vers. 8-11. Esau then in-
quired about the camp that had met him, i.e. the presents of
cattle that were sent to meet him, and refused to accept them,
until Jacob's urgent persuasion eventually induced him to do so.
— Ver. 10. " For therefore" sc. to be able to offer thee this pre-
sent, " have I come to see Uiy face, as man seeth the face of God,
and thou hast received me favourably >." The thought is this : In
thy countenance I have been met with divine (heavenly) friend-
liness (cf. 1 Sam. xxix. 9, 2 Sam. xiv. 17). Jacob might say
this without cringing, since he " must have discerned the work
of God in the unexpected change in his brother's disposition
towards him, and in his brother's friendliness a reflection of the
divine." — Ver. 11. Blessing: i.e. the present, expressive of his
desire to bless, as in 1 Sam. xxv. 27, xxx. 26. DtOH : for
nsaPl, as in Deut. xxxi. 29, Isa. vii. 14, etc. ; sometimes also in
verbs nS, Lev. xxv. 21, xxvi. 34. fe W : "I have all" (not all
kinds of things) ; viz. as the heir of the divine promise.
Vers. 12-15. Lastly, Esau proposed to accompany Jacob
on his journey. But Jacob politely declined not only his own
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXXIII. 12-16. 309
company, but also the escort, which Esau afterwards offered him,
of a portion of his attendants ; the latter as being unnecessary,
the former as likely to be injurious to his flocks. This did not
spring from any feeling of distrust ; and the ground assigned
was no mere pretext. He needed no military guard, " for he
knew that he was defended by the hosts of God ;" and the rea-
son given was a very good one : " My lord knoweth that tlie chil-
dren are tender, and the flocks and herds that are milking (1i/y
from Sy, giving milk or suckling) are upon me" (vV) : i.e. because
they are giving milk they are an object of especial anxiety to
me ; " and if one should overdrive them a single day, all the sheep
would die." A caravan, with delicate children and cattle that
required care, could not possibly keep pace with Esau and his
horsemen, without taking harm. And Jacob could not expect
his brother to accommodate himself to the rate at which he was
travelling. For this reason he wished Esau to go on first ; and
he would drive gently behind, " according to tJie foot of the
cattle ( n ? K ?? possessions = cattle), and according to the foot of
the children" i.e. " according to the pace at which the cattle
and the children could go" {Luther). u Till I come to my lord
to Seir:" these words are not to be understood as meaning that
he intended to go direct to Seir ; consequently they were not a
wilful deception for the purpose of getting rid of Esau. Jacob's
destination was Canaan, and in Canaan probably Hebron,
where his father Isaac still lived. From thence he may have
thought of paying a visit to Esau in Seir. "Whether he carried
out this intention or not, we cannot tell ; for we have not a re-
cord of all that Jacob did, but only of the principal events of
his life. We afterwards find them both meeting together as
friends at their father's funeral (xxxv. 29). Again, the attitude
of inferiority which Jacob assumed in his conversation with
Esau, addressing him as lord, and speaking of himself as servant,
was simply an act of courtesy suited to the circumstances, in
which he paid to Esau the respect due to the head of a powerful
band ; since he could not conscientiously have maintained the
attitude of a brother, when inwardly and spiritually, in spite of
Esau's friendly meeting, they were so completely separated the
one from the other. — Vers. 16, 17. Esau set off the same day
for Mount Seir, whilst Jacob proceeded to Succoth, where he
built himself a house and made succoth for his flocks, i.e. pro-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
310 THE FIKST BOOK OP MOSES. '
bably not huts of branches and shrubs, but hurdles or folds made
of twigs woven together. According to Josh. xiii. 27, Suceoth
was in the valley of the Jordan, and was allotted to the tribe of
Gad, as part of the district of the Jordan, " on the other side
Jordan eastward ; " and this is confirmed by Judg. viii. 4, 5,
and by Jerome (qucest. ad h. I.) : Sochoth usque hodie civitas
trans Jordanem in parte Scythopoleos. Consequently it cannot
be identified with the Sdcut on the western side of the Jordan,
to the south of Beisan, above the Wady el Mdlih. — How long
Jacob remained in Suceoth cannot be determined ; but we may
conclude that he stayed there some years from the circumstance,
that by erecting a house and huts he prepared for a lengthened
stay. The motives which induced him to remain there are also un-
known to us. But when Knobel adduces the fact, that Jacob came
to Canaan for the purpose of visiting Isaac (xxxi. 18), as a reason
why it is improbable that he continued long at Suceoth, he for-
gets that Jacob could visit his father from Suceoth just as well
as from Shechem, and that, with the number of people and cattle
that he had about him, it was impossible that he should join and
subordinate himself to Isaac's household, after having attained
through his past life and the promises of God a position of
patriarchal independence.
Vers. 18-20. From Suceoth, Jacob crossed a ford of the
Jordan, and " came in safety to the city of Sachem in the land of
Canaan" DPE* is not a proper name meaning " to Shaletn," as
it is rendered by Luther (and Eng. Vers., TV.) after the LXX.,
Vulg., etc. ; but an adjective, safe, peaceful, equivalent to DW3,
" in peace," in chap, xxviii. 21, to which there is an evident
allusion. What Jacob had asked for in his vow at Bethel, before
his departure from Canaan, was now fulfilled. He had returned
in safety u to the land of Canaan ;" Suceoth, therefore, did not
belong to the land of Canaan, but must have been on the eastern
side of the Jordan. MB* *VJ?> lit. city of Shechem ; so called from
Shechem the son of the Hivite prince Hamor 1 (ver. 19, xxxi v.
2 sqq.), who founded it and called it by the name of his son, since
it was not in existence in Abraham's time (vid. xii. 6). Jacob
pitched his tent before the town, and then bought the piece of
ground upon which he encamped from the sons of Hamor for 100
1 Mamortha, which according to Plin. (h. n. v. 14) was the earlier name
of Neapolis (Nablus), appears to have been a corruption of Chamor.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXXIV. 1-4. 311
Kesita. ntre'D is not a piece of silver of the value of a lamb (ac-
cording to the ancient versions), but a quantity of silver weighed
out, of considerable, though not exactly determinable value : cf.
Ges. thes. 8. v. This purchase showed that Jacob, in reliance upon
the promise of God, regarded Canaan as his own home and the
home of his seed. This piece of field, which fell to the lot of
the sons of Joseph, and where Joseph's bones were buried (Josh,
xxiv. 32), was, according to tradition, the plain which stretches
out at the south-eastern opening of the valley of Shechem, where
Jacob's well is still pointed out (John iv. 6), also Joseph's grave,
a Mahometan wely (grave) two or three hundred paces to the
north (Bob. Pal. iii. 95 sqq.). Jacob also erected an altar, as
Abraham had previously done after his entrance into Canaan
(xii. 7), and called it ELelohe-hrael, " God (the mighty) is the
God of Itrael," to set forth in this name the spiritual acquisition
of his previous life, and according to his vow (xxviii. 21) to give
glory to the " God of Israel " (as he called Jehovah, with refer-
ence to the name given to him at chap, xxxii. 29), for having
proved Himself to be El, a mighty God, during his long absence,
and that it might serve as a memorial for his descendants.
VIOLATION OF DINAH ; BEVENOE OF SIAIEON AND LEVI. —
CHAP. XXXIV.
Vers. 1-4. During their stay at Shechem, Dinah, Jacob's
daughter by Leah, went out one day to see, i.e. to make the
acquaintance of the daughters of the land ; when Shechem the
Hivite, the son of the prince, took her with him and seduced
her. Dinah was probably between 13 and 15 at the time, and
had attained perfect maturity ; for this is often the case in the
East at the age of 12, and sometimes earlier. There is no ground
for supposing her to have been younger. Even if she was born
after Joseph, and not till the end of Jacob's 14 years' service
with Laban, and therefore was only five years old when they
left Mesopotamia, eight or ten years may have passed since then,
as Jacob may easily have spent from eight to eleven years in
Succoth, where he had built a house, and Shechem, where he
had bought " a parcel of a field." But she cannot have been
older ; for, according to chap, xxxvii. 2, Joseph was sold by his
brethren when he was 17 years old, i.e. in the 11th year after
Digitized by VjOOQlC
312 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
Jacob's return from Mesopotamia, as he was born in the 14th
year of Jacob's service with Laban 1 (cf. xxx. 24). In the interim
between Dinah's seduction and the sale of Joseph there occurred
nothing but Jacob's journey from Shechem to Bethel and thence
to Ephratah, in the neighbourhood of which Benjamin was born
and Rachel died, and his arrival in Hebron (chap. xxxv.). This
may all have taken place within a single year. Jacob was still
at Hebron, when Joseph was sent to Shechem and sold by his
brethren (xxxvii. 14) ; and Isaac's death did not happen for 12
years afterwards, although it is mentioned in connection with
the account of Jacob's arrival at Hebron (chap. xxxv. 27 sqq.).
— Ver. 3. Shechem " loved the girl, and spoke to her heart;" i.e.
he sought to comfort her by the promise of a happy marriage,
and asked his father to obtain her for him as a wife.
Vers. 5-12. When Jacob heard of the seduction of his
daughter, " he was silent" i.e. he remained quiet, without taking
any active proceedings (Ex. xiv. 14 ; 2 Sam. xix. 11) until his
sons came from the field. When they heard of it, they were
grieved and burned with wrath at the disgrace. KtDt? to defile =
to dishonour, disgrace, because it was an uncircumcised man who
had seduced her. "Because he had wrought folly in Israel, by
lying with Jacob's daughter." " To work folly" was a standing
phrase for crimes against the honour and calling of Israel as
the people of God, especially for shameful sins of the flesh
(Deut. xxii. 21 ; Judg. xx. 10 ; 2 Sam. xiii. 2, etc.) ; but it was
also applied to other great sins (Josh. vii. 15). As Jacob had
become Israel, the seduction of his daughter was a crime against
Israel, which is called folly> inasmuch as the relation of Israel to
God was thereby ignored (Ps. xiv. 1). "And this ought not to
be done:" >)&)£. potentialis as in chap. xx. 9. — Hamor went to
Jacob to ask for his daughter (ver. 6) ; but Jacob's sons
reached home at the same time (ver. 7), so that Hamor spoke
to them (Jacob and his sons). To attain his object Hamor pro-
posed a further intermarriage, unrestricted movement on their
part in the land, and that they should dwell there, trade (i/Mro-
peveaQaC), and secure possessions (W?R3 settle down securely, as in
xlvii. 27). Shechem also offered (vers. 11, 12) to give anything
1 This view is generally supported by the earlier writers, such as Deme-
trius, Petavius (Hengst. Diss.), etc. ; only they reckon Dinah's age at 16,
placing her birth in the 14th year of Jacob's service.
Digitized by CjOOQIC
CHAP. XXXIV. 13-24. 313
i
they Vords\ght ask in the form of dowry ("inb not purchase-money,
Wt jnwf (usual gift made to the bride, vid. xxiv. 53) and presents
(f deep a\ brothers and mother), if they would only give him the
■ *Sin His \
^6 hou* 13-17. Attractive as these offers of the Hivite prince
and i°at our sere, they were declined by Jacob's sons, who had
the chiel-digne in the question of their sister's marriage (vid.
xxiv. 50). And they were quite right; for, by accepting them,
they would have&Js "d^ted t^.: sacred call of Israel and his seed,
and sacrificed the x In ftcs^eJehovah to Mammon. But they
did it in a wrong wtmoifcarr "they answered with deceit and
acted from behind" (VIST? W1D3: "St is to be rendered doloe
struxit ; B^yj ISl would be the expression for " giving mere
words," Hos. x. 4 ; vid. Gee. thee.), "because he had defiled Dinah
their sister" They told him that they could not give their sister
to an uncircumcised man, because this would be a reproach to
them ; and the only condition upon which they would consent
(nitu imperf. Niph. of JWN) was, that the Shechemites should all
be circumcised ; otherwise they would take their sister and go.
Vers. 18—24. The condition seemed reasonable to the two
suitors, and by way of setting a good example, " the young man
did not delay to do this word" i.e. to submit to circumcision, " as
he was honoured before all his father's house." This is stated by
anticipation in ver. 19 ; but before submitting to the operation,
he went with his father to the gate, the place of public assembly,
to lay the matter before the citizens of the town. They knew
so well how to make the condition palatable, by a graphic de-
scription of the wealth of Jacob and his family, and by expa-
tiating upon the advantages of being united with them, that
the Shechemites consented to the proposal. &&)>&: integri,
people whose bearing is unexceptionable. "And the land, behold
broad on both sides it is before them," i.e. it offers space enough
in every direction for them to wander about with their flocks.
And then the gain : " Their cattle, and their possessions, and their
beasts of burden . . . shall they not be ourst" njpD is used here
for flocks and herds, nona for beasts of burden, viz. camels and
asses (cf. Num. xxxii. 26). But notwithstanding the advantages
here pointed out, the readiness of all the citizens of Shechem
(rid. chap, xxiii. 10) to consent to be circumcised, could only be
satisfactorily explained from the fact that this religious rite was
PENT. — VOL. I. X
Digitized by VjOOQlC
314 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
already customary in different nations (according to Hi ^
104, among the Egyptians and Colchians), as an act of
or priestly consecration.
Vers. 25-31. But on the third day, when the Shed
were thoroughly prostrated by the painful effects of tlj a- C
tion, Simeon and Levi (with their servants of couijMJ0P upon \
the town nt33 (i.e. while the people were off thei^" ,.^rd, as . in '
Ezek. xxx. 9), slew all the males, including Hamojrand Shechem,
with the edge of the sword, i.e. without qua"* ' (Num. xxi. 24 ;
Josh. x. 28, etc.), and brought back tb/^ «<er. The sons of
Jacob then plundered the town, and -f ^eia off all the cattle in
the town and in the fields, and al* cfieir possessions, including
the women and the children in their houses. By the sons of
Jacob (ver. 27) we are not to understand the rest of his sons to
the exclusion of Simeon, Levi, and even Reuben, as Delitzsch
supposes, but all his sons. For the supposition, that Simeon
and Levi were content with taking their murderous revenge,
and had no share in the plunder, is neither probable in itself nor
reconcilable with what Jacob said on his death-bed (chap. xlix.
5-7, observe *»W npJJ) about this very crime; nor can it be inferred
from 'WW in ver. 26, for this relates merely to their going away
/rom the house of the two princes, not to their leaving Shechem
altogether. The abrupt way in which the plundering is linked
on to the slaughter of all the males, without any copulative Vav,
gives to the account the character of indignation at so revolting
a crime ; and this is also shown in the verbosity of the descrip-
tion. The absence of the copula is not be accounted for by the
hypothesis that vers. 27—29 are interpolated ; for an interpolator
might have supplied the missing link by a car, just as well as the
LXX. and other ancient translators. — Vers. 30, 31. Jacob re-
proved the originators of this act most severely for their wicked-
ness: " Ye have brought me into trouble (conturbare), to make
me stink (an abomination) among the inhabitants of the land;
. . . and yet I (with my attendants) am a company that can be
numbered (lit. people of number, easily numbered, a small band,
Deut. iv. 27, cf. Isa. x. 19) ; and if they gather together against
me, tfiey will slay me," etc. If Jacob laid stress simply upon the
consequences which this crime was likely to bring upon himself
and his house, the reason was, that this was the view most
adapted to make an impression upon his sons. For his last
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXXV. 1-8. SI 5
words concerning Simeon and Levi (xlix. 5—7) are a sufficient
proof that the wickedness of their conduct was also an object of
deep abhorrence. And his fear was not groundless. Only God
in His mercy averted all the evil consequences from Jacob and
his house (chap. xxxv. 5, 6). But bis sons answered, "Are they
to treat our sister like a harlot?" >WV: as in Lev. xvi. 15, etc.
Their indignation was justifiable enough ; and their seeking re-
venge, as Absalom avenged the violation of his sister on Amnon
(2 Sam. xiii. 22 sqq.), was in accordance with the habits of
nomadic tribes. In this way, for example, seduction is still
punished by death among the Arabs, and the punishment is
generally inflicted by the brothers (cf . Niebuhr, Arab. p. 39 ;
Burckhardt, Syr. p. 361, and Beduinen, p. 89, 224-5). In addi-
tion to this, Jacob's sons looked upon the matter not merely as
a violation of their sister's chastity, but as a crime against the
peculiar vocation of their tribe. But for all that, the deception
they practised, the abuse of the covenant sign of circumcision
as a means of gratifying their revenge, and the extension of
that revenge to the whole town, together with the plundering of
the slain, were crimes deserving of the strongest reprobation.
The crafty character of Jacob degenerated into malicious
cunning in Simeon and Levi ; and jealousy for the exalted voca-
tion of their family, into actual sin. This event " shows us in
type all the errors into which the belief in the pre-eminence of
Israel was sure to lead in the course of history, whenever that
belief was rudely held by men of carnal minds" (0. v. Gerlaeh).
Jacob's ketubn to bethel and hebron. death of
isaac. — chap. xxxt.
Vers. 1-8. Journey to Bethel. — Jacob had allowed ten years
to pass since his return from Mesopotamia, without performing
the vow which he made at Bethel when fleeing from Esau
(xxviii. 20 sqq.), although he had recalled it to mind when re-
solving to return (xxxi. 13), and had also erected an altar in
Shechem to the "God of Israel" (xxxiii. 20). He was now
directed by God (ver. 1) to go to Bethel, and there build an
altar to the God who had appeared to him on his flight from
Esau. This command stirred him up to perform what had
been neglected, viz. to put away from his house the strange
Digitized by VjOOQlC
316 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
gods, which he had tolerated in weak consideration for his wives,
and which had no doubt occasioned the long neglect, and to
pay to God the vow that he had made in the day of his trouble.
He therefore commanded his house (vers. 2, 3), i.e. his wives
and children, and "all that were with him," i.e. his men and
maid-servants, to put away the strange gods, to purify them-
selves, and wash their clothes. He also buried " all the strange
gods," i.e. Rachel's teraphim (xxxi. 19), and whatever other idols
there were, with the earrings which were worn as amulets and
charms, " under the terebintli at Sfiechem," probably the very
tree under which Abraham once pitched his tent (xii. 6), and
which was regarded as a sacred place in Joshua's time (vid.
Josh. xxiv. 26, though the pointing is n?K there). The burial
of the idols was followed by purification through the washing of
the body, as a sign of the purification of the heart from the
defilement of idolatry, and by the putting on of clean and festal
clothes, as a symbol of the sanctification and elevation of the
heart to the Lord (Josh. xxiv. 23). This decided turning to
the Lord was immediately followed by the blessing of God.
When they left Shechem a " terror of God" i.e. a supernatural
terror, " came upon the cities round about" so that they did not
venture to pursue the sons of Jacob on account of the cruelty
of Simeon and Levi (ver. 5). Having safely arrived in Bethel,
Jacob built an altar, which he called El Bethel (God of Bethel)
in remembrance of the manifestation of God on His flight from
Esau. — Ver. 8. There Deborah, Rebekah's nurse, died, and was
buried below Bethel under an oak, which was henceforth called
the "oak of weeping," a mourning oak, from the grief of
Jacob's house on account of her death. Deborah had either
been sent by Rebekah to take care of her daughters-in-law and
grandsons, or had gone of her own accord into Jacob's house-
hold after the death of her mistress. The mourning at her
death, and the perpetuation of her memory, are proofs that she
must have been a faithful and highly esteemed servant in
Jacob's house.
Vers. 9-15. The fresh revelation at Bethel. — After
Jacob had performed his vow by erecting the altar at Bethel,
God appeared to him again there ("again," referring to chap,
xxviii.), " on his coming out of Padan-Aram" as He had ap-
'Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXXV. 9-15. 317
peared to him 30 years before on his journey thither, — though
it was then in a dream, now by daylight in a visible form (cf.
ver. 13, u God went up from Mm"). The gloom of that day of
fear had now brightened into the clear daylight of salvation.
This appearance was the answer, which God gave to Jacob on
his acknowledgment of Him ; and its reality is thereby estab-
lished, in opposition to the conjecture that it is merely a legend-
ary repetition of the previous vision. 1 The former theophany
had promised to Jacob divine protection in a foreign land and
restoration to his home, on the ground of his call to be the
bearer of the blessings of salvation. This promise God had
fulfilled, and Jacob therefore performed his vow. On the
strength of this, God now confirmed to him the name of Israel,
which He had already given him in chap, xxxii. 28, and with it
the promise of a numerous seed and the possession of Canaan,
which, so far as the form and substance are concerned, points-
back rather to chap. xvii. 6 and 8 than to chap, xxviii. 13, 14,
and for the fulfilment of which, commencing with the birth of
his sons and his return to Canaan, and stretching forward to the
most remote future, the name of Israel was to furnish him with
a pledge. — Jacob alluded to this second manifestation of God at
Bethel towards the close of his life (chap, xlviii. 3, 4) ; and Hosea
(xii. 4) represents it as the result of his wrestling with God. The
remembrance of this appearance Jacob transmitted to his descend-
ants by erecting a memorial stone, which he not only anointed with
oil like the former one in chap, xxviii. 18, but consecrated by a
drink-offering and by the renewal of the name Bethel.
1 This conjecture derives no support from the fact that the manifesta-
tions of God are ascribed to Elohim in vers. 1 and 9 sqq., although the
whole chapter treats of the display of mercy by the covenant God, i.e.
Jehovah. For the occurrence of Elohim instead of Jehovah in ver. 1 may
be explained, partly from the antithesis of God and man (because Jacob, the
man, had neglected to redeem his vow, it was necessary that he should be
reminded of it by God), and partly from the fact that there is no allusion
to any appearance of God, but the words " God said " are to be understood,
no doubt, as relating to an inward communication. The use of Elohim in vers.
9 sqq. follows naturally from the injunction of Elohim in ver. 1 ; and there
was the less necessity for an express designation of the God appearing aa
Jehovah, because, on the one hand, the object of this appearance was simply
to renew and confirm the former appearance of Jehovah (xxviii. 12 sqq.),
and on the other hand, the title assumed in ver. 11, El Shaddai, refers to
chap. xrii. 1, where Jehovah announces Himself to Abram as El Shaddai.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
318 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
Vers. 16-20. Birth op Benjamin and death op Rachel.
— Jacob's departure from Bethel was not in opposition to the
divine command, " dwell there " (ver. 1). For the word 3B> does
not enjoin a permanent abode ; but, when taken in connection
with what follows, " make there an altar," it merely directs him
to stay there and perform his vow. As they were travelling
forward, Rachel was taken in labour not far from Ephratah.
jntjn rrpa is a space, answering probably to the Persian parasang,
though the real meaning of rn33 is unknown. The birth was a
difficult one. n^nfe B*i?Fi : she had difficulty in her labour (in-
stead of Piel we find Hiphil in ver. 17 with the same significa-
tion). The midwife comforted her by saying : " Fear not, for
this alao is to thee a son," — a wish expressed by her when Joseph
was born (xxx. 24). But she expired ; and as she was dying,
^he called him Ben-oni, "son of my pain." Jacob, however,
called him Ben-jamin, probably son of good fortune, according
to the meaning of the word jamin sustained by the Arabic, to
indicate that his pain at the loss of his favourite wife was com-
pensated by the birth of this son, who now completed the
number twelve. Other explanations are less simple. He buried
Rachel on the road to Ephratah, or Ephrath (probably the
fertile, from ^6), i.e. Bethlehem (bread-house), by which name
it is better known, though the origin of it is obscure. He also
erected a monument over her grave ('"OtfD, crrjkij), on which
the historian observes, " This is the pillar of Rachel's grave unto
this day:" a remark which does not necessarily point to a post-
Mosaic period, but which could easily have been made even 10
or 20 years after its erection. For the fact that a grave-stone
had been preserved upon the high road in a foreign land, the
inhabitants of which had no interest whatever in it, might
appear worthy of notice even though only a single decennary
had passed away. 1
1 But even if this Mazzebah was really preserved till the conquest of
Canaan by the Israelites, i.e. more than 450 years, and the remark referred
to that time, it might be an interpolation by a later hand. The grave was
certainly a well-known spot in Samuel's time (1 Sam. x. 2) ; but a mottu-
menlum ubi Rachel posita est uxor Jacob is first mentioned again by the
Bordeaux pilgrims of a.d. 333 and Jerome. The Kubbet Rakil (Rachel's
grave), which is now shown about half an hour's journey to the north of
Bethlehem, to the right of the road from Jerusalem to Hebron, is merely
" an ordinary Muslim wely, or tomb of a holy person, a small square build*
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXXV. 21-29. 319
Vers. 21, 22a. Reuben's inoest. — As they travelled on-
ward, Jacob pitched his tent on the other side of Migdal Eder,
where Reuben committed incest with Bilhah, his father's con-
cubine. It is merely alluded to here in the passing remark that
Israel heard it, by way of preparation for chap. xlix. 4. Migdal
Eder (flock-tower) was a watch-tower built for the protection of
flocks against robbers (cf. 2 Kings sviii. 8 ; 2 Chron. xxvi. 10,
xxvii. 4) on the other side of Bethlehem, but hardly within 1000
paces of the town, where it has been placed by tradition since
the time of Jerome. The piska in the middle of ver. 22 does
not indicate a gap in the text, but the conclusion of a parashah,
a division of the text of greater antiquity and greater correctness
than the Masoretic division.
Vers. 226-29. Jacob's return to his father's house,
and death OP Isaac. — Jacob had left his father's house with
no other possession than a staff, and now he returned with 12
sons. Thus had he been blessed by the faithful covenant God.
To show this, the account of his arrival in his father's tent at
Hebron is preceded by a list of his 12 sons, arranged according
to their respective mothers ; and this list is closed with the re-
mark, " These are the sons of Jacob, which were born to him in
Padan-Aram" (T9J for YT3J; Ges. § 143, 1), although Benjamin,
the twelfth, was not born in Padan-Aram, but on the journey
back. — Vers. 27, 28. Jacob's arrival in "Mamre Kirjath-Arbah"
, i.e. in the terebinth-grove of Mamre (xiii. 18) by Kirjath-Arbah
or Hebron (yid. xxiii. 2), constituted his entrance into his father's
house, to remain there as Isaac's heir. He had probably visited
his father during the ten years that had elapsed since his return
from Mesopotamia, though no allusion is made to this, since such
visits would have no importance, either in themselves or their
consequences, in connection with the sacred history. This was
not the case, however, with his return to enter upon the family
ing of stone with a dome, and within it a tomb in the ordinary Mohammedan
form" (Rob. Pal. 1, p. 322). It has been recently enlarged by a square
court with high walls and arches on the eastern side (Rob. Bibl. Researches,
p. 357). Now although this grave is not ancient, the correctness of the
tradition, which fixes upon this as the site of Rachel's grave, cannot on the
whole be disputed. At any rate, the reasons assigned to the contrary by
Theniux, Kurtz, and others are not conclusive.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
320 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
inheritance. With this, therefore, the history of Isaac's life is
brought to a close. Isaac died at the age of 180, and was buried
by his two sons in the cave of Machpelah (chap. xlix. 31), Abra-
ham's family grave, Esau having come from Seir to Hebron to
attend the funeral of his father. But Isaac's death did not
actually take place for 12 years after Jacob's return to Hebron.
For as Joseph was 17 years old when he was sold by his brethren
(xxxvii. 2), and Jacob was then living at Hebron (xxxvii. 14-),
it cannot have been more than 31 years after his flight from
Esau when Jacob returned home (cf. chap, xxxiv. 1). Now
since, according to our calculation at chap, xxvii. 1, he was 77
years old when he fled, he must have been 108 when he returned
home; and Isaac would only have reached his 168th year, as he
was 60 years old when Jacob was born (xxv. 26). Consequently
Isaac lived to witness the grief of Jacob at the loss of Joseph,
and died but a short time before his promotion in Egypt, which
occurred 13 years after he was sold (xli. 46), and only 10 years
before Jacob's removal with his family to Egypt, as Jacob was
130 years old when he was presented to Pharaoh (xlvii. 9). But
the historical significance of his life was at an end, when Jacob
returned home with his twelve sons.
IX. HISTORY OF ESAU.
Chap, xxxvi.
" Esau and Jacob shook hands once more over the corpse of
their father. Henceforth their paths diverged, to meet no more"
{Del.). As Esau had also received a divine promise (xxv. 23),
and the history of his tribe was already interwoven in the pater-
nal blessing with that of Israel (xxvii. 29 and 40), an account
is given in the book of Genesis of his growth into a nation ; and
a separate section is devoted to this, which, according to the
invariable plan of the book, precedes the tkoledoth of Jacob.
The account is subdivided into the following sections, which are
distinctly indicated by their respective headings. (Compare with
these the parallel list in 1 Chron. i. 35-54.)
Digitized by VjOOQlC
/
CHAP. XXXVI. 1-8. 321
T Vers. 1-8. Esau's wives and children. His settle-
'. ment in the mountains op Seik. — In the heading (ver. 1)
' the surname Edom is added to the name Esau, which he received
at his birth, because the former became the national designation
of his descendants. — Vers. 2, 3. The names of Esau's three wives
differ from those given in the previous accounts (chap. xxvi. 34
and xxviii. 9), and in one instance the father's name as well.
The daughter of Elon the Hittite is called Adah (the ornament),
and in chap. xxvi. 34 Basmath (the fragrant) ; the second is
called Aholibamah (probably tent-height), the daughter of Anah,
daughter, i.e. grand-daughter of Zibeon the Hivite, and in xxvi.
34, Jehudith (the praised or praiseworthy), daughter of Beeri the
Hittite ; the third, the daughter of Ishmael, is called Basmath
here and Mahalath in chap, xxviii. 9. This difference arose
from the fact, that Moses availed himself of genealogical docu-
ments for Esau's family and tribe, and inserted them without
alteration. It presents no irreconcilable discrepancy, therefore,
but may be explained from the ancient custom in the East, of
giving surnames, as the Arabs frequently do still, founded upon
some important or memorable event in a man's life, which gra-
dually superseded the other name {e.g. the name Edom, as ex-
plained in chap. xxv. 30) ; whilst as a rule the women received
new names when they were married (cf. Chardin, Ilengstenberg,
Dissertations, vol. ii. p. 223-6). The different names given for
the father of Aholibamah or Judith, Hengstenberg explains by
referring to the statement in ver. 24, that Anah, the son of
Zibeon, while watching the asses of his father in the desert, dis-
covered the warm springs (of Calirrhoe), on which he founds the
acute conjecture, that from this discovery Anah received the
surname Beeri, i.e. spring-man, which so threw his original name
into the shade, as to be the only name given in the genealogical
table. There is no force in the objection, that according to ver.
25 Aholibamah was not a daughter of the discoverer of the
springs, but of his uncle of the same name. For where is it
stated that the Aholibamah mentioned in ver. 25 was Esau's
wife ? And is it a thing unheard of that aunt and niece should
have the same namet^Jf Zibeon gave his second son the
name of his brother &/ ^^-^ers. 24 and 20), why could not
his son Anah have/ \ugTiter after his cousin, the
daughter of his,f ' \ie reception of Aholibamah
/
Digitized by VjOOQlC
322 THE FIBST BOOK OF MOSES.
\
into the list of the Seirito princes is no proof that she was Esau's
wife, but may be much more naturally supposed to have arisen
from the same (unknown) circumstance as that which caused
one of the seats of the Edomitish Alluphim to be called by her
name (ver. 41). — Lastly, the remaining diversity, viz. that Anaiu.
is called a Hivite in ver. 2 and a Hittite in chap. xxvi. 34, is not
to be explained by the conjecture, that for Hivite we should read
Horite, according to ver. 20, but by the simple assumption that
Hittite is used in chap. xxvi. 34 sensu latiori for Canaanite,
according to the analogy of Josh. i. 4, 1 Kings x. 29, 2 Kings
vii. 6 ; just as the two Hittite wives of Esau are called daughters
of Canaan in chap, xxviii. 8. For the historical account, thege
neral name Hittite sufficed ; but the genealogical list required the
special name of the particular branch of the Canaanhish tribes,
viz. the Hivites. In just as simple a manner may the introduc
tion of the Hivite Zibeon among the Horites of Seir (vers. 20 and
24) be explained, viz. on the supposition that he removed to the
mountains of Seir, and there became a Horite, i.e. a troglodyte,
or dweller in a cave. — The names of Esau's sons occur again in
1 Chron. L 35. The statement in vers. 6, 7, that Esau went
with his family and possessions, which he had acquired in
Canaan, into the land of Seir, from before his brother Jacob,
does not imply (in contradiction to chap, xxxii. 4, xxxiii. 14-16)
that he did not leave the land of Canaan till after Jacob's return.
The words may be understood without difficulty as meaning, that
after founding a house of his own, when his family and flocks
increased, Esau sought a home in Seir, because he knew that
Jacob, as the heir, would enter upon the family possessions, but
without waiting till he returned and actually took possession.
In the clause " went into the country" (ver. 6), the name Seir or
Edom (cf. ver. 16) must have dropt out, as the words " into
the country" convey no sense when standing by themselves.
Vers. 9-14 (cf. 1 Chron. i. 36, 37). Esau's sons and
GRANDSONS AS FATHERS OF tribes. — Through them he be-
came the father of Edom, i.e. the founder of the Edomitish
nation on the mountains of Seir. Moimt Seir is the mountain-
ous region between the Dead Se~ ' ]i e Elanitic Gulf, the
northern half of which is f' 'Te$a)J\vt\) by the
Arabs, the southern half, S "•. 552). — In the
s
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXXVI. 9-14. 323
case of two of the wives of Esau, who bore only one son each,
the tribes were founded not by the sons, but by the grandsons;
but in that of Aholibamah the three sons were the founders.
Among the sons of Eliphaz we find Amalek, whose mother was
Timna, the concubine of Eliphaz. He was the ancestor of the
Amalekites, who attacked the Israelites at Horeb as they came
out of Egypt under Moses (Ex. xvii. 8 sqq.), and not merely of
a mixed tribe of Amalekites and Edomites, belonging to the
supposed aboriginal Amalekite nation. For the Arabic legend
of AmUk as an aboriginal tribe of Arabia is far too recent, con-
fused, and contradictory to counterbalance the clear testimony
of the record before us. The allusion to the fields of the
Amalekites in chap. xiv. 7 does not imply that the tribe was
in existence in Abraham's time, nor does the expression " first
of the nations," in the saying of Balaam (Num. xxiv. 20), repre-
sent Amalek as the aboriginal or oldest tribe, bat simply as the
first heathen tribe by which Israel was attacked. The Old
Testament says nothing of any fusion of Edomites or Horites
with Amalekites, nor does it mention a double Amalek (cf.
Hengstenberg, Dessertations 2, 247 sqq., and Kurtz, History
i. 122, 3, ii. 240 sqq.). 1 If there had been an Amalek previous
to Edom, with the important part which they took in opposition
to Israel even in the time of Moses, the book of Genesis would
not have omitted to give their pedigree in the list of the na-
tions. At a very early period the Amalekites separated from the
other tribes of Edom and formed an independent people, having
their headquarters in the southern part of the mountains of
Judah, as far as Kadesh (xiv. 7 ; Num. xiii. 29, xiv. 43, 45),
but, like the Bedouins, spreading themselves as a nomad tribe
over the whole of the northern portion of Arabia Petrsea, from
Havilah to Shur on the border of Egypt (1 Sam. xv. 3, 7,
xxvii. 8); whilst one branch penetrated into the heart of
Canaan, so that a range of hills, in what was afterwards the
inheritance of Ephraim, bore the name of mountains of the
Amalekites (Judg. xii. 15, cf. v. 14). Those who settled in
Arabia seem also to have separated in the course of time into
several branches, so that Amalekite hordes invaded the land of
l The occurrence of " Timna and Amalek " in 1 Chron. i. 36, as co-
ordinate with the sons of Eliphaz, ia simply a more concise form of saying
" and from Timna, Amalek."
Digitized by VjOOQlC
324 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
Israel in connection sometimes with the Midianites and the sons
of the East (the Arabs, Judg. vi. 3, vii. 12), and at other times
with the Ammonites (Judg. iii. 13). After they had been
defeated by Saul (1 Sam. xiv. 48, xv. 2 sqq.), and frequently
chastised by David (1 Sam. xxvii. 8, xxx. 1 sqq. ; 2 Sam.
viii. 12), the remnant of them was exterminated under Heze-
kiah by the Simeonites on the mountains of Seir (1 Chron. iv.
42, 43).
Vers. 15-19. The tribe-princes who descended from
Esau. — DTO was the distinguishing title of the Edomite
and Horite phylarchs; and it is only incidentally that it is
applied to Jewish heads of tribes in Zech. ix. 7, and xii. 5.
It is probably derived from 1?** or MJlf, equivalent to rrtPlBBfe,
families (1 Sam. x. 19; Mic. v. 2), — the heads of the families,
i.e. of the principal divisions, of the tribe. The names of
these Alluphim are not names of places, but of persons — of
the three sons and ten grandsons of Esau mentioned in vers.
9—14 ; though Knobel would reverse the process and interpret
the whole geographically. — In ver. 16 KoraJi has probably been
copied by mistake from ver. 18, and should therefore be erased,
as it really is in the Samar. Codex.
Vers. 20-30 (parallel, 1 Chron. i. 38-42). Descendants
of Seir the Horite ; — the inhabitants of the land, or
pre-Edomitish population of the country. — " The Horite : "
6 TpwyKoSvrryt, the dweller in caves, which abound in the
mountains of Edom (vid. Bob. Pal. ii. p. 424). The Horites,
who had previously been an independent people (xiv. 6), were
partly exterminated and partly subjugated by the descendants
of Esau (Deut. ii. 12, 22). Seven sons of Seir are given as
tribe-princes of the Horites, who are afterwards mentioned as
Alluphim (vers. 29, 30), also their sons, as well as two daughters,
Timna (ver. 22) and Aholibamah (ver. 25), who obtained no-
toriety from the fact that two of the headquarters of Edomitish
tribe-princes bore their names (vers. 40 and 41). Timna was
probably the same as the concubine of Eliphaz (ver. 12); but
Aholibamah was not the wife of Esau (cf. ver. 2). — There are
a, few instances in which the names in this list differ from those
in the Chronicles. But they are differences which either con-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXXVI. 81-89. 325
sist of variations in form, or have arisen from mistakes in
copying. 1 Of Anah, the son of Zibeon, it is related (ver. 24),
that as he fed the asses of his father in the desert, he " found
Dl ?!n;" — not " he invented mules," as the Talmud, Luther, etc.,
render it, for mules are D'Tl?, and *WO does not mean to invent,
but he discovered aqua calidce ( Vulg.), either the hot sulphur
springs of Calirrlwe in the Wady Zerka Maein (vid. x. 19), or
those in the Wady el Ahsa to the S.E. of the Dead Sea, or
those in the Wady Hamad between Kerek and the Dead Sea. 2 —
Ver. 30. " These are the princes of the Horites according to their
princes" i.e. as their princes were individually named in the
land of Seir. ? in enumerations indicates the relation of the
individual to the whole, and of the whole to the individual.
Vers. 31-39 (parallel, 1 Chron. i. 43-50). The kings in
the LAND OF Edom : before the children of Israel had a king.
It is to be observed in connection with the eight kings men-
tioned here, that whilst they follow one another, that is to say,
1 Knobel also undertakes to explain these names geographically, and to
point them out in tribes and places of Arabia, assuming, quite arbitrarily
and in opposition to the text, that the names refer to tribes, not to persons,
although an incident is related of Zibeon's son, which proves at once that
the list relates to persons and not to tribes ; and expecting his readers to
believe that not only are the descendants of these troglodytes, who were
exterminated before the time of Moses, still to be found, but even their
names may be traced in certain Bedouin tribes, though more than 3000
years have passed away ! The utter groundlessness of such explanations,
which rest upon nothing more than similarity of names, may be seen
in the association of Shobal with Syria Sobal (Judith iii. 1), the name
used by the Crusaders for Arabia tertia, i.e. the southernmost district
below the Dead Sea, which was conquered by them. For notwithstand-
ing the resemblance of the name Shobal to Sobal, no one could seriously
think of connecting Syria Sobal with the Horite prince Shobal, unless
he was altogether ignorant of the apocryphal origin of the former name,
which first of all arose from the Greek or Latin version of the Old Testa-
ment, and in fact from a misunderstanding of Ps. lx. 2, where, instead
rniY OIK, Aram Zobah, we find in the LXX. lupt* 2o/3«x, and in the Vulg.
Syria el Sobal.
2 It is possible that there may be something significant in the fact that
it was " as he was feeding his father's asses," and that the asses may havo
contributed to the discovery ; just as the whirlpool of Karlsbad is said to
have been discovered through a hound of Charles IV., which pursued a stag
into a hot spring, and attracted the huntsmen to the spot by its howling.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
326 THE F1BST BOOK OF MOSES.
one never comes to the throne till his predecessor is dead, yet
the son never succeeds the father, but they all belong to different
families and places, and in the case of the last the statement that
" he died" is wanting. From this it is unquestionably obvious,
that the sovereignty was elective ; that the kings were chosen
by the phylarchs ; and, as Isa. xxxiv. 12 also shows, that they
lived or reigned contemporaneously with these. The contem-
poraneous existence of the Alluphim and the kings may also be
inferred from Ex. xv. 15 as compared with Num. xx. 14 sqq.
Whilst it was with the king of Edom that Moses treated re-
specting the passage through the land, in the song of Moses it
is the princes who tremble with fear on account of the miracu-
lous passage through the Red Sea (cf. Ezek. xxxii. 29). Lastly,
this is also supported by the fact, that the account of the seats
of the phylarchs (vers. 40-43) follows the list of the kings.
This arrangement would have been thoroughly unsuitable if the
monarchy had been founded upon the ruins of the phylarchs
(vid. Hengstenberg, ut sup. pp. 238 sqq.). Of all the kings of
Edom, not one is named elsewhere. It is true, the attempt has
been made to identify the fourth, Hadad (ver. 35), with the
Edomite Hadad who rose up against Solomon (1 Kings xi. 14) ;
but without foundation. The contemporary of Solomon was of
royal blood, but neither a king nor a pretender ; our Hadad, on
the contrary, was a king, but he was the son of an unknown
Hadad of the town of Avith, and no relation to his predecessor
Husham of the country of the Temanites. It is related of him
that he smote Midian in the fields of Moab (ver. 35) ; from which
Hengstenberg (pp. 235-6) justly infers that this event cannot
have been very remote from the Mosaic age, since we find the
Midianites allied to the Moabites in Num. xxii. ; whereas after-
wards, viz. in the time of Gideon, the Midianites vanished from
history, and in Solomon's days the fields of Moab, being Israel-
itish territory, cannot have served as a field of battle for the
Midianites and Moabites. — Of the tribe-cities of these kings
only a few can be identified now. Bozrdh, a noted city of the
Edomites (Isa. xxxiv. 6, bdii. 1, etc.), is still to be traced in el
Buseireh, a village with ruins in Jebal (Eob. Pal. ii. 571). — The
land of the Temanite (ver. 34) is a province in northern Idumaea,
with a city, Tetnan, which has not yet been discovered ; accord-
ing to Jerome, quinque millibus from Petra. — Behoboth of the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXXVI. 81-89. 327
river (ver. 37) can neither be the Idumsean Robotha, nor er
Buheibeh in the wady running towards el Arish, bnt must be
sought for on the Euphrates, say in Errachabi or Rachabeh, near
the mouth of the Chaboras. Consequently Saul, who sprang
from Rehoboth, was a foreigner. — Of the last king, Radar (ver.
39 ; not Hadad, as it is written in 1 Chron. i. 50), the wife, the
mother-in-law, and the mother are mentioned : his death is not
mentioned here, but is added by the later chronicler (1 Chron.
i. 51). This can be explained easily enough from the simple
fact, that at the time when the table was first drawn up, Hadad
was still alive and seated upon the throne. In all probability,
therefore, Hadad was the king of Edom, to whom Moses applied
for permission to pass through the land (Num. xx. 14 sqq.). 1 At
any rate the list is evidently a record relating to the Edomitish
kings of a pre-Mosaic age. But if this is the case, the heading,
" These are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before
there reigned any king over the children of Israel," does not refer
to the time when the monarchy was introduced into Israel under
Saul, but was written with the promise in mind, that kings
should come out of the kins of Jacob (xxxv. 11, cf. xvii. 4 sqq.),
and merely expresses the thought, that Edom became a kingdom
at an earlier period than Israel. Such a thought was by no
means inappropriate to the Mosaic age. For the idea, " that
1 If this be admitted ; then, on the supposition that this list of kings
contains all the previous kings of Edom, the introduction of monarchy
among the Edomites can hardly have taken place more than 200 years be-
fore the exodus ; and, in that case, none of the phylarchs named in vers.
15-18 can have lived to see its establishment. For the list only reaches to
the grandsons of Esau, none of whom are likely to have lived more than
100 or 150 years after Esau's death. It is true we do not know when Esau
died ; but 413 years elapsed between the death of Jacob and the exodus,
and Joseph, who was born in the 91st year of Jacob's life, died 54 years
afterwards, i.e. S59 years before the exodus. But Esau was married in his
40th year, 87 years before Jacob (xxvi. 84), and had sons and daughters
before his removal to Seir (ver. 6). Unless, therefore, his sons and grand-
sons attained a most unusual age, or were married remarkably late in life,
his grandsons can hardly have outlived Joseph more than 100 years. Now,
if we fix their death at about 250 years before the exodus of Israel from
Egypt, there remains from that point to the arrival of the Israelites at the
land of Edom (Num. xx. 14) a period of 290 years ; amply sufficient for the
reigns of eight kings, even if the monarchy was not introduced till after the
death of the last of the phylarchs mentioned in vers. 15-18.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
328 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
Israel was destined to grow into a kingdom with monarchs of
his own family, was a hope handed down to the age of Moses,
which the long residence in Egypt was well adapted to foster"
(Del).
Vers. 40-43 (parallel, 1 Chron. i. 51-54). Seats op the
TRIBE-PRINCES OP ESAU ACCORDING TO THEIR FAMILIES. —
That the names which follow are not a second list of Edomitish
tribe-princes (viz. of those who continued the ancient constitu-
tion, with its hereditary aristocracy, after Hadar's death), but
merely relate to the capital cities of the old phylarchs, is evident
from the expression in the heading, " After their places, by their
names" as compared with ver. 43, " According to their habita-
tions in the land of tlieir possession." This being the substance
and intention of the list, there is nothing surprising in the fact,
that out of the eleven names only two correspond to those given
in vers. 15-19. This proves nothing more than that only two
of the capitals received their names from the princes who cap-
tured or founded them, viz. Jimnah and Kenaz. Neither of
these has been discovered yet. The name Aholibamah is derived
from the Horite princess (ver. 25) ; its site is unknown. Elali
is the port Aila (vid. xiv. 6). Pinon is the same as Phunon, an
encampment of the Israelites (Num. xxxiii. 42-3), celebrated
for its mines, in which many Christians were condemned to
labour under Diocletian, between Petra and Zoar, to the north-
east of Wady Musa. Tetnan is the capital of the land of the
Temanites (ver. 34). Mibzar is supposed by Knobel to be Petra ;
but this is called Selah elsewhere (2 Kings xiv. 7). Magdiel and
lram cannot be identified. The concluding sentence, " This is
Esau, the father (founder) of Edom" (i.e. from him sprang the
great nation of the Edomites, with its princes and kings, upon
the mountains of Seir), not only terminates this section, but
prepares the way for the history of Jacob, which commences
with the following chapter.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
chap, xxxm-u 329
X. HISTORY OF JACOB.
Chap. xxxvii.-l.
its substance and character.
The history (tholedotli) of Isaac commenced with the found-
ing of his house by the birth of his sons (p. 266) ; but Jacob
was abroad when his sons were born, and had not yet entered
into undisputed possession of his inheritance. Hence his tho-
Udoth only commence with his return to his father's tent and
his entrance upon the family possessions, and merely embrace
the history of his life as patriarch of the house which he founded.
In this period of his life, indeed, his sons, especially Joseph and
Judah, stand in the foreground, so that " Joseph might be de-
scribed as the moving principle of the following history." But
for all that, Jacob remains the head of the house, and the centre
around whom the whole revolves. This section is divided by
the removal of Jacob to Egypt, into the period of his residence in
Canaan (chap, xxxvii.-xlv.), and the close of his life in Goshen
(chap. xlvi.-L). The first period is occupied with the events
which prepared the way for, and eventually occasioned, his mi-
gration into Egypt. The way was prepared, directly by the sale
of Joseph (chap, xxxvii.), indirectly by the alliance of Judah with
the Canaanites (chap, xxxviii.), which endangered the divine
call of Israel, inasmuch as this showed the necessity for a tem-
porary removal of the sons of Israel from Canaan. The way
was opened by the wonderful career of Joseph in Egypt, his
elevation from slavery and imprisonment to be the ruler over
the whole of Egypt (xxxix.-xli.). And lastly, the migration was
occasioned by the famine in Canaan, which rendered it necessary
for Jacob's sons to travel into Egypt to buy corn, and, whilst it
led to Jacob's recovery of the son he had mourned for as dead,
furnished an opportunity for Joseph to welcome his family into
Egypt (chap, xlii.-xlv.). The second period commences with
the migration of Jacob into Egypt, and his settlement in the
land of Goshen (chap, xlvi.-xlvii. 27). It embraces the patri-
arch's closing years, his last instructions respecting his burial in
Canaan (chap, xlvii. 28-31), his adoption of Joseph's sons, and
pent. — VOL. I. T
Digitized by VjOOQlC
330 THE FIBST BOOK OF MOSES.
the blessing given to his twelve sons (chap, xlix.), and extends
to his burial and Joseph's death (chap. 1.).
Now if we compare this period of the patriarchal history with
the previous ones, viz. those of Isaac and Abraham, it differs
from them most in the absence of divine revelations — in the fact,
that from the time of the patriarch's entrance upon the family
inheritance to the day of his death, there was only one other
occasion on which God appeared to him in a dream, vie. in Beer-
sheba, on the border of the promised land, when he had prepared
to go with his whole house into Egypt: the God of his father
then promised him the increase of his seed in Egypt into a great
nation, and their return to Canaan (xlvi. 2-4). This fact may
be, easily explained on the ground, that the end of the divine
manifestations had been already attained ; that in Jacob's house
with his twelve sons the foundation was laid for the development
of the promised nation ; and that the time had come, in which
the chosen family was to grow into a nation, — a process for which
they needed, indeed, the blessing and protection of God, but no
special revelations, so long at least as this growth into a nation
took its natural course. That course was not interrupted, but
rather facilitated by the removal into Egypt. But as Canaan
had been assigned to the patriarchs as the land of their pilgrim-
age, and promised to their seed for a possession after it had
become a nation ; when Jacob was compelled to leave this land,
his faith in the promise of God might have been shaken, if God
had not appeared to him as he departed, to promise him His pro-
tection in the foreign land, and assure him of the fulfilment of
His promises. More than this the house of Israel did not need to
know, as to the way by which God would lead them, especially as
Abraham had already received a revelation 'from the Lord (xv.
13-16).
In perfect harmony with the character of the time thus com-
mencing for Jacob-Israel, is the use of the names of God in
this last section of Genesis : viz. the fact, that whilst in chap,
xxxvii. (the sale of Joseph) the name of God is not met with at
all, in chap, xxxviii. and xxxix. we find the name of Jehovah
nine times and Elohim only once (xxxix. 9), and that in circum-
stances in which JeJwvah would have been inadmissible ; and
after chap. xl. 1, the name Jehovah almost entirely disappears,
occurring only once in chap. xl.-L (chap. xlix. 18, where Jacob
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXXVIL-L. 331
uses it), whereas Ehhim is used eighteen times and Ha-Elohim
seven, not to mention sach expressions as "your God" (xliii.
23), or " the God of his, or your father" (xlvi. 1, 3). So long
as the attention is confined to this numerical proportion of
Jehovah, and Elohim or Ha-Elohim, it must remain " a difficult
enigma." But when we look at the way in which these names
are employed, we find the actual fact to he, that in chap, xxxviii.
and xxxix. the writer mentions God nine times, and calls Him
Jehovah, and that in chap, xl.-l. he only mentions God twice,
and then calls Him Elohim (xlvi. 1, 2), although the God of
salvation, i.e. Jehovah, is intended. In every other instance in
which God is referred to in chap. xl.-l., it is always hy the per-
sons concerned : either Pharaoh (xli. 38, 39), or Joseph and his
brethren (xl. 8, xli. 16, 51, 52, etc., Elohim; and xli. 25, 28,
32, etc., Ha-Elohim), or by Jacob (xlviii. 11, 20, 21, Elohim).
Now the circumstance that the historian speaks of God nine
times in chap, xxxviii. xxxix. and only twice in chap. xl.-l. is
explained by the substance of the history, which furnished no
particular occasion for this in the last eleven chapters. But the
reason why he does not name Jehovah in chap, xl.-l. as in chap,
xxxviii.-xxxix., but speaks of the " God of his (Jacob's) father
Isaac," in chap. xlvi. 1, and directly afterwards of Elohim (ver.
2), could hardly be that the periphrasis "the God of his father"
seemed more appropriate than the simple name Jehovah, since
Jacob offered sacrifice at Beersheba to the God who appeared to
his father, and to whom Isaac built an altar there, and this God
(Elohim) then appeared to him in a dream and renewed the pro-
mise of his fathers. As the historian uses a periphrasis of the
name Jehovah, to point out the internal connection between what
Jacob did and experienced at Beersheba and what his father ex-
perienced there ; so Jacob also, both in the blessing with which
he sends his sons the second time to Egypt (xliii. 14) and at the
adoption of Joseph's sons (xlviii. 3), uses the name El Shaddai,
and in his blessings on Joseph's sons (xlviii. 15) and on Joseph
himself (xlix. 24, 25) employs rhetorical periphrases for the name
Jehovah, because Jehovah had manifested Himself not only to
him (xxxv. 11, 12), but also to his fathers Abraham and Isaac
(xvii. 1 and xxviii. 3) as El Shaddai, and had proved Himself
to be the Almighty, f* the God who fed him," " the Mighty One
of Jacob," " the Shepherd and Bock of Israel." In these set
Digitized by VjOOQlC
332 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES
discourses the titles of God here mentioned were unquestionably
more significant and impressive than the simple name Jehovali.
And when Jacob speaks of Elohim only, not of Jehovah, in chap,
xlviii. 11, 20, 21, the Elohim in vers. 11 and 21 may be easily
explained from the antithesis of Jacob to both man and God,
and in ver. 20 from the words themselves, which contain a com-
mon and, so to speak, a stereotyped saying. Wherever the
thought required the name Jehovah as the only appropriate one,
there Jacob used this name, as chap. xlix. 18 will prove. But
that name would have been quite unsuitable in the mouth of
Pharaoh in chap. xli. 38, 39, in the address of Joseph to the
prisoners (xl. 8) and to Pharaoh (xli. 16, 25, 28, 32), and in his
conversation with his brethren before he made himself known
(xlii. 18, xliii. 29), and also in the appeal of Judah to Joseph as
an unknown Egyptian officer of state (xliv. 16). In the mean-
time the brethren of Joseph also speak to one another of Elohim
(xlii. 28) ; and Joseph not only sees in the birth of his sons merely
a gift of Elohim (xli. 51, 52, xlviii. 9), but in the solemn mo-
ment in which he makes himself known to his brethren (xlv. 5-9)
he speaks of Elohim alone : " Elohim did send me before you
to preserve life " (ver. 5) ; and even upon his death-bed he says,
" I die, and Elohim will surely visit you and bring you out of
this land" (1. 24, 25). But the reason of this is not difficult to
discover, and is no other than the following : Joseph, like his
brethren, did not clearly discern the ways of the Lord in the
wonderful changes of his life ; and his brethren, though they
felt that the trouble into which they were brought before the
unknown ruler of Egypt was a just punishment from God for
their crime against Joseph, did not perceive that by the sale of
their brother they had sinned not only against Elohim (God the
Creator and Judge of men), but against Jehovah the covenant
God of their father. They had not only sold their brother, but
in their brother they had cast out a member of the seed promised
and given to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, from the fellowship of
the chosen family, and sinned against the God of salvation and
His promises. But this aspect of their crime was still hidden
from them, so that they could not speak of Jehovah. In the
same way, Joseph regarded the wonderful course of his life as a
divine arrangement for the preservation or rescue of his family ,
and he was so far acquainted with the promises of God, that he
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXXVH.-L. 333
regarded it as a certainty, that Israel would be led out of Egypt,
especially after the last wish expressed by Jacob. But this did
not involve so full and clear an insight into the ways of Jehovah,
as to lead Joseph to recognise in his own career a special appoint-
ment of the covenant God, and to describe it as a gracious work
of Jehovah. 1
The disappearance of the name Jehovah, therefore, is to be
explained, partly from the fact that previous revelations and
acts of grace had given rise to other phrases expressive of the
idea of Jehovah, which not only served as substitutes for this
name of the covenant God, but in certain circumstances were
much more appropriate ; and partly from the fact that the sons
of Jacob, including Joseph, did not so distinctly recognise in
their course the saving guidance of the covenant God, as to be
able to describe it as the work of JehovaJt. This imperfect in-
sight, however, is intimately connected with the fact that the
direct revelations of God had ceased ; and that Joseph, although
chosen by God to be the preserver of the house of Israel and
the instrument in accomplishing His plans of salvation, was
separated at a very early period from the fellowship of his
father's house, and formally naturalized in Egypt, and though
endowed with the supernatural power to interpret dreams, was
not favoured, as Daniel afterwards was in the Chaldaean court,
with visions or revelations of God. Consequently we cannot
place Joseph on a level with the three patriarchs, nor assent to
the statement, that " as the noblest blossom of the patriarchal
life is seen in Joseph, as in him the whole meaning of the
patriarchal life is summed up and fulfilled, so in Christ we see
the perfect blossom and sole fulfilment of the whole of the Old
Testament dispensation" {Kurtz, Old Covenant ii. 95), as being
1 The very fact that the author of Genesis, who wrote in the light of the
further development and fuller revelation of the ways of the Lord with
Joseph and the whole house of Jacob, represents the career of Joseph as a
gracious interposition of Jehovah (chap, xxxix.), and yet makes Joseph him-
self speak of Elohim as arranging the whole, is by no means an unimpor-
tant testimony to the historical fidelity and truth of the narrative ; of which
farther proofs are to be found in the faithful and exact representation of
the circumstances, manners, and customs of Egypt, as Hengstenberg has
proved in bis Egypt and the Books of Moses, from a comparison of these
accounts of Joseph's life with ancient documents and monuments connected
with this land.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
334 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
either correct or scriptural, so far as the first portion is concerned.
For Joseph was not a medium of salvation in the same way as
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. He was indeed a benefactor, not
only to his brethren and the whole house of Israel, but also to
the Egyptians ; but salvation, i.e. spiritual help and culture, he
neither brought to the Gentiles nor to the house of Israel. In
Jacob's blessing he is endowed with the richest inheritance of
the first-born in earthly things ; but salvation is to reach the
nations through Judah. We may therefore without hesitation
look upon the history of Joseph as a" type of the pathway of
the Church, not of Jehovah only, but also of Christ, from low-
liness to exaltation, from slavery to liberty, from suffering to
glory" (Delitzsch) ; we may also, so far as the history of Israel
is a type of the history of Christ and His Church, regard the
life of Joseph, as believing commentators of all centuries have
done, as a type of the life of Christ, and use these typical traits
as aids to progress in the knowledge of salvation ; but that we
may not be seduced into typological trifling, we must not over-
look the fact, that neither Joseph nor his career is represented,
either by the prophets or by Christ and His apostles, as typical
of Christ, — in anything like the same way, for example, as the
guidance of Israel into and out of Egypt (Hos. xi. 1 cf. Matt. ii.
15), and other events and persons in the history of Israel.
SALE OP JOSEPH INTO EGYPT. — CHAP. XXXVII.
Vers. 1-4. The statement in ver. 1, which introduces the
tholedoth of Jacob, " And Jacob dwelt in the land of his father s
pilgrimage, in the land of Canaan," implies that Jacob had now
entered upon his father's inheritance, and carries on the patri-
archal pilgrim-life in Canaan, the further development of which
was determined by the wonderful career of Joseph. This strange
and eventful career of Joseph commenced when he was 17 years
old. The notice of his age at the commencement of the narra-
tive which follows, is introduced with reference to the principal
topic in it, viz. the sale of Joseph, which was to prepare the way,
according to the wonderful counsel of God, for the fulfilment
of the divine revelation to Abraham respecting the future his-
tory of his seed (xv. 13 sqq.). While feeding the flock with his
brethren, and, as he was young, with the sons of Bilhah and
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXXVII. 6-11. 335
Zilpab, who were nearer his age than the sons of Leah, he
brought an evil report of them to his father (fijn intentionally
indefinite, connected with DT£ft without an article). The words
">J0 wrn, « and he a lad," are subordinate to the main clause :
they are not to be rendered, however, " he was a lad with the
sons," but, " as he was young, he fed the flock with the sons of
Bilhah and Zilpab." — Ver. 3. "Israel (Jacob) loved Joseph
more than all his (other) sons, because he was born in his old age"
as the first-fruits of the beloved Rachel (Benjamin was hardly
a year old at this time). And lie made him &'BB runs : a long
coat with sleeves (%iTdh> atrrpayaKeios, Aqu., or ooTywyaXwro?,
LXX. at 2 Sam. xiii. 18, tunica talaris, Vulg. ad Sam.), i.e. an
upper coat reaching to the wrists and ankles, such as noblemen
and kings' daughters wore, not " a coat of many colours" (" blot-
ter Rock," as Lutlier renders it, from the ^irtova iroucCXov, tuni-
cam polymitam, of the LXX. and Vulgate). This partiality
made Joseph hated by his brethren ; so that they could not
" speak peaceably unto him," i.e. ask him how he was, offer him
the usual salutation, " Peace be with thee."
Vers. 5-11. This hatred was increased when Joseph told
them of two dreams that he had had : viz. that as they were
binding sheaves in the field, his sheaf "stood and remained
standing," but their sheaves placed themselves round it and
bowed down to it ; and that the sun (his father), and the moon
(his mother, "not Leah, but Bachel, who was neither forgotten
nor lost"), and eleven stars (his eleven brethren) bowed down
before him. These dreams pointed in an unmistakeable way to
the supremacy of Joseph ; the first to supremacy over his bre-
thren, the second over the whole house of Israel. The repe-
tition seemed to establish the thing as certain (cf. xlL 32); so
that not only did his brethren hate him still more " on account
of his dreams and words" (ver. 8), t.6. the substance of the
dreams and the open interpretation of them, and become jealous
and envious, but his father gave him a sharp reproof for the
second, though he preserved the matter, i.e. retained it in his
memory (">DB> LXX. ^lerriprjae, cf. crwerqpei, Luke ii. 19). The
brothers with their ill-will could not see anything in the dreams
but the suggestions of his own ambition and pride of heart ; and
even the father, notwithstanding his partiality, was grieved by
the second dream. The dreams are not represented as divine
Digitized by VjOOQlC
336 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
revelations ; yet they are not to be regarded as pare flights of
fancy from an ambitious heart, but as the presentiments of deep
inward feelings, which were not produced without some divine
influence being exerted upon Joseph's mind, and therefore were of
prophetic significance, though they were not inspired directly by
God, inasmuch as the purposes of God were still to remain hidden
from the eyes of men for the saving good of all concerned.
Vers. 12-24. In a short time the hatred of Joseph's brethren
grew into a crime. On one occasion, when they were feeding
their flock at a distance from Hebron, in the neighbourhood
of Shechem (Nablus, in the plain of Mukhnah), and Joseph
who was sent thither by Jacob to inquire as to the welfare
(ahalom, valetudo) of the brethren and their flocks, followed them
to Doihain or Doilian, a place 12 Roman miles to the north of
Samaria (Sebaste), towards the plain of Jezreel, they formed the
malicious resolution to put him, " this dreamer," to death, and
throw him into one of the pits, i.e. cisterns, and then to tell (his
father) that a wild beast had slain him, and so to bring his
dreams to nought. — Vers. 21 sqq. Reuben, who was the eldest
son, and therefore specially responsible for his younger brother,
opposed this murderous proposal. He dissuaded his brethren
from killing Joseph (B>M 'd nan), and advised them to throw him
" into this pit in the desert" i.e. into a dry pit that was near.
As Joseph would inevitably perish even in that pit, their malice
was satisfied ; but Reuben intended to take Joseph out again,
and restore him to his father. As soon, therefore, as Joseph
arrived, they took off his coat with sleeves and threw him into
the pit, which happened to be dry.
Vers. 25-36. Reuben had saved Joseph's life indeed by his
proposal ; but his intention to send hi'ji back to his father was
frustrated. For as soon as the brethren sat down to eat, after
the deed was performed, they saw a company of Ishmaelites
from Gilead coming along the road which leads from Beisan
past Jenin (Rob. Pal. iii. 155) and through the plain of Dothan
to the great caravan road that runs from Damascus by Lcjun
(Legio, Megiddo), Ramleh, and Gaza to Egypt (Rob. iii. 27,
178). The caravan drew near, laden with spices : viz. nttoJ,
gum-tragacanth ; '"iV, balsam, for which Gilead was celebrated
(xliii. 11 ; Jer. viii. 22, xlvi. 11) ; and D*>, ladanum, the fragrant
resin of the cistus-rose. Judah seized the opportunity to pro-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXXVII. 26-86. 337
pose to bis brethren to sell Joseph to the Ishmaelites. " What
'profit have we," he said, " that we slay our brother and conceal hie
blood ? Come, let us sell him to the Ishmaelites ; and our hand,
let it not lay hold of him («c. to slay him), for he is our brother,
our flesh" Reuben wished to deliver Joseph entirely from his
brothers' malice. Judah also wished to save his life, though not
from brotherly love so much as from the feeling of horror,
which was not quite extinct within him, at incurring the guilt of
fratricide ; but he would still like to get rid of him, that his
dreams might not come true. Jndah, like his brethren, was
probably afraid that their father might confer upon Joseph the
rights of the first-born, and so make him lord over them. His
proposal was a welcome one. When the Arabs passed by, the
brethren fetched Joseph out of the pit and sold him to the Ish-
maelites, who took him into Egypt. The different names given
to the traders — viz. Ishmaelites (vers. 25, 27, and 286), Midianites
(ver. 28a), and Medanites (ver. 36)— do not show that the account
has been drawn from different legends, but that these tribes
were often confounded, from the fact that they resembled one
another so closely, not only in their common descent from Abra-
ham (xvi. 15 and xxv. 2), but also in the similarity of their mode
of life and their constant change of abode, that strangers could
hardly distinguish them, especially when they appeared not as
tribes but as Arabian merchants, such as they are here described
as being : " Midianitish men, merchant*." That descendants of
Abraham should already be met with in this capacity is by no
means strange, if we consider that 150 years had passed by since
Ishmael's dismissal from his father's house, — a period amply suffi-
cient for his descendants to have grown through marriage into
a respectable tribe. The price, " twenty («c. shekels) of silver,"
was the price which Moses afterwards fixed as the value of a
boy between 5 and 20 (Lev. xxvii. 5), the average price of a
slave being 30 shekels (Ex. xxi. 32). But the Ishmaelites
naturally wanted to make money by the transaction. — Vers. 29
sqq. The business was settled in Reuben's absence; probably
because his brethren suspected that he intended to rescue Joseph.
When he came to the pit and found Joseph gone, he rent his
clothes (a sign of intense grief on the part of the natural man)
and exclaimed : " The boy is no more, and I, whither shall lgo!"
— how shall I account to his father for his disappearance ! But
Digitized by VjOOQlC
S38 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
the brothers were at no loss ; they dipped Joseph's coat in the
blood of a goat and sent it to his father, with the message, " We
have found this ; see whether it is thy son's coat or not." Jacob
recognised the coat at once, and mourned bitterly in mourning
clothes (pi?) for his son, whom he supposed to have been de-
voured and destroyed by a wild beast ("fib fiB inf. abs. of Kal
before Pual, as an indication of undoubted certainty), and re-
fused all comfort from his children, saying, "No ('3 immo,
elliptical : Do not attempt to comfort me, for) J will go down,
mourning into Sheol to my son." Sheol denotes the place where
departed souls are gathered after death ; it is an infinitive form
from -'KB' to demand, the demanding, applied to the place which
inexorably summons all men into its shade (cf. Prov. xxx. 15,
16 ; Isa. v. 14 ; Hab. ii. 5). How should his sons comfort him,
when they were obliged to cover their wickedness with the sin of
lying and hypocrisy, and when even Reuben, although at first
beside himself at the failure of his plan, had not courage enough
to disclose his brothers' crime ? — Ver. 36. But Joseph, while his
father was mourning, was sold by the Midianites to Potiphar,
the chief of Pharaoh's trabantes, to be first of all brought low,
according to the wonderful counsel of God, and then to be
exalted as ruler in Egypt, before whom his brethren would bow
down, and as the saviour of the house of Israel. The name
Potipliar is a contraction of Poti Pherdh (xli. 50) ; the LXX.
render both Here^prp or Herefypfj (vid. xli. 50). D*"i0 (eunuch)
is used here, as in 1 Sam. viii. 15 and in most of the passages of
the Old Testament, for courtier or chamberlain, without regard
to the primary meaning, as Potiphar was married. " Captain of
the guard" (to. captain of the slaughterers, i.e. the executioners),
commanding officer of the royal body-guard, who executed the
capital sentences ordered by the king, as was also the case with
the Chaldeans (2 Kings xxv. 8 ; Jer. xxxix. 9, lii. 12. See my
Commentary on the Books of Kings, vol. i. pp. 35, 36, Eng. Tr.).
judah's marriage and children, his incest with
thamar. — chap. xxxviii.
The following sketch from the life of Judah is intended to
point out the origin of the three leading families of the future
princely tribe in Israel, and at the same time to show in what
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXXVIII. 1-11. 839
danger the sons of Jacob would have been of forgetting the
sacred vocation of their race, through marriages with Canaan-
itish women, and of perishing in the sin of Canaan, if the mercy
of God had not interposed, and by leading Joseph into Egypt
prepared the way for the removal of the whole house of Jacob
into that land, and thus protected the family, just as it was ex-
panding into a nation, from the corrupting influence of the
manners and customs of Canaan. This being the intention of
the narrative, it is no episode or interpolation, but an integral
part of the early history of Israel, which is woven here into the
history of Jacob, because the events occurred subsequently to
the sale of Joseph.
Vers. 1-11. About this time, i.e. after the sale of Joseph,
while still feeding the flocks of Jacob along with his brethren
(xxxvii. 26), 1 Judah separated from them, and went down (from
Hebron, xxxvii. 14, or the mountains) to Adullam, in the low-
land (Josh. xv. 35), into the neighbourhood of a man named
Hirah. u He pitched (his tent, xxvi. 25) up to a man of Adul-
lam," i.e. in his neighbourhood, so as to enter into friendly inter-
course with him. — Vers. 2 sqq. There Judah married the daugh-
ter of Shuah, a Canaanite, and had three sons by her : Ger (IP),
Onan, and Shelah. The name of the place is mentioned when
the last is born, viz. Chezifo or Achzib (Josh. xv. 44 ; Micah i. 14),
1 As the expression " at that time" does not compel us to place Judah 'g
marriage after the sale of Joseph, many have followed Augustine (quant. 123),
and placed it some years earlier. But this assumption is rendered extremely
improbable, if not impossible, by the fact that Judah was not merely acci-
dentally present when Joseph was sold, but was evidently living with his
brethren, and had not yet set up an establishment of his own ; whereas he
had settled at Adullam previous to his marriage, and seems to have lived
there up to the time of the birth of the twins by Thamar. Moreover, the
28 years which intervened between the taking of Joseph into Egypt and the
migration of Jacob thither, furnish space enough for all the events recorded
in this chapter. If we suppose that Judah, who was 20 years old when
Joseph was sold, went to Adullam soon afterwards and married there, his
three sons might have been born four or five years after Joseph's captivity.
And if his eldest son was born about a year and a half after the sale of
Joseph, and he married him to Thamar when he was 15 years old, and gave
her to his second son a year after that, (man's death would occur at least
five years before Jacob's removal to Egypt ; time enough, therefore, both for
the generation and birth of the twin-sons of Judah by Thamar, and for
Judah's two journeys into Egypt with his brethren to buy corn. (See chap.
xlvi. 8 sqq.)
Digitized by CjOOQ 16
/
340 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
in the southern portion of the lowland of Judah, that the de-
scendants of Shelah might know the birth-place of their ancestor.
This was unnecessary in the case of the others, who died child-
less. — Vers. 6 sqq. When Ger was grown np, according to ancient
custom (cf. xxi. 21, xxxiv. 4) his father gave him a wife, named
Thamar, probably a Canaanite, of unknown parentage. But
Ger was soon put to death by Jehovah on account of his wicked-
ness. Judah then wished Onan, as the brother-in-law, to marry
the childless widow of his deceased brother, and raise up seed,
i.e. a family, for him. But as he knew that the first-born son
would not be the founder of his own family, but would perpe-
tuate the family of the deceased and receive his inheritance, he
prevented conception when consummating the marriage by spill-
ing the semen. nyiK fire*, " destroyed to the ground (i.e. let it
fall upon the ground), so as not to give seed to his brother
(jro for nn only here and Num. xx. 21). This act not only be-
trayed a want of affection to his brother, combined with a despi-
cable covetousness for his possession and inheritance, but was
also a sin against the divine institution of marriage and its object,
and was therefore punished by Jehovah with sudden death.
The custom of levirate marriage, which is first mentioned here,
and is found in different forms among Indians, Persians, and
other nations of Asia and Africa, was not founded upon a divine
command, but upon an ancient tradition, originating probably
in Chaldea. It was not abolished, however, by the Mosaic law
(Deut. xxv. 5 sqq.), but only so far restricted as not to allow it to
interfere with the sanctity of marriage ; and with this limitation
it was enjoined as a duty of affection to build up the brother's
house, and to preserve his family and name (see my Bibl. Archa-
ologie, § 108). — Ver. 1 1. The sudden death of his two sons so
soon after their marriage with Thamar made Judah hesitate to
give her the third as a husband also, thinking, very likely, accord-
ing to a superstition which we find in Tobit iii. 7 sqq., that either
she herself, or marriage with her, had been the cause of her hus-
bands' deaths. He therefore sent her away to her father's house,
with the promise that he would give her his youngest son as soon
as he had grown up ; though he never intended it seriously, "for
he thought lest (IB *U?K, i.e. he was afraid that) he also might die
like his brethren"
Vers. 12-30. But when Thamar, after waiting a long time,
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXXVIH. 12-30. 341
saw that Shelah had grown up and yet was not (riven to her as
a husband, she determined to procure children from Judah
himself, who had become a widower in the meantime ; and his
going to Timnath to the sheep-shearing afforded her a good
opportunity. The time mentioned (" the days multiplied," i.e.
a long time passed by) refers not to the statement which follows,
that Judah's wife died, but rather to the leading thought of the
verse, viz. Judah's going to the sheep-shearing, onsn: he
comforted himself, i.e. he ceased to mourn. Timnath is not the
border town of Dan and Judah between Beth-shemesh and
Ekron in the plain (Josh. xv. 10, xix. 43), but Ttmnah on the
mountains of Judah (Josh. xv. 57, cf. Rob. Pal. ii. 343, note),
as the expression " went up " shows. The sheep-shearing was a
fete with shepherds, and was kept with great feasting. Judah
therefore took his friend Hirah with him; a fact noticed in
ver. 12 in relation to what follows. — Vers. 13, 14. As soon as
Thamar heard of Judah's going to this feast, she took off her
widow's clothes, put on a veil, and sat down, disguised as a
harlot, by the gate of Enayim, where Judah would be sure to
pass on his return from Timnath. Enayim was no doubt the
same as Enam in the lowland of Judah (Josh. xv. 34). — Vers.
15 sqq. When Judah saw her here and took her for a harlot,
he made her an offer, and gave her his signet-ring, with the
band (^1B) by which it was hung round his neck, and his staff,
as a pledge of the young buck-goat which he offered her. They
were botb objects of value, and were regarded as ornaments in
the East, as Herodotus (i. 195) has shown with regard to the
Babylonians (see my Bibl. Arch. 2, 48). He then lay with her,
and she became pregnant by him. — Vers. 19 sqq. After this
had occurred, Thamar laid aside her veil, put on her widow's
dress again, and returned home. When Judah, therefore, sent
the kid by his friend Hirah to the supposed harlot for the
purpose of redeeming his pledges, he could not find her, and
was told, on inquiring of the inhabitants of Enayim, that there
was no neh£ there, neh^n : lit. " the consecrated," i.e. the
hierodule, a woman sacred to Astarte, a goddess of the Canaan-
ites, the deification of the generative and productive principle of
nature ; one who served this goddess by prostitution (vid. Deut.
xxiii. 18). This was no doubt regarded as the most respectable de-
signation for public prostitutes in Canaan. — Vers. 22, 23. When
Digitized by VjOOQlC
342 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
his friend returned with the kid and reported his want of success,
Judah resolved to leave his pledges with the girl, that he might
not expose himself to the ridicule of the people by any further
inquiries, since he had done his part towards keeping his promise.
" Let her take them (i.e. keep the signet-ring and staff) for her-
self, that we may not become a (an object of) ridicule" The
pledges were unquestionably of more value than a young he-
goat.
Vers. 24-26. About three months afterwards (b6e>d prob.
for vfafo with the prefix D) Judah was informed that Thamar
had played the harlot and was certainly (nw) with child. He
immediately ordered, by virtue of his authority as head of the
tribe, that she should be brought out and burned. Thamar was
regarded as the affianced bride of Shelah, and was to be punished
as a bride convicted of a breach of chastity. But the Mosaic
law enjoined stoning in the case of those who were affianced
and broke their promise, or of newly married women who were
found to have been dishonoured (Deut. xxii. 20, 21, 23, 24) ;
and it was only in the case of the whoredom of a priest's
daughter, or of carnal intercourse with a mother or a daughter,
that the punishment of burning was enjoined (Lev. xxi. 9 and
xx. 14). Judah' s sentence, therefore, was more harsh than the
subsequent law ; whether according to patriarchal custom, or
on other grounds, cannot be determined. When Thamar was
brought out, she sent to Judah the things which she had kept
as a pledge, with this message : " By a man to whom these belong
am I with child : look carefully therefore to whom this signet-ring,
and band, and stick belong." Judah recognised the things as
his own, and was obliged to confess, " She is more in the riglvt.
than I; for tlterefore (sc. that this might happen to me, or that
it might turn out so ; on 13^JP? see chap, xviii. 5) have I not
given her to my son Shelah." In passing sentence upon Thamar,
Judah had condemned himself. His sin, however, did not con-
sist merely in his having given way to his lusts so far as to lie
with a supposed public prostitute of Canaan, but still more in
the fact, that by breaking his promise to give her his son Shelah
as her husband, he had caused his daughter-in-law to practise
this deception upon him, just because in his heart he blamed
her for the early and sudden deaths of his elder sons, whereas
the real cause of the deaths which had so grieved his paternal
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXXVIII. 37-80. 343
heart was the wickedness of the sons themselves, the main-
spring of which was to be found in his own marriage with a
Canaanite in violation of the patriarchal call. And even if the
sons of Jacob were not unconditionally prohibited from marry-
ing the daughters of Canaanites, Judah's marriage at any rate
had borne such fruit in his sons Ger and Onan, as Jehovah the
covenant God was compelled to reject. But if Judab, instead
of recognising the hand of the Lord in the sudden death of his
sons, traced the cause to Thamar, and determined to keep her
as a childless widow all her life long, not only in opposition to
the traditional custom, but also in opposition to the will of God
as expressed in His promises of a numerous increase of the seed
of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob ; Thamar had by no means acted
rightly in the stratagem by which she frustrated his plan, and
sought to procure from Judah himself the seed of which he was
unjustly depriving her, though her. act might be less criminal
than Judah's. For it is evident from the whole account, that
she was not driven to her sin by lust, but by the innate desire
for children (or* 8k wat&Wo&a? %a/w, /cat ov <f>i\i)Sov(a<; rovro
6 O a. fiap ifwfxavqaaTo, — Theodoret); and for that reason she
was more in the right than Judah. Judah himself, however,
not only saw his guilt, but he confessed it also ; and showed both
by this confession, and also by the fact that he had no further
conjugal intercourse with Thamar, an earnest endeavour to
conquer the lusts of the flesh, and to guard against the sin into
which he had fallen. And because he thus humbled himself,
God gave him grace, and not only exalted him to be the chief
of the house of Israel, but blessed the children that were be-
gotten in sin.
Vers. 27-30. Thamar brought forth twins ; and a circum-
stance occurred at the birth, which does occasionally happen
when the children he in an abnormal position, and always im-
pedes the delivery, and which was regarded in this instance as
so significant that the names of the children were founded upon
the fact. At the birth T^H " there was a hand" i.e. a hand
came out (t>|P as in Job xxxvh. 10, Frov. xiii. 10), round which
the midwife tied a scarlet thread, to mark this as the first-born.
— Ver. 29. " And it came to pass, when it (the child) drew back
its hand (^B^OS for ^Eb n^ns as in chap. xl. 10), behold its
brother came out. Then she (the midwife) said, What a breach
Digitized by VjOOQlC
344 THE FIBST BOOK OF MOSES.
hast thou made for thy part? Upon thee the breach;" i.e. thou
bearest the blame of the breach. p.B signifies not rupturam
perinoei, but breaking through by pressing forward. From that
he received the name of Perez (breach, breaker through). Then
the other one with the scarlet thread came into the world, and
was named ZeraJt (rnt exit, rising), because he sought to appear
first, whereas in fact Perez was the first-born, and is even placed
before Zerah in the lists in chap. xlvi. 12, Num. xxvi. 20.
Perez was the ancestor of the tribe-prince Nahshon (Num. ii.
3), and of king David also (Ruth iv. 18 sqq. ; 1 Chron. ii. 5
sqq.). Through him, therefore, Thamar has a place as one of
the female ancestors in the genealogy of Jesus Christ.
JOSEPH IN POTIPHAR's HOUSE, AND IN PBISON. — CHAP. XXXIX.
Vers. 1-18. In Potiphae's house. — Potiphar had bought
him of the Ishmaelites, as is repeated in ver. 1 for the purpose
of resuming the thread of the narrative ; and Jehovah was
with him, so that he prospered in the house of his Egyptian
master, n TV? VPK : a man who has prosperity, to whom God
causes all that he undertakes and does to prosper. When
Potiphar perceived this, Joseph found favour in his eyes, and
became his servant, whom he placed over his house (made
manager of his household affairs), and to whom he entrusted
all his property (bmrbs ver. 4=WT^ W'k vers. 5, 6). This
confidence in Joseph increased, when he perceived how the
blessing of Jehovah (Joseph's God) rested upon his property
in the house and in the field; so that now "he left to Joseph
everything tJuxt lie liad, and did not trouble himself frlK (with or
near him) about anything but his own eating" — Vers. 6b sqq.
Joseph was handsome in form and feature; and Potiphar's
wife set her eyes upon the handsome young man, and tried
to persuade him to lie with her. But Joseph resisted the adul-
terous proposal, referring to the unlimited confidence which
his master had placed in him. He (Potiphar) was not greater
in that house than he, and had given everything over to
him except her, because she was his wife. " How could he so
abuse this confidence, as to do this great wickedness and sin
against God !" — Vers. 10 sqq. But after she had repeated her
enticements day after day without success, " it came to pass at
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXXIX. 19-23. 345
that time (n»n Di»ii3 for the more usual njn oi»3 (chap. 1. 20), lit.
about this day, i.e. the day in the writer's mind, on which the
thing to be narrated occurred) that Joseph came into hie house to
attend to his duties, and iliere were none of the house-servants
within? And she laid hold of him by his garment and entreated
him to lie with her ; but he left his garment in her hand and
fled from the house. — Vers. 13-18. When this daring assault
upon Joseph's chastity had failed, on account of his faithfulness
and fear of God, the adulterous woman reversed the whole affair,
and charged him with an attack upon her modesty, in order that
she might have her revenge upon him and avert suspicion from
herself. She called her house-servants and said, " See, he (her
husband, whom she does not think worth naming) has brought
us a. Hebrew man ("no epiiheton ornans to Egyptian ears: xliii.
32") to mock us (pnv to show his wantonness; us, the wife and
servants, especially the female portion) : he came in unto me to
lie with me ; and I cried with a loud voice . . . and he left his
garment by me." She said v¥K "by my side," not "in my
hand," as that would have shown the true state of the case.
She then left the garment lying by her side till the return of
Joseph's master, to whom she repeated her tale.
Vers. 19-23. Joseph in prison. — Potiphar was enraged
at what he heard, and put Joseph into the prison where (i^K
for DC> "IB>K, xl. 3 like xxxv. 13) the king's prisoners (state-
prisoners) were confined, irien JV3 : lit. the house of enclosure,
from nriD, to surround or enclose (o^v/xo/to, LXX.) ; the state-
prison surrounded by a wall. This was a very moderate pun-
ishment. For according to Diod. Sic. (i. 78) the laws of the
Egyptians were triKpol irepl t&v ywacK&v vo/jloi. An attempt at
adultery was to be punished with 1000 blows, and rape upon a
free woman still more severely. It is possible that Potiphar was
not fully convinced of his wife's chastity, and therefore did not
place unlimited credence in what she said. 1 But even in that
1 Credibile est aliquod fuisse indicium, quo Josephum innocentem esse
Potiphari constiteret; neque enim servi vita tanti erat ut ei parceretur in tarn
r/ravi delicto. Sed licet innocuum, in careers tamen detinebat, ut uxoris
honori et into consuleret (Clericus). The chastity of Egyptian women has
been in bad repute from time immemorial (Diod. Sic. i. 59 ; Herod, ii. 111).
Even in the middle ages the Fatimite Hakim thought it necessary to adopt
PENT. — VOL. I. Z
Digitized by VjOOQlC
346 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
case it was the mercy of the faithful covenant God, which now
as before (xxxvii. 20 sqq.) rescued Joseph's life.
Vers. 21—23. In the prison itself Jehovah was with Joseph,
procuring him favour in the eyes of the governor of the prison,
so that he entrusted all the prisoners to his care, leaving every-
thing that they had to do, to be done through him, and not
troubling himself about anything that was in his hand, ue. was
committed to him, because Jehovah made all that he did to
prosper. " The keeper" was the governor of the prison, or
superintendent of the gaolers, and was under Potiphar, the
captain of the trabantes and chief of the executioners (chap,
xxxvii. 36).
THE PRISONERS' DREAMS AND JOSEPH'S INTERPRETATION. —
CHAP. XL.
Vers. 1-8. The head cup-bearer and head baker had com
mitted crimes against the king of Egypt, and were imprisoned
in " the prison of the house of the captain of the trabantes, the
prison where Joseph himself was confined;" the state-prison, ac-
cording to Eastern custom, forming part of the same building as
the dwelling-house of the chief of the executioners. From a
regard to the exalted position of these two prisoners, Potiphar
ordered Joseph to wait upon them, not to keep watch over them;
for n« 1£B does not mean to appoint as guard, but to place by
the side of a person. — Ver. 5. After some time (" days," ver. 4,
as in iv. 3), and on the same night, these two prisoners had each
a peculiar dream, u each one according to the interpretation of his
dream;" i.e. each one had a dream corresponding to the inter-
pretation which specially applied to him. On account of these
dreams, which seemed to them to have some bearing upon their
fate, and, as the issue proved, were really true omens of it,
Joseph found them the next morning looking anxious, and asked
them the reason of the trouble which was depicted upon their
countenances. — Ver. 8. On their replying that they had dreamed,
and there was no one to interpret the dream, Joseph reminded
them first of all that "interpretations are God's," come from
severe measures against their immorality (Bar-Hebrmi, chron. p. 217), and
at the present day, according to Bwrchhardt (arab. Sprichworter, pp. 222,
227), chastity is " a great rarity" among women of every rank in Cairo.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XL. 9-19 347
God, arc His gift; at the same time he bade them tell him their
dreams, from a consciousness, no doubt, that he was endowed
with this divine gift.
Vers. 9-15. The cup-bearer gave this account: "In my dream,
behold there was a vine before me, and on the vine three branches ;
and it was as though blossoming, it shot forth Us blossom (iW
either from the hapax 1. )*;i"-ni?3, or from fW3 with the fem. ter-
mination resolved into the 3 pers. stiff. : Ewald, § 257d), its
clusters ripened into grapes. And Pharaoh's cup was in my
hand; and I took the grapes and pressed them into Pharaoh's cup,
and gave the cup into Pharaoh's hand." In this dream the office
and duty of the royal cup-bearer were represented in an unmis-
takeable manner, though the particular details must not be so
forced as to lead to the conclusion, that the kings of ancient
Egypt drank only the fresh juice of the grape, and not fermented
wine as well. The cultivation of the vine, and the making and
drinking of wine, among the Egyptians, are established beyond
question by ancient testimony and the earliest monuments, not-
withstanding the statement of Herodotus (2, 77) to the contrary
(see Hengstenberg, Egypt and the Books of Moses, pp. 13 sqq.). —
Vers. 12 sqq. Joseph then gave this interpretation : The three
branches were three days, in which time Pharaoh would restore
him to his post again (" lift up his head," t.e. raise him from his
degradation, send and fetch him from prison, 2 Kings zxv. 27).
And he added this request (ver. 14) : " Only think of me, as it
goes well with thee, and show favour tome . . . for I was stolen
(i.e. carried away secretly and by force; I did not abscond because
of any crime) out of the land of the Hebrews (the land where the
Ibrim live); and here also I have done nothing (committed no
crime) for which they should put me into the hole." "ri3 : the cell,
applied to a prison as a miserable hole, because often dry cess-
pools were used as' prisons.
Vers. 16-19. Encouraged by this favourable interpretation,
the chief baker also told his dream : "I too, . . . tn my dream :
behold, baskets of white bread upon my head, and in the top basket
all kinds of food for Pharaoh, pastry ; and the birds ate it out of
the basket from my head" In this dream, the carrying of the
baskets upon the head is thoroughly Egyptian ; for, according
to Herod. 2, 35, the men in Egypt carry burdens upon the
head, the women upon the shoulders. And, according to the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
348 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
monuments, the variety of confectionary was very extensive (cf.
Hengat. p. 27). In the opening words, " / too" the baker points
to the resemblance between his dream and the cup-bearer's.
The resemblance was not confined to the sameness of the num-
bers — three baskets of white bread, and three branches of the
vine, — but was also seen in the fact that his official duty at the
court was represented in the dream. But instead of Pharaoh
taking the bread from his hand, the birds of heaven ate it out of
the basket upon his head. And Joseph gave this interpretation :
" The three baskets signify three days : within that time Pharaoh
will take away thy head from thee (" lift up thy head," as in
ver. 13, but with T7JO " away from thee," i.e. behead thee), and
hang thee on the stake (thy body after execution ; vid. Deut. xxi.
22, 23), and the birds will eat tliy flesh from off thee." However
simple and close this interpretation of the two dreams may ap-
pear, the exact accordance with the fulfilment was a miracle
wrought by God, and showed that as the dreams originated in
the instigation of God, the interpretation was His inspiration also.
Vers. 20-23. Joseph's interpretations were fulfilled three
days afterwards, on the king's birth-day. rn?n Di* : the day of
being born ; the inf. Hoph. is construed as a passive with the
accus. obj., as in chap. iv. 18, etc. Pharaoh gave his servants
a feast, and lifted up the heads of both the prisoners, but in very
different ways. The cup-bearer was pardoned, and reinstated
in his office ; the baker, on the other hand, was executed. — Ver.
23. But the former forgot Joseph in his prosperity, and did
nothing to procure his liberation.
pharaoh's dreams and Joseph's exaltation. — chap. xli.
Vers. 1-36. Pharaoh's dreams and their interpreta-
tion. — Two full years afterwards (D^J accus. " in days," as in
chap. xxix. 14) Pharaoh had a dream. He was standing by the
Nile, and saw seven fine fat cows ascend from the Nile and feed
in the Nile-grass (TIK an Egyptian word) ; and behind them seven
others, ugly (according to ver. 19, unparalleled in their ugliness),
lean (lE'a rripn " thin in flesh," for which we find in ver. 19 rrtjn
" fallen away," and "KPa nipn withered in flesh, fleshless), which
placed themselves beside those fat ones on the brink of the Nile
and devoured them, without there being any effect to show that
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XLI. 1-SC. 349
they had eaten them. He then awoke, but fell asleep again and
had a second, similar dream : seven fat (ver. 22, full) and fine
ears grew upon one blade, and were swallowed up by seven
thin (ver. 23, " and hardened") ones, which were blasted by the
east wind (D , "!i' i.e. the S.E. wind, Chamsin, from the desert of
Arabia). — Ver. 7. " Then Pharaoh awoke, and behold it was a
dream." The dream was so like reality, that it was only when
he woke that he perceived it was a dream. — Ver. 8. Being
troubled about this double dream, Pharaoh sent the next morning
for all the scribes and wise men of Egypt, to have it interpreted.
D'BD'inj from D"in a stylus (pencil), are the UpoypafifiareZi, men
of the priestly caste, who occupied themselves with the sacred
arts and sciences of the Egyptians, the hieroglyphic writings,
astrology, the interpretation of dreams, the foretelling of events,
magic, and conjuring, and who were regarded as the possessors
of secret arts (yid. Ex. vii. 11) and the wise men of the nation.
But not one of these could interpret it, although the clue to the
interpretation was to be found in the religious symbols of Egypt.
For the cow was the symbol of Isis, the goddess of the all-sus-
taining earth, and in the hieroglyphics it represented the earth,
agriculture, and food ; and the Nile, by its overflowing, was the
source of the fertility of the land. But however simple the expla-
nation of the fat and lean cows ascending out of the Nile appears
to be, it is " the fate of the wisdom of this world, that where it
suffices it is compelled to be silent. For it belongs to the govern-
ment of God to close the lips of the eloquent, and take away the-
understanding of the aged (Job xii. 20)." Baumgarten.
Vers. 9 sqq. In this dilemma the head cup-bearer thought of
Joseph ; and calling to mind his offence against the king (xl. 1),
and his ingratitude to Joseph (xl. 23), he related to the king
how Joseph had explained their dreams to him and the chief
baker in the prison, and how entirely the interpretation had
come true. — Vers. 14 sqq. Pharaoh immediately sent for Joseph.
As quickly as possible he was fetched from the prison ; and after
shaving the hair of his head and beard, and changing his clothes,
as the customs of Egypt required (see Hengst. Egypt and the
Books of Moses, p. 30), he went in to the king. On the king's
saying to him, " / have heard of thee (IvP de te), thou hearest a
dream to interpret it" — i.e. thou only needest to hear a dream, and
thou canst at once interpret »t, -Joseph replied, " Not I (?~lffl }
Digitized by VjOOQlC
350 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
lit. " not so far as me," this is not in my power, vid. xiv. 24), God
will answer Pharaoh's good" i.e. what shall profit Pharaoh ; just
as in chap. xl. 8 he had pointed the two prisoners away from
himself to God. Pharaoh then related his double dream (vers.
17-24), and Joseph gave the interpretation (vers. 25-32): "The
dream of Pharaoh is one (».«. the two dreams have the same
meaning) ; God hath showed Pharaoh what He is about to do."
The seven cows and seven ears of corn were seven years, the
fat ones very fertile years of superabundance, the lean ones very
barren years of famine ; the latter would follow the former over
the whole land of Egypt, so that the years of famine would leave
no trace of the seven fruitful years ; and, "for that the dream
was doubled unto Pharaoh twice " (i.e. so far as this fact is con-
cerned, it signifies) " that the thing is firmly resolved by God,
and God will quickly carry it out" In the confidence of this
interpretation which looked forward over fourteen years, the
divinely enlightened seer's glance was clearly manifested, and
could not fail to make an impression upon the king, when con-
trasted with the perplexity of the Egyptian augurs and wise
men. Joseph followed up his interpretation by the advice (vers.
33-36), that Pharaoh should " look out (**"}.?.) a man discreet and
wise, and set him over the land of Egypt ; " and cause ( n j?!£) that
in the seven years of superabundance he should raise fifths
(e'en), t'.e. the fifth part of the harvest, through overseers, and
have the corn, or the stores of food (« N), laid up in the cities
" under the band of the king," i.e. by royal authority and direc-
tion, as food for the land for the seven years of famine, that it
might not perish through famine.
Vers. 37-57. Joseph's promotion. — This counsel pleased
Pharaoh and all his servants, so that he said to them, " Shall we
find a man like this one, in whom the Spirit of God is t" " The
Spirit of Elohim;" i.e. the spirit of supernatural insight and
wisdom. He then placed Joseph over his house, and over all
Egypt ; in other words, he chose him as his grand vizier, saying
to him, " After God hath showed thee all this, there is none dis-
creet and wise as thou." p?* T?"??, " according to thy mouth (i*.
command, chap. xlv. 21) shall my whole people arrange itself."
PSW does not mean to kiss (Rabb., Ges., etc.), for 79 ptM is not
Hebrew, and kissing the mouth was not customary as an act of
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XIX 37-57. 351
homage, but " to dispose, arrange one's self" (ordine disposuit).
" Only in the throne will I be greater than thou" — Vers. 42 sqq.
As an installation in this post of honour, the king handed him
his signet-ring, the seal which the grand vizier or prime minister
wore, to give authority to the royal edicts (Esth. iii. 10), clothed
him in a byssus dress (B^, fine muslin or white cotton fabric), 1
and put upon his neck the golden chain, which was usually worn
in Egypt as a mark of distinction, as the Egyptian monuments
show (Hgst. pp. 30, 31). — Ver. 43. He then had him driven in
the second chariot, the chariot which followed immediately upon
the king's state-carriage; that is to say, he directed a solemn
procession to be made through the city, in which they (heralds)
cried before him TP* (i.e. bow down), — an Egyptian word, which
has been pointed by the Masorites according to the Hiphil or Aphel
of T}3. In Coptic it is abork, projicere, with the signs of the
imperative and the second person. Thus he placed him over all
Egypt. |in« inf. absol. as a continuation of the finite verb (vid.
Ex. viii. 11 ; Lev. xxv. 14, etc.). — Ver. 44. " lam P/iaraoh," he
said to him, " and without thee shall no man lift his hand or foot
in all the land of Egypt ;" i.e. I am the actual king, and thou, the
next to me, shalt rule over all my people. — Ver. 45. But in order
that Joseph might be perfectly naturalized, the king gave him
an Egyptian name, Zaphnath-Paaneah, and married him to
Asenath, the daughter of Potipherah, the priest at On. The
name Zaphnath-Paaneah (a form adapted to the Hebrew, for
Wovdofupawfa (LXX.) ; according to a Greek scholium, acorrjp
Koafwv, u salvator mundi" (Jerome)), answers to the Coptic
P-sote-m-ph-eneh, — P the article, sots salvation, m the sign of the
genitive, ph the article, and eneh the world (lit. atas, seculum) ; or
perhaps more correctly, according to Rosellini and more recent
Egyptologists, to the Coptic P-sOnt-em-ph-anh, i.e. sustentator
vita, support or sustainer of life, with reference to the call en-
trusted to him by God. 2 AsenatJi, 'AaeveO (LXX.), possibly
1 See my Bfbl. Antiquities, § 17, 5. The reference, no doubt, is to the
fvAjrec A(*f>i», worn by the Egyptian priests, which was not made of linen,
but of thejrutex quern aliqui gossipion vocant, plures xylon et ideo ldja inde
facta xylina. Nee ulla sunt eis candore mottitiave prmferenda. — Vestes inde
sacerdotibus JSgypti gratissimx. Plin. h. n. xix. 1.
* Luther in his version, " privy councillor," follows the rabbinical ex-
planation, which was already to be found in Josephus (Ant. ii. 6, 1) : zpwirrZ*
liftris, from r0Bx = rtU1BX occulta, and ruprj revelator.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
352 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
connected with the name Neitk, the Egyptian Pallas. Poti-
Pliera, Here^pr) (LXX.), a Coptic name signifying ille qui solis
est, consecrated to the sun (<f>pv with the aspirated article signi-
fies the sun in Memphitic). On was the popular name for Helio-
polis ('H\wv7roXt9, LXX.), and according to Cyrill. Alex, ad
Hos. v. 8 signifies the sun ; whilst the name upon the monuments
is ta-Rd or pa-Rd, house of the sun (Brugsch, Reisebericht, p. 50).
From a very early date there was a celebrated temple of the sun
here, with a learned priesthood, which held the first place among
the priests' colleges of Egypt {Herod. 2, 3 ; Hengst. pp. 32 sqq.).
This promotion of Joseph, from the position of a Hebrew slave
pining in prison to the highest post of honour in the Egyptian
kingdom, is perfectly conceivable, on the one hand, from the great
importance attached in ancient times to the interpretation of
dreams and to all occult science, especially among the Egyp-
tians, and on the other hand, from the despotic form of govern-
ment in the East ; but the miraculous power of God is to be seen
in the fact, that God endowed Joseph with the gift of infallible
interpretation, and so ordered the circumstances that this gift
opened the way for him to occupy that position in which he
became the preserver, not of Egypt alone, but of his own family
also. And the same hand of God, by which he had been so
highly exalted after deep degradation, preserved him in his lofty
post of honour from sinking into the heathenism of Egypt;
although, by his alliance with the daughter of a priest of the
sun, the most distinguished caste in the land, he had fully
entered into the national associations and customs of the land. —
Ver. 46. Joseph was 30 years old when he stood before Pharaoh,
and went out from him and passed through all the land of Egypt,
i.e. when he took possession of his office ; consequently he had
been in Egypt for 13 years as a slave, and at least three years
in prison.
Vers. 47 sqq. For the seven years of superabundance the
land bore D^ify, in full hands or bundles ; and Joseph gathered
all the provisional store of these years (i.e. the fifth part of
the produce, which was levied) into the cities. " The food of
the field of the city, which was round about it, he brought
into the midst of it ;" i.e. he provided granaries in the towns, in
which the corn of the whole surrounding country was stored.
In this manner he collected as much corn " as the sand of the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XLI. 47-57. 353
sea," until he left off reckoning the quantity, or calculating
the number of bushels, which the monuments prove to have
been the usual mode adopted (cm/. Hengst. p. 36). — Vers. 50-52.
During the fruitful years two sons were born to Joseph. The
first-born he named Manasseh, i.e. causing to forget ; "for, he
said, God hath made me forget all my toil and all my fathers
house ('?#>, an Aram. Piel form, for 'JBb, on account of the re-
semblance in sound to flBOD)." ffcec pia est, ac sancta gratiarum
actio, quod Deus oblivisei eum fecit pristinas omnes arumnas : sed
nullus honor tanti esse debuit, ut desiderium et memoriam paternw
domus ex animo deponeret (Calvin). But the true answer to the
question, whether it was a Christian boast for him to make, that
he had forgotten father and mother, is given by Luther : " I see
that God would take away the reliance which I placed upon my
father ; for God is a jealous God, and will not suffer the heart
to have any other foundation to rely upon, but Him alone."
This also meets the objection raised by Theodoret, why Joseph
did not inform his father of his life and promotion, but allowed
so many years to pass away, until he was led to do so at last in
consequence of the arrival of his brothers. The reason of this
forgetfulness and silence can only be found in the fact, that
through the wondrous alteration in his condition he had been
led to see, that he was brought to Egypt according to the counsel
of God, and was redeemed by God from slavery and prison, and
had been exalted by Him to be lord over Egypt ; so that, know-
ing he was in the hand of God, the firmness of his faith led him
to renounce all wilful interference with the purposes of God,
which pointed to a still broader and more glorious goal (Baum-
garten, Delitcsch). — Ver. 52. The second son he named Ephraim,
Le. double-fruitf ulness ; "for God hath made me fruitful in the
land of my affliction" Even after his elevation Egypt still con-
tinued the land of affliction, so that in this word we may see one
trace of a longing for the promised land. — Vers. 53-57. When
the years of scarcity commenced, at the close of the years of
plenty, the famine spread over all (the neighbouring) lands ;
only in Egypt was there bread. As the famine increased in the
land, and the people cried to Pharaoh for bread, he directed
them to Joseph, who " opened all in which was" (bread), i.e.
all the granaries, and sold corn p^t?, denom. from ~&&, signifies
to trade in corn, to buy and sell corn) to the Egyptians, and
Digitized by VjOOQlC
354 THE FIBST BOOK OF MOSES.
(as the writer adds, with a view to what follows) to all the
world (}HKrn>3 } V er. 57), that came thither to buy corn, because
the famine was great on every hand. — Years of famine have
frequently fallen, like this one, upon Egypt, and the neigh-
bouring countries to the north. The cause of this is to be seen
in the fact, that the overflowing of the Nile, to which Egypt is
indebted for its fertility, is produced by torrents of rain falling
in the alpine regions of Abyssinia, which proceed from clouds
formed in the Mediterranean and carried thither by the wind ;
consequently it has a common origin with the rains of Palestine
(see the proofs in Hengst. pp. 37 sqq.).
FIRST JOURNEY MADE TO EGYPT BY JOSEPH'S BRETHREN,
WITHOUT BENJAMIN. — CHAP. XLII.
Vers. 1-6. With the words " Why do ye look at one another?"
viz. in such a helpless and undecided manner, Jacob exhorted his
sons to fetch corn from Egypt, to preserve his family from star-
vation. Joseph's ten brothers went, as their aged father would
not allow his youngest son Benjamin to go with them, for fear
that some calamity might befall him C r J? = , " T 3P, xliv. 29 as in ver-
38 and xlix. 1) ; and they came " in the midst of the comers" t.e.
among others who came from the same necessity, and bowed
down before Joseph with their faces to the earth. For he was
" the ruler over the land," and had the supreme control of the
sale of the corn, so that they were obliged to apply to him.
D'pB'n seems to have been the standing title which the Shemites
gave to Joseph as ruler in Egypt ; and from this the later legend
of Sd\art.<i the first king of the Hyksos arose (Josephus c. Ap.
i. 14). The only other passages in which the word occurs in
the Old Testament are in writings of the captivity or a still
later date, and there it is taken from the Chaldee ; it belongs,
however, not merely to the Aramaean thesaurus, but to the
Arabic also, from which it was introduced into the passage
before us.
Vers. 7-17. Joseph recognised his brothers at once; but
they could not recognise a brother who had not been seen for
20 years, and who, moreover, had not only become thoroughly
Egyptianized, but had risen to be a great lord. And he acted
as a foreigner (" | 3?T) towards them, speaking harshly, and
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XLII. 7-17. 355
asking them whence they had come. In ver. 7, according to a
truly Semitic style of narrative, we have a condensation of what
is more circumstantially related in vers. 8-17. — Vers. 9 sqq. As
the sight of his brethren bowing before him with the deepest reve-
rence reminded Joseph of his early dreams of the sheaves and
stars, which had so increased the hatred of his brethren towards
him as to lead to a proposal to kill him, and an actual sale, he
said to them, " Ye are spies ; to see the nakedness of the land (i.e.
the unfortified parts of the kingdom which would be easily acces-
sible to a foe) ye are come;" and persisted in this charge notwith-
standing their reply, "Nay, my lord, but Q. see Ges. § 155, 16) to
buy food are thy servants come. We are all one man's sons (un:
for ^™^j only in Ex. xvi. 7, 8 ; Num. xxxii. 32 ; 2 Sam. xvii.
12; Lam. iii. 42): honest (D , ?2) are we; thy servants are no
spies" Cum exploratio sit delictum capitale, non est verisimile ;
quod pater totfilios una tempore vitce periculo expositurus sit (J.
Gerhard). But as their assertion failed to make any impression
upon the Egyptian lord, they told him still more particularly about
their family (vers. 13 sqq.) : " Twelve are thy servants, brothers
are we, sons of a man in the land of Canaan ; and behold the
youngest is now with our father, and one is no more (UJ'K as in chap,
v. 24). Joseph then replied, " That is it (s«n neut. like xx. 16)
that I spake unto you, saying ye are spies. By this shall ye be proved:
By the life of Pharaoh! ye shall not (DK, like xiv. 23) go hence, un-
less your youngest brother come hither. Send one of you, and let
him fetch your brotJier; but ye shall be in bonds, and ?,.wr words
shall be proved, whether there be truth in you or not. By ihe life
of Pharaoh! ye are truly spies!" He then had them put into
custody for three days. By the coming of the youngest brother,
Joseph wanted to test their assertion, not because he thought
it possible that he might not be living with them, and they
might have treated him as they did Joseph (Kn.), but because
he wished to discover their feelings towards Benjamin, and see
what affection they had for this son of Rachel, who had taken
Joseph's place as his father's favourite. And with his harsh
mode of addressing them, Joseph had no intention whatever to
administer to his brethren " a just punishment for their wicked-
ness towards him," for his heart could not have stooped to such
mean revenge ; but he wanted to probe thoroughly the feelings
of their hearts, " whether they felt that they deserved the pun-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
350 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
ishment of God for the sin they had committed," and how they
felt towards their aged father and their youngest brother. 1
Even in the fact that he did not send the one away directly to
fetch Benjamin, and merely detain the rest, but put the whole
ten in prison, and afterwards modified his threat (vers. 18 sqq.),
there was no indecision as to the manner in which he should
behave towards them — no "wavering between thoughts of
wrath and revenge on the one hand, and forgiving love and
meekness on the other ;" but he hoped by imprisoning them to
make his brethren feel the earnestness of his words, and to give
them time for reflection, as the curt "is no more" with which
they had alluded to Joseph's removal was a sufficient proof that
they had not yet truly repented of the deed.
Vers. 18-25. On the third day Joseph modified his severity.
" This do and live" i.e. then ye shall live : " / fear God."
One shall remain in prison, but let the rest of you take home
"corn for the famine of your families," and fetch your youngest
brother, that your words may be verified, and ye may not die,
i.e. may not suffer the death that spies deserve. That he might
not present the appearance of despotic caprice and tyranny by
too great severity, and so render his brethren obdurate, Joseph
stated as the reason for his new decision, that he feared God.
From the fear of God, he, the lord of Egypt, would not punish
or slay these strangers upon mere suspicion, but would judge
them justly. How differently had they acted towards their
brother! The ruler of all Egypt had compassion on their fami-
lies who were in Canaan suffering from hunger ; but they had
1 Joseph nihil aliud agit quam ut revelet peccatum fratrum hoc duris-
simo opere et sermone. Descendunt enim in jEgyptum una cum aliis em-
turn frumentum, securi et negligentes tarn atrocis delicti, cujus sibi erant
conscii, quasi nihil unquam deliquissent contra patrera decrepitum aut
fratrem innocentem, cogitant Joseph jam diu exemtum esse rebus humanis,
patrem vero rerum omnium ignarum esse. Quid ad nos? Non agunt pceni-
tentiam. Hi silices et adamantes frangendi et conterendi sunt ac aperiendi
oculi eorum, ut videant atrocitatem sceleris sui, idque ubi perfecit Joseph
statini verbis et gestibus humaniorem se prsebet eoequc honorifice tractat. —
Hsec igitur atrocitas scelerum movit Joseph ad explorandos animos fratrum
accuratius, ita ut non solum priorum delictorum aed et cogitationum pra-
varum memoriam renovaret, ac fuit sane inquisitio satis ingrata et acerba
et tamen ab animo placidissimo profecta. Ego durius eos tractassera. Sed
hsec acerbitas, quam prse se fert, non pertinet ad vindicandnm injurkm sed
ad salutarem eorum poenitentiam, ut humilientur. — Luther.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XLIL 26-38. 357
intended to leave their brother in the pit to starve ! These and
similar thoughts could hardly fail to pass involuntarily through
their minds at Joseph's words, and to lead them to a penitential
acknowledgment of their sin and unrighteousness. The notion
that Joseph altered his first intention merely from regard to his
much afflicted father, appears improbable, for the simple reason,
that he can only have given utterance to the threat that he would
keep them all in prison till one of them had gone and fetched
Benjamin, for the purpose of giving the greater force to his ac-
cusation, that they were spies. But as he was not serious in
making this charge, he could not for a moment have thought of
actually carrying out the threat. "And they did so:" in these
words the writer anticipates the result of the colloquy which
ensued, and which is more fully narrated afterwards. Joseph's
intention was fulfilled. The brothers now saw in what had hap-
pened to them a divine retribution : "Surely we atone because of
our brother, whose anguish of soul we saw, when he entreated us and
we would not hear; therefore is this distress come upon us" And
Reuben reminded them how he had warned them to no purpose,
not to sin against the boy — "and even his blood . . . behold it is
required" (cf . ix. 5) ; i.e. not merely the sin of casting him into
the pit and then selling him, but his death also, of which we
have been guilty through that sale. Thus- they accused them-
selves in Joseph's presence, not knowing that he could under-
stand ; "for the interpreter was between them." Joseph had con-
versed with them through an interpreter, as an Egyptian who
was ignorant of their language. " The interpreter," viz. the one
appointed for that purpose ; ni^? like xxvi. 28. But Joseph
understood their words, and "turned away and wept" (ver.
24), with inward emotion at the wonderful leadings of divine
grace, and at the change in his brothers' feelings. He then
turned to them again, and, continuing the conversation with
them, had Simeon bound before their eyes, to be detained as a
hostage (not Reuben, who had dissuaded them from killing
Joseph, and had taken no part in the sale, but Simeon, the next
in age). He then ordered his men to fill their sacks with corn,
to give every one (B^R as in chap. xv. 10) his money back in his
sack, and to provide them with food for the journey.
Vers. 26—38. Thus they started with their asses laden with
the corn. On the way, when they had reached their halting-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
358 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
place for the night, one of them opened his sack to feed the ass,
and found his money in it. JvO, camping-place for the night, is
merely a resting-place, not an inn, both here and in Ex. iv. 24 ;
for there can hardly have been caravanserais at that time, either
in the desert or by the desert road, nrtnox: an antiquated
word for a corn-sack, occurring only in these chapters, and used
even here interchangeably with Pb. — Ver 28. When this dis-
covery was made known to the brethren, their hearts sank within
them. They turned trembling to one another, and said, " What
i.9 this that God hath done to us!" Joseph had no doubt had
the money returned, " merely because it was against his nature
to trade with his father and brethren for bread ;" just as he
had caused them to be supplied with food for the journey, for
no other reason than to give them a proof of his good-will.
And even if he may have thought it possible that the brothers
would be alarmed when they found the money, and thrown into
a state of much greater anxiety from the fear of being still
further accused by the stern lord of Egypt of cheating or of
theft, there was no reason why he should spare them this anxiety,
since it could only help to break their hard hearts still more
At any rate, this salutary effect was really produced, even if
Joseph had no such intention. The brothers looked upon this
incomprehensible affair as a punishment from God, and ne-
glected in their alarm to examine the rest of the sacks. — Vers.
29-34. On their arrival at home, they told their father all that
had occurred. — Vers. 35 sqq. But when they emptied their sacks,
and, to their own and their father's terror, found their bundles
of money in their separate sacks, Jacob burst out with the com-
plaint, " Ye are making me childless! Joseph is gone, and Simeon is
gone, and will ye take Benjamin ! All this falls upon me " (naps
for $3 as in Prov. xxxi. 29). — Vers. 37, 38. Reuben then offered
his two sons to Jacob as pledges for Benjamin, if Jacob would
entrust him to his care : Jacob might slay them, if he did not
bring Benjamin back — the greatest and dearest offer that a
son could make to a father. But Jacob refused to let him go.
fC If mischief befell him by the way, ye would bring down my grey
hairs with sorrow into Sheol " (cf . xxxvii. 35).
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XUII. 1-15. 359
THE SECOND VISIT OF JOSEPH'S BRETHREN TO EGYPT, ALONG
WITH BENJAMIN. — CHAP. XLIII.
Vers. 1-15. When the corn brought from Egypt was all con-
sumed, as the famine still continued, Jacob called upon his sons
to go down and fetch a little corn (little in proportion to their
need). — Vers. 3 sqq. Judah then declared, that they would not
go there again unless their father sent Benjamin with them ; for
the man (Joseph) had solemnly protested ("WfJ tpn) that they
should not see his face without their youngest brother. Judah
undertook the consultation with his father about Benjamin's
going, because Reuben, the eldest son, had already been refused,
and Levi, who followed Reuben and Simeon, had forfeited his
father's confidence through his treachery to the Shechemites
(chap, xxxiv.). — Vers. 6 sqq. To the father's reproachful ques-
tion, why they had dealt so ill with him, as to tell the man that
they had a brother, Judah replied : "The man asked after us
and our kinsmen : Is your father yet alive t have ye a brother ?
And we answered him in conformity (*B ?V as in Ex. xxxiv. 27,
etc.) with these words (i.e. with his questions). Could we know,
then, that he would say, Bring your brother down ? " Joseph had
not made direct inquiries, indeed, about their father and their
brother ; but by his accusation that they were spies, he had com-
pelled them to give an exact account of their family relation-
ships. So that Judah, when repeating the main points of the
interview, could very justly give them in the form just men-
tioned. — Ver. 8. He then repeated the only condition on which
they would go to Egypt again, referring to the death by famine
which threatened them, their father, and their children, and
promising that he would himself be surety for the youth (TPIfJ,
Benjamin was twenty-three years old), and saying, that if he did
not restore him, he would bear the blame (KDn to be guilty of a
sin and atone for it, as in 1 Kings i. 21) his whole life long.
He then concluded with the deciding words, "for if we had not
delayed, surely we should already have returned a second time." —
Ver. 11. After this, the old man gave way to what could not be
avoided, and let Benjamin go. But that nothing might be want-
ing on his part, which could contribute to the success of the
journey, he suggested that they should take a present for the man,
and that they should also take the money which was brought
Digitized by VjOOQlC
360 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
back in their sacks, in addition to what was necessary for the
corn they were to purchase ; and he then commended them to
the mercy of Almighty God. " If it must be so, yet do this (KiBK
belongs to the imperative, although it precedes it here, cf. xxvii.
37) : take of Hie prize (the most choice productions) of the land
— a little balm and a little honey (^-T 1 . the Arabian dibs, either
new honey from bees, or more probably honey from grapes, — a
thick syrup boiled from sweet grapes, which is still carried every
year frpm Hebron to Egypt), gum-dragon and myrrh (yid. xxxvii.
25), pistachio nuts and almonds." D^oa, which are not mentioned
anywhere else, are, according to the Samar. vers., the fruit of the
pistacia vera, a tree resembling the terebinth, — long angular
nuts of the size of hazel-nuts, with an oily kernel of a pleasant
flavour ; it does not thrive in Palestine now, but the nuts are
imported from Aleppo. — Ver. 12. " And take second (i.e. more)
money (n3B>o t|D3 is different from *|D3""UB>p doubling of the
money = double money, ver. 15) in your hand ; and the money
that returned in your sacks take with you again ; perhaps it is a
mistake" i.e. was put in your sacks by mistake. — Ver. 14. Thus
Israel let his sons go with the blessing, " God Almighty give you
mercy before the man, that he may liberate to you your other
brother (Simeon) and Benjamin;" and with this resigned submis-
sion to the will of God, " And I, if lam bereaved, lam bereaved,"
i.e. if I am to lose my children, let it be so ! For this mode of
expression, cf. Esth. iv. 16 and 2 Kings vii. 4. ^pat? with the
pausal a, answering to the feelings of the speaker, which is fre-
quently used for o ; e.g. e ^^t? , for ^B'., chap. xlix. 27.
Vers. 16-25. When the brethren appeared before Joseph,
he ordered his steward to take them into the house, and pre-
pare a dinner for them and for him. natp the original form of
the imperative for natp. But the brethren were alarmed, think-
ing that they were taken into the house because of the money
which returned the first time (a#n which came back, they could
not imagine how), that he might take them unawares (lit. roll
upon them), and fall upon them, and keep them as slaves, along
with their asses. For the purpose of averting what they dreaded,
they approached (ver. 19) the steward and told him, "at the door
of the house," before they entered therefore, how, at the first
purchase of corn, on opening their sacks, they found the money
that had been paid, " every one's money in the mouth of his sack,
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XLIII. 26-84. 361
our money according to its weight" i.e. in full, and had now
brought it back, together with some more money to buy corn,
and they did not know who had put their money in their sacks
(vers. 20-22). The steward, who was initiated into Joseph's
plans, replied in a pacifying tone, " Peace be to you (ps? DW
is not a form of salutation here, but of encouragement, as in
Judg. vi. 23) : fear not ; your God and the God of your father has
given you a treasure in your sacks ; your money came to me ; " and
at the same time, to banish all their fear, he brought Simeon
out to them. He then conducted them into Joseph's house, and
received them in Oriental fashion as the guests of his lord.
But, previous to Joseph's arrival, they arranged the present
which they had brought with them, as they heard that they were
to dine with him.
Vers. 26-34. When Joseph came home, they handed him the
present with the most reverential obeisance. — Ver. 27. Joseph first
of all inquired after their own and their father's health (D'frB'first
as substantive, then as adjective = Dw xxxiii. 18), whether he was
still living ; which they answered with thanks in the affirmative,
making the deepest bow. His eyes then fell upon Benjamin,
the brother by his own mother, and he asked whether this was
their youngest brother ; but without waiting for their reply, he
exclaimed, " God be gracious to thee, my son!" 1?IT for 1311* as in
Isa. xxx. 19 (cf. Ewald, § 251d). He addressed him as " my
son," in tender and, as it were, paternal affection, and with spe-
cial regard to his youth. Benjamin was 16 years younger than
Joseph, and was quite an infant when Joseph was sold. — Vers.
30, 31. And "his (Joseph's) bowels did yearn" (VIM? lit, were
compressed, from the force of love to his brother), so that he
was obliged to seek (a place) as quickly as possible to weep, and
went into the chamber, that he might give vent to his feelings
in tears ; after which, he washed his face and came out again,
and, putting constraint upon himself, ordered the dinner to be
brought in. — Vers. 32, 33. Separate tables were prepared for
him, for his brethren, and for the Egyptians who dined with
them. This was required by the Egyptian spirit of caste, which
neither allowed Joseph, as minister of state and a member of the
priestly order, to eat along with Egyptians who were below him,
nor the latter along with the Hebrews as foreigners. " They can-
not (i.e. may not) eat (cf. Deut. xii. 17, xvi. 5, xvii. 15). For
PENT. — VOL. I. 2 A
Digitized by VjOOQlC
362 THE FIBST BOOK OF MOSES.
this was an abomination to the Egyptians" The Hebrews and
others, for example, slaughtered and ate animals, even female ani-
mals, which were regarded by the Egyptians as sacred ; so that,
according to Herod, ii. 41, no Egyptian would use the knife, or
fork, or saucepan of a Greek, nor would any eat of the flesh of
a clean animal which had been cut up with a Grecian knife
(cf. Ex. viii. 22).— Vers. 33, 34. The brothers sat in front of
Joseph, u the first-born according to his birthright, and the smallest
(youngest) according to his smallnesi (youth) ;" i.e. the placta
were arranged for them according to their ages, so that they
looked at one another with astonishment, since this arrangement
necessarily impressed them with the idea that this great man
had been supernaturally enlightened as to their family affairs.
To do them honour, they brought (Kfe?, Ges. § 137, 3) them
dishes from Joseph, i.e. from his table ; and to show especial
honour to Benjamin, his portion was five times larger than that of
any of the others (rrtT lit. hands, grasps, as in chap, xlvii. 24 ;
2 Kings xi. 7). The custom is met with elsewhere of showing
respect to distinguished guests by giving them the largest and
best pieces (1 Sam. ix. 23, 24 ; Homer, H. 7, 321 ; 8, 162, etc.),
by double portions (e.g. the kings among the Spartans, Herod.
6, 57), and even by fourfold portions in the case of the Archons
among the Cretans (Heraclid. polit. 3). But among the Egyp-
tians the number 5 appears to have been preferred to any other
(cf . chap. xli. 34, xlv. 22, xlvii. 2, 24 ; Isa. xix. 18). By this par-
tiality Joseph intended, with a view to his further plans, to draw
out his brethren to show their real feelings towards Benjamin, that
he might see whether they would envy and hate him on account
of this distinction, as they had formerly envied him his long coat
with sleeves, and hated him because he was his father's favourite
(xxxvii. 3, 4). This honourable treatment and entertainment
banished all their anxiety and fear. " They drank, and drank
largely with him," i.e. they were perfectly satisfied with what they
ate and drank ; not, they were intoxicated (cf . Bag. i. 9).
THE LAST TEST AND ITS RESULTS. — CHAP. XLIV.
Vers. 1-13. The test. — Vers. 1, 2. After the dinner Joseph
had his brothers' sacks filled by his steward with corn, as much
as they could hold, and every one's money placed inside : and
Digitized by VjOOQlC
chap. xliv. l-ia. 363
in addition to that, had his own silver goblet put into Ben-
jamin's sack. — Vers. 3-6. Then as soon as it was light ("i^K, 3d
pers. pert", in o: Ges. § 72, 1), they were sent away with their
asses. But they were hardly outside the town, u not far off,"
when he directed his steward to follow the men, and as soon as
he overtook them, to say, " Where/ore have ye rewarded evil for
good? Is it not this from which my lord drinketh, and he is ac*
customed to prophesy from itf Ye have done an evil deed!"
By these words they were accused of theft; the thing was taken
for granted as well known to them all, and the goblet purloined
was simply described as a very valuable possession of Joseph's.
8>ro : lit. to whisper, to mumble out formularies, incantations,
then to prophesy, divinare. According to this, the Egyptians
at that time practised Xetcavotricoiri-r) or Xeieavofunneia and
vBpo/utvrela, the plate and water incantations, of which Jambli-
chus speaks (de myst. iii. 14), and which consisted in pouring
clean water into a goblet, and then looking into the water for
representations of future events ; or in pouring water into a
goblet or dish, dropping in pieces of gold and silver, also
precious stones, and then observing and interpreting the appear-
ances in the water (cf. Varro apud August, civ. Dei 7, 35;
Plin. h. n. 37, 73 ; Strabo, xvi. p. 762). Traces of this have
been continued even to our own day (see NordetCs Journey
through Egypt and Nubia). But we cannot infer with cer-
tainty from this, that Joseph actually adopted this superstitious
practice. The intention of the statement may simply have been
to represent the goblet as a sacred vessel, and Joseph as ac-
quainted with the most secret things (ver. 15). — Vers. 7-9. In
the consciousness of their innocence the brethren repelled this
charge with indignation, and appealed to the fact that they
brought back the gold which was found in their sacks, and
therefore could not possibly have stolen gold or silver ; and de-
clared that whoever should be found in possession of the goblet,
should be put to death, and the rest become slaves. — Ver. 10.
The man replied, "Now let it be even (M placed first for the sake
of emphasis) according to your words: with whom it is found, he
shall be my slave, and ye (the rest) shall remain blameless."
Thus he modified the sentence, to assume the appearance of jus-
tice. — Vers. 11-13. They then took down their sacks as quickly
as possible ; and he examined them, beginning with the eldest
Digitized by VjOOQlC
364 THE FIBST BOOK OF MOSES.
and finishing with the youngest ; and the goblet was found in
Benjamin's sack. With anguish and alarm at this new calamity
they rent their clothes (yid. xxxvii. 34), loaded their asses again,
and returned to the city. It would now be seen how they felt in
their inmost hearts towards their father's favourite, who had
been so distinguished by the great man of Egypt : whether now
as formerly they were capable of giving up their brother, and
bringing their aged father with sorrow to the grave ; or whether
they were ready, with unenvying, self-sacrificing love, to give up
their own liberty and lives for him. And they stood this test.
Vers. 14-34. Result of the test. — Vers. 14-17. With
Judah leading the way, they came into the house to Joseph,
and fell down before him begging for mercy. Joseph spoke to
them harshly : " What kind of deed is this that ye have done f
Did ye not know that such a man as I (a. man initiated into the
most secret things) would certainly divine this t " S?n? augurari.
Judah made no attempt at a defence. " What shall we say to
my lord? how speak, how clear ourselves ? God (Ha-Elohim, the
personal God) has found out the wickedness of thy servants (i.e.
He is now punishing the crime committed against our brother,
cf. xlii. 21). Behold, we are my lord's slaves, both we, and he
in whose hand the cup was found" But Joseph would punish
mildly and justly. The guilty one alone should be his slave ;
the others might go in peace, i.e. uninjured, to their father. —
Vers. 18 sqq. But that the brothers could not do. Judah, who
had pledged himself to his father for Benjamin, ventured in the
anguish of his heart to approach Joseph, and implore him to
liberate his brother. " I would give very much," says Luther,
" to be able to pray to our Lord God as well as Judah prays to
Joseph here ; for it is a perfect specimen of prayer, the true
feeling that there ought to be in prayer." Beginning with the
request for a gracious hearing, as he was speaking to the ears of
one who was equal to Pharaoh (who could condemn or pardon
like the king), Judah depicted in natural, affecting, powerful,
and irresistible words the love of their aged father to this son of
his old age, and his grief when they told him that they were not
to come into the presence of the lord of Egypt again without
Benjamin; the intense anxiety with which, after a severe
struggle, their father had allowed him to come, after he
Digitized by VjOOQlC
chap. xlv. l-u. 365
(Judah) had offered to be answerable for his life ; and the
grievous fact, that if they returned without the youth, they
must bring down the grey hairs of their father with sorrow to
the grave. — Ver. 21. To u set eyes upon him" signifies, with a
gracious intention, to show him good-will (as in Jer. xxxix.
12, xl. 4). — Ver. 27. " That my wife bore me two (sons) :"
Jacob regards Rachel alone as his actual wife (cf. xlvi. 19). —
Ver. 28 low, preceded by a preterite, is to be rendered " and
I was obliged to say, Only (nothing but) torn in pieces has he be-
come." — Ver. 30. "His soul is bound to his soul:" equivalent to,
" he clings to him with all his soul." — Vers. 33, 34. Judah
closed his appeal with the entreaty, "Now let tJiy servant (me)
remain instead of the lad as slave to my lord, but let lite lad go
up with his brethren ; for how could I go to my father without the
lad being with me ! (I cannot,) tliat I may not see the calamity
which will befall my father ! "
THE RECOGNITION. INVITATION TO JACOB TO COME DOWN
TO EGYPT. — CHAP. XLV.
Vers. 1-15. The recognition. — Ver. 1. After this ap-
peal, in which Judah, speaking for his brethren, had shown the
tenderest affection for the old man who had been bowed down
by their sin, and the most devoted fraternal love and fidelity to
the only remaining son of his beloved Rachel, and had given a
sufficient proof of the change of mind, the true conversion, that
had taken place in themselves, Joseph could not restrain him-
self any longer in relation to all those who stood round him.
He was obliged to relinquish the part which he had hitherto
acted for the purpose of testing his brothers' hearts, and to give
full vent to his feelings. " He called out : Cause every man to gc
out from me. And there stood no man (of his Egyptian attendants),
with him, while Joseph made himself known to his brethren," quia
effusio ilia affectuum et CTO/xyf/s erga fratres et parentem tantafuit,
ut non posset ferre alienorum prasentiam et aspectum (Luther). —
Vers. 2, 3. As soon as all the rest were gone, he broke out into
such loud weeping, that the Egyptians outside could hear it; and
the house of Pharaoh, i.e. the royal family, was told of it (cf.
vers. 2 and 16). He then said to his brethren : "lam Joseph.
Is my father still alive ? " That his father was still living, he
Digitized by VjOOQlC
866 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
had not only been informed before (xliii. 27), but had just been
told again; but his filial heart impels him to make sure of it once
more. " But his brethren could not answer him, for they were
terrified before him : " they were so smitten in their consciences,
that from astonishment and terror they could not utter a word.
— Vers. 4, 5. Joseph then bade his brethren approach nearer,
and said : " / am Joseph, your brother, whom ye sold into Egypt.
But now be not grieved nor angry with yourselves (Da^JJB in^Ttt
as in chap. xxxi. 35) that ye sold me hither ; for God hath sent
me before you to preserve life." Sic enim Joseph interpretatur
venditionem. Vos quidem me vendidistis, sed Deus emit, asseruit et
vindicavit me sibi pastor em, principem et salvatorem populorum
eodem consilio, quo videbar omissus et perditus (Luther). " For,"
he continues in explanation, " now there are two years of famine
in the land, and there are five years more, in which there will be
no ploughing and reaping. And God hath sent me before you to
establish you a remnant (cf. 2 Sam. xiv. 7) upon the earth (i.e. to
secure to you the preservation of the tribe and of posterity during
this famine), and to preserve your lives to a great deliverance,"
i.e. to a great nation delivered from destruction, cf. 1. 20. ^BvB
that which has escaped, the band of men or multitude escaped
from death and destruction (2 Kings xix. 30, 31). Joseph
announced prophetically here, that God had brought him into
Egypt to preserve through him the family which He had chosen
for His own nation, and to deliver them out of the danger of
starvation which threatened them now, as a very great nation. —
Ver. 8. " And now (this was truly the case) it was not you that
sent me hither ; but God (Ha-Ehhim, the personal God, in con-
trast with his brethren) liaih made me a father to Pharaoh (i.e. his
most confidential counsellor and friend ; cf. 1 Mace. xi. 32, Ges.
thes. 7), and lord of all his house, and a ruler throughout all the
land of Egypt ; " cf . xli. 40, 41.
Vers. 9 sqq. Joseph then directed his brethren to go up to
their father with all speed, and invite him in his name to
come without delay, with all his family and possessions, into
Egypt, where he would keep him near himself, in the land of
Goshen (see xlvii. 11), that he might not perish in the still
remaining five years of famine. BHtfi : ver. 11, lit. to be
robbed of one's possessions, to be taken possession of by another,
from Ehj to take possession. — Vers. 12, 13. But the brethren
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAr. XLV. 16-88. 367
were so taken by surprise and overpowered by this unexpected
discovery, that to convince them of the reality of the whole
affair, Joseph was obliged to add, " Behold, your eyes see, and
the eyes of my brother Benjamin, that it is my mouth that
speaketh unto you. And tell my father all my glory in
Egypt, and all that ye have seen, and bring my father quickly
hither." — Vers. 14, 15. He then fell upon Benjamin's neck and
wept, and kissed all his brethren and wept on them, i.e. whilst
embracing them ; " and after that, hie brethren talked with him"
p 'nrw, : after Joseph by a triple assurance, that what they had
done was the leading of God for their own good, had dispelled
their fear of retribution, and, by embracing and kissing them
with tears, had sealed the truth and sincerity of his words.
Vers. 16-28. Invitation to Jacob to come into Egypt.
— Vers. 16 sqq. The report of the arrival of Joseph's brethren
soon found its way into the palace, and made so favourable an
impression upon Pharaoh and his courtiers, that the king sent a
message through Joseph to his brethren to come with their
father and their families {"your houses") into Egypt, saying
that he would give them " the good of the land of Egypt" and
they should eat " the fat of the land" 3«3, "the good," is not
the best part, but the good things (produce) of the land, as in
vers. 20, 23, xxiv. 10, 2 Kings viii. 9. 2?n fat, i.e. the finest pro-
ductions. — Vers. 19, 20. At the same time Pharaoh empowered
Joseph (" thou art commanded ") to give his brethren carriages
to take with them, in which to convey their children and wives
and their aged father, and recomnv nded them to leave then-
goods behind them in Canaan, for the good of all Egypt was at
their service. From time immemorial Egypt was rich in small,
two-wheeled carriages, which could be used even where there
were no roads (cf. chap. 1. 9, Ex. xiv. 6 sqq. with Isa. xxxvi. 9)
" Let not your eye look toith mourning (Dhn) at your goods ; " i.e.
do not trouble about the house-furniture which you are obliged
to leave behind. The good-will manifested in this invitation of
Pharaoh towards Jacob's family was to be attributed to the
feeling of gratitude to Joseph, and " is related circumstantially,
because this free and honourable invitation involved the right of
Israel to leave Egypt again without obstruction " (Delitzsch).
Vers. 21 sqq. The sons of Israel carried out the instructions
Digitized by VjOOQlC
368 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
of Joseph and the invitation of Pharaoh (vers. 25-27). Bat
Joseph not only sent carriages according to Pharaoh's directions,
and food for the journey, he also gave them presents, changes of
raiment, a suit for every one, and five suits for Benjamin, as
well as 300 shekels of silver, rmob niopn : change of clothes,
clothes to change ; i.e. dress clothes which were worn on special
occasions and frequently changed (Judg. siv. 12, 13, 19 ; 2
Kings v. 5). "And to his father he tent like these;" i.e. not
changes of clothes, but presents also, viz. ten asses " carrying
of the good of Egypt," and ten she-asses with corn and pro-
visions for the journey ; and sent them off with the injunction :
Wjrr?K, fifj 6py%e<rde (LXX.), " do not get angry by the way."
Placatus erat Joseph fratribus, simul eos admonet, ne quid tur-
barum moveant. Timendum enim erat, ne quisque se purgando
crimen transferre in alios studeret atque ita surgeret contentio
(Calvin). — Vers. 25-28. When they got back, and brought
word to their father, "Joseph is still living, yea ('31 an em-
phatic assurance, Ewald, § 3306) he is ruler in all the land of
Egypt, his heart stopped, for he believed them not;" i.e. his heart
did not beat at this joyful news, for he put no faith in what
they said. It was not till they told him all that Joseph had said,
and he saw the carriages that Joseph had sent, that " Hie spirit
of their father Jacob revived; and Israel said: It is enough!
Joseph my son is yet alive : I will go and see him before I die"
Observe the significant interchange of Jacob and Israel. When
once the crushed spirit of the old man was revived by the cer-
tainty that his son Joseph was still alive, Jacob was changed
into Israel, the " conqueror overcoming his grief at the previous
misconduct of his sons " (Fr. v. Meyer).
REMOVAL OF ISRAEL TO G08HEN IN EGYPT. — CHAP. XLVI.
Vers. 1-7. " So Israel took his journey (from Hebron, chap,
xxxvii. 14) witli all who belonged to him, and came to Beersheba."
There, on the border of Canaan, where Abraham and Isaac had
called upon the name of the Lord (xxi. 33, xxvi. 25), he offered
sacrifices to the God of his father Isaac, ut sibifirmum et ratum
esse testetur fasdus, quod Dens ipse cum Patribus pepigerat (Cal-
vin). Even though Jacob might see the ways of God in the
wonderful course of his son Joseph, and discern in the friendly
Digitized by CjOOQIC
CHAP. XLVI. 8-27. 369
invitation of Joseph and Pharaoh, combined with the famine
prevailing in Canaan, a divine direction to go into Egypt ; yet
this departure from the land of promise, in which his fathers
had lived as pilgrims, was a step which necessarily excited
serious thoughts in his mind as to his own future and that of
his family, and led him to commend himself and his follow-
ers to th» care of the faithful covenant God, whether in so
doing he thought of the revelation which Abram had received
(chap. xv. 13-16), or not. — Ver. 2. Here God appeared to him
in a vision of the night (nioo, an intensive plural), and gave
him, as once before on his flight from Canaan (xxviii. 12 sqq.),
the comforting promise, " / am ?Kn (the Mighty One), the God
of thy father : fear not to go down into Egypt ("Tr*!? for HT1D, as
in Ex. ii. 4 njrc for nin, cf. Ges. § 69, 3, Anm. 1); for ' I will
there make thee a great nation. I will go down toith thee into
Egypt, and I — bring thee up again also will J, and Joseph shall
close thine eyes." ripjTDj an inf. abs. appended emphatically
(as in chap. xxxi. 15) ; according to Ges. inf. Kal. — Vers. 5-7.
Strengthened by this promise, Jacob went into Egypt with
children and children's children, his sons driving their aged
father together with their wives and children in the carriages
sent by Pharaoh, and taking their flocks with all the possessions
that they had acquired in Canaan. 1
Vers. 8-27. The size of Jacob's family, which was to grow
into a great nation, is given here, with evident allusion to the
fulfilment of the divine promise with which he went into Egypt.
The list of names includes not merely the " sons of Israel" in
the stricter sense ; but, as is added immediately afterwards,
"Jacob and his sons" or, as the closing formula expresses it (ver.
27), u all the souls of tlie house of Jacob, who came into Egypt"
(rwan for ntja im, Ges. § 109), including the patriarch himself,
and Joseph with his two sons, who were born before Jacob's ar-
rival in Egypt. If we reckon these, the house of Jacob consisted
of 70 souls ; and apart from these, of 66, besides his sons' wives.
The sons are arranged according td the four mothers. Of LeaJi
' Such a scene as this, with the emigrants taking their goods laden upon
asses, and eren two children in panniers upon an ass's back, may bo seen
depicted upon a tomb at Beni Hassan, which might represent the immigra-
tion of Israel, although it cannot be directly connected with it. (See the
particulars in Hengstenberg, Egypt and the Books of Moses.)
Digitized by VjOOQlC
370 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
there are given 6 sons, 23 grandsons, 2 great-grandsons (sons of
Pharez, whereas Er and Onan, the sons of Judah who died in
Canaan, are not reckoned), and 1 daughter, Dinah, who re-
mained unmarried, and was therefore an independent member
of the house of Jacob; in all, therefore, 6 + 23 + 2 + 1 = 32,
or with Jacob, 33 souls. Of Zilpah, Leah's maid, there are
mentioned 2 sons, 11 grandsons, 2 great-grandsons, and 1
daughter (who is reckoned like Dinah, both here and Num.
xxvi. 46, for some special reason, which is not particularly de-
scribed) ; in all, 2 + 11 + 2 + 1 = 16 souls. Of Rachel, "Jacob's
(favourite) wife," 2 sons and 12 grandsons are named, of whom,
according to Num. xxvi. 40, two were great-grandsons, =14
souls ; and of Rachel's maid BiUiali, 2 sons and 5 grandsons =
7 souls. The whole number therefore was 33+16+14 + 7 =
70. 1 The wives of Jacob's sons are neither mentioned by name
nor reckoned, because the families of Israel were not founded
by them, but by their husbands alone. Nor is their parentage
given either here or anywhere else. It is merely casually that
one of the sons of Simeon is called the son of a Canaanitish
woman (ver. 10) ; from which it may be inferred that it was quite
an exceptional thing for the sons of Jacob to take their wives
from among the Canaanites, and that as a rule they were chosen
from their paternal relations in Mesopotamia ; besides whom,
there were also their other relations, the families of Ishmael,
Keturah, and Edom. Of the " daughters of Jacob " also, and
the " daughters of his sons," none are mentioned except Dinah
and Serah the daughter of Asher, because they were not the
founders of separate houses.
If we look more closely into the list itself, the first thing
which strikes us is that Pharez, one of the twin-sons of Judah,
who were not born till after the sale of Joseph, should already
have had two sons. Supposing that Judah's marriage to the
1 Instead of the number 70 given here, Ex. i. 5, and Deut. x. 22,
Stephen speaks of 75 (Acts vii. 14), according to the LXX., which has the
number 75 both here and Ex. i. 5, on account of the words which follow
the names of Manasseh and Ephraim in ver. 20 : iyhorro is viol M»»«tro-r„
ov( fctxst ainy fi vdKXaxT) q 2ip», to* Vlocx'P' Mettle ii iyimat ri» Tct-
>.««o. viol ii 'Etppxtfi ditXtpov tiateuarf SovroAicAft k*\ Taift. viol ii 2on-
■teiKaaft.- 'Ela/x: and which are interpolated by conjecture from chap. 1. 23,
and Num. xxvi. 29, 35, and 36 (38, 39, and 40), these three grandsons and
two great-grandsons of Joseph being reckoned in.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XLV1. 8-27. 371
daughter of Shuah the Canaanite occurred, notwithstanding
the reasons advanced to the contrary in chap, xxxviii., before the
sale of Joseph, and shortly after the return of Jacob to Canaan,
during the time of his sojourn at Shechem (xxxiii. 18), it can-
not have taken place more than five, or at the most six, years
before Joseph was sold; for Judah was only three years older
than Joseph, and was not more than 20 years old, therefore, at
the time of his sale. But even then there would not be more
than 28 years between Judah' s marriage and Jacob's removal to
Egypt; so that Pharez would only be about 11 years old, since
he could not have been born till about 17 years after Judah's
marriage, and at that age he could not have had two sons.
Judah, again, could not have taken four sons with him into
Egypt, since he had at the most only two sons a year before
their removal (xlii. 37) ; unless indeed we adopt the extremely
improbable hypothesis, that two other sons were born within
the space of 11 or 12 months, either as twins, or one after the
other. Still less could Benjamin, who was only 23 or 24 years
old at the time (vid. pp. 311 and 319), have had 10 sons already,
or, as Num. xxvi. 38-40 shows, eight sons and two grandsons.
From all this it necessarily follows, that in the list before us
grandsons and great-grandsons of Jacob are named who were
born afterwards in Egypt, and who, therefore, according to a
view which we frequently meet with in the Old Testament,
though strange to our modes of thought, came into Egypt in
lumbia patrum. That the list is really intended to be so under-
stood, is undoubtedly evident from a comparison of the " sons
of Israel " (ver. 8), whose names it gives, with the description
given in Num. xxvi. of the whole community of the sons of
Israel according to their fathers' houses, or their tribes and
families. In the account of the families of Israel at the time
of Moses, which is given there, we find, with slight deviations,
all the grandsons and great-grandsons of Jacob whose names
occur in this chapter, mentioned as the founders of the families,
into which the twelve tribes of Israel were subdivided in Moses'
days. The deviations are partly in form, partly in substance.
To the former belong the differences in particular names, which
are sometimes only different forms of the same name; e.g. Jemuel
and Zohar (ver. 10), for Nemuel and Zerah (Num. xxvi. 12, 13);
Ziphion and Arodi (ver. 16), for Zephon and Arod (Num. xxvi.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
372 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
15 and 17) ; Huppim (ver. 21) for Hupham (Num. xxvi. 39) ;
Ehi (ver. 21), an abbreviation of Ahiram (Num. xxvi. 38) :
sometimes different names of the same person ; viz. Ezbon (ver.
16) and Ozni (Num. xxvi. 16); Muppim (ver. 21) and Shupham
(Num. xxvi. 39) ; Hushim (ver. 23) and Shuham (Num. xxvi.
42). Among the differences in substance, the first to be noticed
is the fact, that in Num. xxvi. Simeon's son Ohad, Asher's son
Ishuah, and three of Benjamin's sons, Becher, Gera, and Rosh,
are missing from the founders of families, probably for no other
reason than that they either died childless, or did not leave a
sufficient number of children to form independent families.
With the exception of these, according to Num. xxvi., all the
grandsons and great-grandsons of Jacob mentioned in this chap-
ter were founders of families in existence in Moses' time. From
this it is obvious that our list is intended to contain, not merely
the sons and grandsons of Jacob, who were already born when
he went down to Egypt, but in addition to the sons, who were
the heads of the twelve tribes of the nation, all the grandsons
and great-grandsons who became the founders of mishpachotk,
i.e. of independent families, and who on that account took the
place or were advanced into the position of the grandsons of
Jacob, so far as the national organization was concerned.
On no other hypothesis can we explain the fact, that in the
time of Moses there was not one of the twelve tribes, except the
double tribe of Joseph, in which there were families existing,
that had descended from either grandsons or great-grandsons of
Jacob who are not already mentioned in this list. As it is quite
inconceivable that no more sons should have been born to Jacob's
sons after their removal into Egypt, so is it equally inconceiv-
able, that all the sons born in Egypt either died childless, or
founded no families. The rule by which the nation descending
from the sons of Jacob was divided into tribes and families
(mishpachotk) according to the order of birth was this, that
as the twelve sons founded the twelve tribes, so their sons, i.e.
Jacob's grandsons, were the founders of the families into which
the tribes were subdivided, unless these grandsons died without
leaving children, or did not leave a sufficient number of male
descendants to form independent families, or the natural rule
for the formation of tribes and families was set aside by other
events or causes. On this hypothesis we can also explain the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XLVI. 8-27. 373
other real differences between this list and Num. xxvi. ; viz. the
fact that, according to Num. xxvi. 40, two of the sons of Benja-
min mentioned in ver. 21,Naaman and Ard, were his grandsons,
sons of Belah ; and also the circumstance, that in ver. 20 only the
two sons of Joseph, who were already born when Jacob arrived
in Egypt, are mentioned, viz. Manasseh and Ephraim, and none
of the sons who were born to him afterwards (xlviii. 6). The
two grandsons of Benjamin could be reckoned among his sons
in our list, because they founded independent families just like
the sons. And of the sons of Joseph, Manasseh and Ephraim
alone could be admitted into our list, because they were elevated
above the sons born to Joseph afterwards, by the fact that shortly
before Jacob's death he adopted them as his own sons and thus
raised them to the rank of heads of tribes ; so that wherever
Joseph's descendants are reckoned as one tribe (e.g. Josh. xvi. 1,
4), Manasseh and Ephraim form the main divisions, or leading
families of the tribe of Joseph, the subdivisions of which were
founded partly by their brothers who were born afterwards, and
partly by their sons and grandsons. Consequently the omission
of the sons born afterwards, and the grandsons of Joseph, from
whom the families of the two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim, who
were elevated into tribes, descended, forms only an apparent
and not a real exception to the general rule, that this list
mentions all the grandsons of Jacob who founded the families of
the twelve tribes, without regard to the question whether they
were born before or after the removal of Jacob's house to Egypt,
since this distinction was of no importance to the main purpose
of our list. That this was the design of our list, is still further
confirmed by a comparison of Ex. i. 5 and Deut. x. 22, where
the seventy souls of the house of Jacob which went into Egypt
are said to constitute the seed which, under the blessing of the
Lord, had grown into the numerous people that Moses led out
of Egypt, to take possession of the land of promise. From this
point of view it was a natural thing to describe the seed of the
nation, which grew up in tribes and families, in such a way as to
give the germs and roots of all the tribes and families of the
whole nation; i.e. not merely the grandsons who were born before
the migration, but also the grandsons and great-grandsons who
were born in Egypt, and became founders of independent
families. By thus embracing all the founders of tribes and
Digitized by VjOOQlC
■v
374 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
families, the significant number 70 was obtained, in which the
number 7 (formed of the divine number 3, and the world number
4, as the seal of the covenant relation between God and Israel) is
multiplied by the number 10, as the seal of completeness, so as
to express the fact that these 70 souls comprehended the whole
of the nation of God. 1
Vers. 28-34. This list of the house of Jacob is followed by an
account of the arrival in Egypt. — Ver. 28. Jacob sent his son
Judah before him to Joseph, " to show (rfMrp) before him to
Goshen;" i.e. to obtain from Joseph the necessary instructions
as to the place of their settlement, and then to act as guide to
Goshen. — Ver. 29. As soon as they had arrived, Joseph had his
chariot made ready to go up to Goshen and meet his father (/W
applied to a journey from the interior to the desert or Canaan),
and "showed himself to him there (lit. he appeared to him; JW"0,
which is generally used only of the appearance of God, is selected
here to indicate the glory in which Joseph came to meet his
father) ; and fell upon his neck, continuing (lip) upon his neck
(i.e. in his embrace) weeping." — Ver. 30. Then Israel said to
Joseph : " Now (pVBn lit. this time) will I die, after I have seen
thy face, that thou (art) still alive."— Vers. 31, 32. But Joseph
told his brethren and his father's house (his family) that he
would go up to Pharaoh (JVV here used of going to the court, as
an ideal ascent), to announce the arrival of his relations, who
were TOpD ^JK " keepers of flocks," and had brought their sheep
and oxen and all their possessions with them. — Vers. 33, 34.
At the same time Joseph gave these instructions to his brethren,
in case Pharaoh should send for them and inquire about their
occupation : " Say, Thy servants have been keepers of cattle
from our youth even until now, we like our fathers ; that ye
may dwell in the land of Goshen ; for every shepherd is an
abomination of the Egyptians." This last remark formed part
of Joseph's words, and contained the reason why his brethren
should describe themselves to Pharaoh as shepherds from of
old, namely, that they might receive Goshen as their dwelling-
place, and that their national and religious independence might
1 This was the manner in which the earlier theologians solved the actual
difficulties connected with our list ; and this solution has been adopted and
defended against the objections offered to it by Hengstenbt r g (Disserta-
tions) and Kurtz (History of the Old Covenant).
Digitized by CjOOQIC
CHAP. XLVII. 1-12. 375
not be endangered by too close an intercourse with the Egyptians.
The dislike of the Egyptians to shepherds arose from the fact,
that the more completely the foundations of the Egyptian state
rested upon agriculture with its perfect organization, the more
did the Egyptians associate the idea of rudeness and barbarism
with the very name of a shepherd. This is not only attested in
various ways by the monuments, on which shepherds are con-
stantly depicted as lanky, withered, distorted, emaciated, and
sometimes almost ghostly figures (Graul, Reise 2, p. 171), but
is confirmed by ancient testimony. According to Herodotus
(2, 47), the swine-herds were the most despised ; but they were
associated with the cow-herds (fiovKokoi) in the seven castes of
the Egyptians (Herod. 2, 164), so that Diodorus Siculus (1, 74)
includes all herdsmen in one caste ; according to which the word
fiov/coXoi in Herodotus not only denotes cow-herds, but a potiori all
herdsmen, just as we find in the herds depicted upon the monu-
ments, sheep, goats, and rams introduced by thousands, along
with asses and horned cattle.
SETTLEMENT OP ISRAEL IN EGYPT ; THEIB PROSPEROUS CON-
DITION DURING THE TEARS OF FAMINE. — CHAP. XLVII. 1-27.
Vers. 1-12. When Joseph had announced to Pharaoh the
arrival of his relations in Goshen, he presented five out of the
whole number of his brethren (vn« nxpD ; on nxjj see chap. xix.
4) to the king. — Vers. 3 sqq. Pharaoh asked them about their
occupation, and according to Joseph's instructions they replied
that they were herdsmen (J^X ny*i, the singular of the predicate,
see Ges. § 147c), who had come to sojourn in the land ("nj, i.e.
to stay for a time), because the pasture for their flocks had failed
in the land of Canaan on account of the famine. The king
then empowered Joseph to give his father and his brethren a
dwelling (a^n) in the best part of the land, in the land of
Goshen, and, if he knew any brave men among them, to make
them rulers over the royal herds, which were kept, as we may
infer, in the land of Goshen, as being the best pasture-land. —
Vers. 7-9. Joseph then presented his father to Pharaoh , but
not till after the audience of his brothers had been followed by
the royal permission to settle, for which the old man, who was
bowed down with age, was not in a condition to sue. The pa-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
3Y6 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
triarch saluted the king with a blessing, and replied to his inquiry
as to his age, " The days of Oie years of my pilgrimage are 130
years ; few and sorrowful are the days of my life's years, and liave
not reached (the perfect in the presentiment of his approaching
end) the days of the life's years of my fathers in the days of their
pilgrimage." Jacob called his own life and that of his fathers a
pilgrimage (D^up), because they had not come into actual pos-
session of the promised land, but had been obliged all their life
long to wander about, unsettled and homeless, in the land pro-
mised to them for an inheritance, as in a strange land. This
pilgrimage was at the same time a figurative representation of
the inconstancy and weariness of the earthly life, in which man
does not attain to that true rest of peace with God and blessed
ness in His fellowship, for which he was created, and for which
therefore his soul is continually longing (cf. Ps. xxxix. 13, cxix.
19, 54; 1 Chron. xxix. 15). The apostle, therefore, could
justly regard these words as a declaration of the longing of the
patriarchs for the eternal rest of their heavenly fatherland (Heb.
xi. 13-16). So also Jacob's life was little (B?p) and evil (».«.
full of toil and trouble) in comparison with the life of his fathers.
For Abraham lived to be 175 years old, and Isaac 180 ; and
neither of them had led a life so agitated, so full of distress and
dangers, of tribulation and anguish, as Jacob had from his first
flight to Haran up to the time of his removal to Egypt.
Ver. 10. After this probably short interview, of which, how-
ever, only the leading incidents are given, Jacob left the king
with a blessing. — Ver. 11. Joseph assigned to his father and his
brethren, according to Pharaoh's command, a possession ( n }n*)
for a dwelling-place in the best part of Egypt, the land of
RaSmses, and provided them with bread, u according to tlie mouth
of the little ones," i.e. according to the necessities of each family,
answering to the larger or smaller number of their children.
?373 with a double accusative (Ges. § 139). The settlement of
the Israelites is called the land of RaSmses (DDDjn, in pause
DDOjn Ex. i. 11), instead of Goshen, either because the province
of Goshen (JW/t, LXX.) is indicated by the name of its former
capital RaSmses (i.e. HeroopoUs, on the site or in the immediate
neighbourhood of the modern Abu Keisheib, in Wady Tumilat
(vid. Ex. i. 11), or because Israel settled in the vicinity of
RaSmses. The district of Goshen is to be sought in the modern
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XLVII. 18-27. 377
province of el Sharkiyek (i.e. the eastern), on the east side of
the Nile, towards Arabia, still the most fertile and productive
province of Egypt (cf. Robinson, Pal. i. 78, 79). For Goshen
was bounded on the east by the desert of Arabia Petrsea, which
stretches away to Philistia (Ex. xiii. 17, cf. 1 Chron. vii. 21)
and is called Teakfi 'Apafitas in the Septuagint in consequence
(chap. xlv. 10, xlvi. 34), and must have extended westwards to
the Nile, since the Israelites had an abundance of fish (Num.
xi. 5). It probably skirted the Tanitic arm of the Nile, as the
fields of Zoan, i.e. Tunis, are said to have been the scene of the
mighty acts of God in Egypt (Ps. lxxviii. 12, 43, cf. Num. xiii.
22). In this province Joseph assigned his relations settlements
near to himself (xlv. 10), from which they could quickly and
easily communicate with one another (xlvi. 28, xlviii. 1 sqq.).
Whether he lived at Raemses or not, cannot be determined, just
because the residence of the Pharaoh of that time is not known,
and the notion that it was at Memphis is only based upon utterly
uncertain combinations relating to the Hyksos.
Vers. 13-27. To make the extent of the benefit conferred
by Joseph upon his family, in providing them with the necessary
supplies during the years of famine, all the more apparent, a
description is given of the distress into which the inhabitants of
Egypt and Canaan were plunged by the continuance of the
famine. — Ver. 13. The land of Egypt and the land of Canaan
were exhausted with hunger. — iWn : from nrp = r\»b, to languish,
to be exhausted, only occurring again in Prov. xxvi. 18, Hithp.
in a secondary sense. — Ver. 14. All the money in both countries
was paid in to Joseph for the purchase of corn, and deposited by
him in Pharaoh's house, i.e. the royal treasury. — Vers. 15 sqq.
When the money was exhausted, the Egyptians all came to
Joseph with the petition : u Give us bread, why should we die
before thee" (i.e. so that thou shouldst see us die, when in reality
thou canst support us) ? Joseph then offered to accept their
cattle in payment ; and they brought him their herds, in return
for which he provided them that year with bread. ?ru : Piel to
lead, with the secondary meaning, to care for (Ps. xxiii. 2 ; Isa.
xl. 11, etc.) ; hence the signification here, " to maintain." — Vers.
18, 19. When that year had passed (pim, as in Ps. cii. 28, to
denote the termination of the year), they came again " the second
year" (i.e. after the money was gone, not the second of the seven
PENT. — VOL. I. 2 B
Digitized by VjOOQlC
378 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
years of famine) and said : " We cannot hide it from my lord
C^iK, a title similar to your majesty), but the money is all gone,
and the cattle have come to my lord ; we have nothing left to offer
to my lord but our bodies and our land." OK '3 is an intensified
'3 following a negation (" but," as in chap, xxxii. 29, etc.), and
is to be understood elliptically ; lit. u for if," sc. we would speak
openly ; not " that because," for the causal signification of DK is
not established. DPI with ?K is constructio prcegnans : " completed
to my lord," i.e. completely handed over to my lord. '?.?? " 1 ¥*^
is the same : " left before my lord," i.e. for us to lay before, or
offer to my lord. " Why should we die before thine eyes, we and
our land! Buy us and our land for bread, that we may be, we
and our land, servants (subject) to Pharaoh ; and give seed, that
we may live and not die, and the land become not desolate." In
the first clause row is transferred per zeugma to the land ; in the
last, the word Dtfn is used to describe the destruction of the land.
The form DOT is the same as ->p$ in chap. xvi. 4. — Vers. 20, 21.
Thus Joseph secured the possession of the whole land to Pharaoh
by purchase, and " the people he removed to cities, from one end of
the land of Egypt to the other" D*1JJ?, not from one city to another,
but " according to (= Kara) the cities ;" so that he distributed
the population of the whole land according to the cities in which
the corn was housed, placing them partly in the cities them-
selves, and partly in the immediate neighbourhood. — Ver. 22.
The lands of the priests Joseph did not buy, " for the priests
had an allowance from Pharaoh, and ate their allowance, which
Pharaoh gave them; therefore iliey sold not their lander ph a
fixed allowance of food, as in Prov. xxx. 8 ; Ezek. xvi. 27. This
allowance was granted by Pharaoh probably only during the
years of famine; in any case it was an arrangement which
ceased when the possessions of the priests sufficed for their need,
since, according to Diod. Sic. i. 73, the priests provided the sacri-
fices and the support of both themselves and their servants from
the revenue of their lands ; and with this Herodotus also agrees
(2, 37). — Vers. 23 sqq. Then Joseph said to the people : " Be-
hold I have bought you this day and your land for Pharaoh; there
have ye (KH only found in Ezek. xvi. 43 and Dan. ii. 43) seed, and
sow t/ie land; and of the produce ye shall give the fifth for Pharaoh,
and four parts (TfV, as in chap, xliii. 34) shall belong to you for
seed, and for the support of yourselves, your families and children."
Digitized by CjOOQIC
CHAP. XLVII. 18-J7. 379
The people agreed to this ; and the writer adds (ver. 26), it be-
came a law, in existence to this day (his own time), " with regard
to the land of Egypt for Pharaoh with reference to the fifth,"
i.e. that the fifth of the produce of the land should be paid to
Pharaoh.
Profane writers have given at least an indirect support to
the reality of this political reform of Joseph's. Herodotus, for
example (2, 109), states that king Sesostris divided the land
among the Egyptians, giving every one a square piece of the
same size as his hereditary possession (icXfjpov), and derived his
own revenue from a yearly tax upon them. JDiod. Sic. (1, 73),
again, says that all the land in Egypt belonged either to the
priests, to the king, or to the warriors; and Strabo (xvii. p.
787), that the fanners and traders held rateable land, so that
the peasants were not landowners. On the monuments, too,
the kings, priests, and warriors only are represented as having
landed property (cf. Wilkinson, Manners and Customs i. 263).
The biblical account says nothing about the exemption of the
warriors from taxation and their possession of land, for that was
a later arrangement. According to Herod. 2, 168, every warrior
had received from former kings, as an honourable payment,
twelve choice fields (apovpeu) free from taxation, but they were
taken away by the Hephaesto-priest Sethos, a contemporary of
Hezekiah, when he ascended the throne {Herod. 2, 141). But
when Herodotus and Diodorus Sic. attribute to Sesostris the
division of the land into 36 voftol, and the letting of these for a
yearly payment; these comparatively recent accounts simply
transfer the arrangement, which was actually made by Joseph,
to a half-mythical king, to whom the later legends ascribed all
the greater deeds and more important measures of the early
Pharaohs. And so far as Joseph's arrangement itself was
concerned, not only had he the good of the people and the inte-
rests of the king in view, but the people themselves accepted it
as a favour, inasmuch as in a land where the produce was regu-
larly thirty-fold, the cession of a fifth could not be an oppressive
burden. And it is probable that Joseph not only turned the
temporary distress to account by raising the king into the posi
tion of sole possessor of the land, with the exception of that of
the priests, and bringing the people into a condition of feudal
dependence upon him, but had also a still more comprehensive
Digitized by VjOOQlC
380 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
object in view ; viz. to secure the population against the danger
of starvation in case the crops should fail at any future time,
not only by dividing the arable land in equal proportions among
the people generally, but, as has been conjectured, by laying the
foundation for a system of cultivation regulated by laws and
watched over by the state, and possibly also by commencing a
system of artificial irrigation by means of canals, for the pur-
pose of conveying the fertilizing water of the Nile as uniformly
as possible to all parts of the land. (An explanation of this
system is given by Hengstenberg in his Dissertations, from the
Correspondance d' Orient par Michaud, etc.) To mention either
these or any other plans of a similar kind, did not come within
the scope of the book of Genesis, which restricts itself, in ac-
cordance with its purely religious intention, to a description of
the way in which, during the years of famine, Joseph proved
himself to both the king and people of Egypt to be the true
support of the land, so that in him Israel already became a
saviour of the Gentiles. The measures taken by Joseph are
thus circumstantially described, partly because the relation into
which the Egyptians were brought to their visible king bore a
typical resemblance to the relation in which the Israelites were
placed by the Mosaic constitution to Jehovah, their God-King,
since they also had to give a double tenth, i.e. the fifth of the
produce of their lands, and were in reality only farmers of the
soil which Jehovah had given them in Canaan for a posses-
sion, so that they could not part with their hereditary possessions
in perpetuity (Lev. xxv. 23) ; and partly also because Joseph's
conduct exhibited in type how God entrusts His servants with
the good things of this earth, in order that they may use them
not only for the preservation of the lives of individuals and
nations, but also for the promotion of the purposes of His king-
dom. For, as is stated in conclusion in ver. 27, not only did
Joseph preserve the lives of the Egyptians, for which they ex-
pressed their acknowledgments (ver. 25), but under his adminis-
tration the house of Israel was able, without suffering any
privations, or being brought into a relation of dependence
towards Pharaoh, to dwell in the land of Goshen, to establish
itself there (TTJW as in chap, xxxiv. 10), and to become fruitful
and multiply.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XLVn. 28-31, XLVIII. 1-7. 381
JACOB 8 LAST WISHES. — CHAP. XLVII. 28-31, AND XLVIII.
Vers. 28—31. Jacob lived in Egypt for 17 years. He then
sent for Joseph, as he felt that his death was approaching ; and
having requested him, as a mark of love and faithfulness, not to
bury him in Egypt, but near his fathers in Canaan, he made
him assure him on oath (by putting his hand under his hip, vid.
p. 257) that his wishes should be fulfilled. When Joseph had
taken this oath, " Israel bowed (in worship) upon the bed" 8 head"
He had talked with Joseph while sitting upon the bed; and
when Joseph had promised to fulfil his wish, he turned towards
the head of the bed, so as to lie with his face upon the bed, and
thus worshipped God, thanking Him for granting his wish,
which sprang from living faith in the promises of God ; just as
David also worshipped upon his bed (1 Kings i. 47, 48). The
Vulgate rendering is correct : adoravit Deum conversus ad lectuli
caput. That of the LXX., on the contrary, is trpoo-e/cvvr/a-ep
'Io-parfk eirl to atcpov Trjs pdfib'ov avrov (i.e. n ??f?); and the
Syriac and Itala have the same (cf. Heb. xi. 21). But no fitting
sense can be obtained from this rendering, unless we think of the
staff with which Jacob had gone through life, and, taking avrov
therefore in the sense of avrov, assume that Jacob made use
of the staff to enable him to sit upright in bed, and so prayed,
bent upon or over it, though even then the expression nt3Dn tfto
remains a strange one; so that unquestionably this rendering
arose from a false reading of nDon, and is not proved to be cor-
rect by the quotation in Heb. xi. 21. "Adduxit enim LXX. In-
terpr. versionem Apostolus, quod ea turn usitata esset, non quod
lectionem Mam prwferendam judicaret (Calovii Bibl. illustr. ad
h. 1.).
Chap, xlviii. 1-7. Adoption op Joseph's sons. — Vers. 1,
2. After these events, i.e. not long after Jacob's arrangements
for his burial, it was told to Joseph (iDtfa "one said," cf. ver. 2)
that his father was taken ill ; whereupon Joseph went to him
with his two sons, Manasseh and Ephraim, who were then 18 or
20 years old. On his arrival being announced to Jacob, Israel
made himself strong (collected his strength), and sat up on his
bed. The change of names is as significant here as in chap. xlv.
27, 28. Jacob, enfeebled with age, gathered up his strength for
Digitized by VjOOQlC
382 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
a work, which he was about to perform as Israel, the bearer of
the grace of the promise. — Vers. 3 sqq. Referring to the promise
which the Almighty God had given him at Bethel (xxxv. 10 sqq.
cf. xxviii. 13 sqq.), Israel said to Joseph (ver. 5) : "And now thy
two sons, which were born to thee in the land of Egypt, until (before)
I came to thee into Egypt . . .let them be mine; Ephraim and Ma-
nasseh, like Reuben and Simeon (my first and second born), let them
be mine." The promise which Jacob had received empowered the
patriarch to adopt the sons of Joseph in the place of children.
Since the Almighty God had promised him the increase of his
seed into a multitude of peoples, and Canaan as an eternal pos-
session to that seed, he could so incorporate into the number of
his descendants the two sons of Joseph who were born in Egypt
before his arrival, and therefore outside the range of his house,
that they should receive an equal share in the promised inherit-
ance with his own eldest sons. But this privilege was to be re-
stricted to the two first-born sons of Joseph. " Tliy descendants"
he proceeds in ver. 6, " which thou hast begotten since them, shall
be thine; by the name of their brethren shall they be called in their
inheritance;" i.e. they shall not form tribes of their own with a
separate inheritance, but shall be reckoned as belonging to
Ephraim and Manasseh, and receive their possessions among
these tribes, and in their inheritance. These other sons of
Joseph are not mentioned anywhere; but their descendants are
at any rate included in the families of Ephraim and Manasseh
mentioned in Num. xxvi. 28-37 ; 1 Chron. vii. 14-29. By this
adoption of his two eldest sons, Joseph was placed in the posi-
tion of the first-born, so far as the inheritance was concerned
(1 Chron v. 2). Joseph's mother, who had died so early, was
also honoured thereby. And this explains the allusion made by
Jacob in ver. 7 to his beloved Rachel, the wife of his affections,
and to her death — how she died by his side (??), on his return
from Padan (for Padan-Aram, the only place in which it is so
called, cf. xxv. 20), without living to see her first-born exalted
to the position of a saviour to the whole house of Israel
Vers. 8-22. The blessing of Ephraim and Manasseh.
— Vers. 8 sqq. Jacob now for the first time caught sight of
Joseph's sons, who had come with him, and inquired who they
were ; for u the eyes of Israel were heavy (dim) with age, so that
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XLVIIL 8-22. 383
he could not see well" (ver. 10). The feeble old man, too, may
not have seen the youths for some years, so that he did not recog-
nise them again. On Joseph's answering, " My sons whom God
hath given me here" he replied, "Bring them to me then (W~Dnj3),
that I may bless them;" and he kissed and embraced them, when
Joseph had brought them near, expressing his joy, that whereas
he never expected to see Joseph's face again, God had per-
mitted him to see his seed. nJO for JliK"j, like ^JJ (xxxi. 28).
??B : to decide ; here, to judge, to think. — Vers. 12, 13. Joseph
then, in order to prepare his sons for the reception of the bless-
ing, brought them from between the knees of Israel, who was
sitting with the youths between his knees and embracing them,
and having prostrated himself with his face to the earth, he
came up to his father again, with Ephraim the younger on his
right hand, and Manasseh the elder on the left, so that Ephraim
stood at Jacob's right hand, and Manasseh at his left. — Vers.
14, 15. The patriarch then stretched out his right hand and laid
it upon Ephraim' s head, and placed his left upon the head of
Manasseh (crossing his arms therefore), to bless Joseph in his
sons. " Guiding his hands wittingly ; " i.e. he placed his hands
in this manner intentionally. Laying on the hand, which is
mentioned here for the first time in the Scriptures, was a sym-
bolical sign, by which the person acting transferred to another a
spiritual good, a snpersensual power or gift ; it occurs elsewhere
in connection with dedication to an office (Num. zxvii. 18, 23 ;
Deut. xxxiv. 9; Matt. xix. 13; Acts vi. 6, viii. 17, etc), with the
sacrifices, and with the cures performed by Christ and the
apostles. By the imposition of hands, Jacob transferred to
Joseph in his sons the blessing which he implored for them from
his own and his father's God : " The God {Ha-Elohim) before
whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac did walk, the God (Ha-
JElohim) who hatJt fed me (led and provided for me with a
shepherd's faithfulness, Ps. xxiii. 1, xxviii. 9) from my existence
up to this day, tlie Angel which redeemed me from all evil, bless the
lads." This triple reference to God, in which the Angel who is
placed on an equality with Ha-Elohim cannot possibly be a
created angel, but must be the " Angel of God," i.e. God mani-
fested in the form of the Angel of Jehovah, or the " Angel of
His face" (Isa. lxiii. 9), contains a foreshadowing of the Trinity,
though only God and the Angel are distinguished, not three
Digitized by VjOOQlC
384 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
persons of the divine nature. The God before whom Abraham
and Isaac walked, had proved Himself to Jacob to be " the God
which fed" and " the Angel which redeemed," i.e. according to
the more fully developed revelation of the New Testament, o 0eo?
and o X0709, Shepherd and Redeemer. By the singular TO})
(bless, benedicat) the triple mention of God is resolved into the
unity of the divine nature. Non dicit (Jakob) benedicant, plu-
raliter, nee repetit sed conjungit in uno opere benedicendi tree per-
sonas, Deum Patrem, Deutn pastorem et Angelum. Sunt igitur
hi tres unus Dene et unus benedietor. Idem opus facit Angelus
quod pastor et Deus Patrum (Luther). u Let my name be named
on them, and the names of my fathers Abraham and Isaac," t.«.
not, " they shall bear my name and my fathers'," " dicanturjilii
mei et patrum meorum, licet ex te nati sint " (Rosenm.), which
would only be another way of acknowledging his adoption of
them, " nota adoptionis " (Calvin) ; for as the simple mention of
adoption is unsuitable to such a blessing, so the words appended,
u and according to the name of my fathers Abraham and Isaac"
are still less suitable as a periphrasis for adoption. The thought
is rather : the true nature of the patriarchs shall be discerned
and acknowledged in Ephraim and Manasseh ; in them shall
those blessings of grace and salvation be renewed, which Jacob
and his fathers Isaac and Abraham received from God. The
name expressed the nature, and " being called" is equivalent to
" being, and being recognised by what one is." The salvation
promised to the patriarchs related primarily to the multiplication
into a great nation, and the possession of Canaan. Hence
Jacob proceeds : " and let them increase into a multitude in the
midst of the land." n«: air. Xey., " to increase," from which the
name H, a fish, is derived, on account of the remarkable rapidity
with which they multiply. — Vers. 17-19. When Joseph observed
his father placing his right hand upon the head of Ephraim, the
younger son, he laid hold of it to put it upon Manasseh's head,
telling his father at the same time that he was the first-born ;
but Jacob replied, " / know, my son, I know : he also (Manasseh)
will become a nation, and will become great, yet (DJ*W as in xxviii.
19) his younger brother will become greater than he, and his seed-
will become the fulness of nations" This blessing began to be
fid filled from the time of the Judges,, when the tribe of Ephraim
so increased in extent and power, that it took the lead of the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XLVIII. 8-22. 38o
northern tribes and became the head of the ten tribes, and its
name acquired equal importance with the name Israel, whereas
under Moses, Manasseh had numbered 20,000 more than
Ephraim (Num. xxvi. 34 and 37). As a result of the promises
received from God, the blessing was not merely a pious wish,
but the actual bestowal of a blessing of prophetic significance
and force. — In ver. 20 the writer sums up the entire act of bless-
ing in the words of the patriarch : " In thee (i.e. Joseph) will
Israel (as a nation) bless, saying : God make thee as Ephraim
and Manasseh " (i.e. Joseph shall be so blessed in his two sons,
that their blessing will become a standing form of benediction in
Israel) ; " and thus he placed Ephraim before Manasseh" viz. in
the position of his hands and the terms of the blessing. Lastly,
(ver. 21) Israel expressed to Joseph his firm faith in the promise,
that God would bring back his descendants after his deatli into
the land of their fathers (Canaan), and assigned to him a double
portion in the promised land, the conquest of which passed be-
fore his prophetic glance as already accomplished, in order to
insure for the future the inheritance of the adopted sons of
Joseph. " I give thee one ridge of land above thy brethren " (i.e.
above what thy brethren receive, each as a single tribe), " which
I take from the hand of the Amorites with my sword and bow" (i.e.
by force of arms). As the perfect is used prophetically, trans-
posing the future to the present as being already accomplished,
so the words ^ing? "lew must also be understood prophetically, as
denoting that Jacob would wrest the land from the Amorites,
not in his own person, but in that of his posterity. 1 The words
cannot refer to the purchase of the piece of ground at Shechem
(xxxiii. 19), for a purchase could not possibly be called a con-
quest by sword and bow ; and still less to the crime committed
by the sons of Jacob against the inhabitants of Shechem, when
they plundered the town (xxxiv. 25 sqq.), for Jacob could not
1 There is no force in Kurtz's objection, that this gift did not apply to
Joseph as the father of Ephraim and Manasseh, but to Joseph personally ;
for it rests upon the erroneous assumption, that Jacob separated Joseph
from his sons by their adoption. But there is not a word to that effect in
ver. 6, and the very opposite in ver. 15, viz. that Jacob blessed Joseph in
Ephraim and Manasseh. Heim's conjecture, which Kurtz approves, that by
the land given to Joseph we are to understand the high land of Gilead,
which Jacob had conquered from the Amorites, needs no refutation, for it
is purely imaginary.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
386 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
possibly have attributed to himself a deed for which he had
pronounced a curse upon Simeon and Levi (xlix. 6, 7), not to
mention the fact, that the plundering of Shechem was not
followed in this instance by the possession of the city, but by
the removal of Jacob from the neighbourhood. "Moreover,
any conquest of territory would have been entirely at variance
with the character of the patriarchal history, which consisted in
the renunciation of all reliance upon human power, and a be-
lieving, devoted trust in the God of the promises" (I)elitesch).
The land, which the patriarchs desired to obtain in Canaan,
they procured not by force of arms, but by legal purchase (cf.
chap. xxiv. and xxxiii. 19). It was to be very different in the
future, when the iniquity of the Amorites was full (xv. 16).
But Jacob called the inheritance, which Joseph was to have in
excess of his brethren, D2t? (/it. shoulder, or more properly nape,
neck ; here figuratively a ridge, or tract of land), as a play upon
the word Shechem, because he regarded the piece of land pur-
chased at Shechem as a pledge of the future possession of the
whole land. In the piece purchased there, the bones of Joseph
were buried, after the conquest of Canaan (Josh. xxiv. 32.) ; and
this was understood in future times, as though Jacob had pre-
sented the piece of ground to Joseph (vid. John iv. 5).
Jacob's blessing and death. — chap. xlix.
Vers. 1-28. The blessing. — Vers. 1, 2. When Jacob had
adopted and blessed the two sons of Joseph, he called his twelve
sons, to make known to them his spiritual bequest In an ele-
vated and solemn tone he said, " Gather yourselves together, that
J may tell you that which shall befall you (*"]?? for nnj^, as in
chap. xlii. 4, 38) at the end of the days! Gather yourselves
together and hear, ye sons of Jacob, and hearken unto Israel your
father /" The last address of Jacob-Israel to his twelve sons,
which these words introduce, is designated by the historian
(ver. 28) "the blessing," with which "their father blessed them,
every one according to his blessing." This blessing is at the
same time a prophecy. " Every superior and significant life be-
comes prophetic at its close" (Ziegler). But this was especially
the case with the lives of the patriarchs, which were filled and
sustained by the promises and revelations of God. As Isaac in
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. 3XIX. 1-88. 387
his blessing (chap, xxvii.) pointed out prophetically to his two
sons, by virtue of divine illumination, the future history of their
f amities ; " so Jacob, while blessing the twelve, pictured in grand
outlines the lineamenta of the future history of the future nation "
(Ziegler). The groundwork of his prophecy was supplied partly
by the natural character of his twelve sons, and partly by the
divine promise which had been given by the Lord to him and to
his fathers Abraham and Isaac, and that not merely in these two
points, the numerous increase of their seed and the possession of
Canaan, but in its entire scope, by which Israel had been ap-
pointed to be the recipient and medium of salvation for all na-
tions. On this foundation the Spirit of God revealed to the
dying patriarch Israel the future history of his seed, so that
he discerned in the characters of his sons the future develop-
ment of the tribes proceeding from them, and with prophetic
clearness assigned to each of them its position and importance
in the nation into which they were to expand in the promised in-
heritance. Thus he predicted to the sons what would happen to
them " in the last days," liL " at the end of the days " (ev f itrya-
rmv T&rv qfiep&v, LXX.), and not merely at some future time,
mrw, the opposite of n'BW, signifies the end in contrast with
the beginning (Dent. xi. 12 ; Isa. xlvi. 10) ; hence DOT mriK in
prophetic language denoted, not the future generally, bat the
last future (see Hengstenberg 's History of Balaam, pp. 465-467,
transl.), the Messianic age of consummation (Isa. ii, 2 ; Ezek.
xxxviii. 8, 16 ; Jer. xxx. 24, xlviii. 47, xlix. 39, etc. : so also
Num. xxiv. 14; Deut. iv. 30), like tV iaj(aTov r&v rjnep&v (2
Pet. hi. 3; Heb. i. 2), or h> rat? laypnawi r/fiepaR (Acts ii.
17 ; 2 Tim. iii. 1). But we must not restrict " the end of the
days" to the extreme point of the time of completion of the Mes-
sianic kingdom ; it embraces " the whole history of the comple-
tion which underlies the present period of growth," or " the future
as bringing the work of God to its ultimate completion, though
modified according to the particular stage to which the work of
God had advanced in any particular age, the range of vision
opened to that age, and the consequent horizon of the prophet,
which, though not absolutely dependent upon it, was to a certain
extent regulated by it" (Delitzsch).
For the patriarch, who, with his pilgrim-life, had been obliged
in the very evening of his days to leave the soil of the promised
Digitized by VjOOQlC
388 THE FIBST BOOK OF MOSES.
land and seek a refuge for himself and bis house in Egypt, the
final future, with its realization of the promises of God, com-
menced as soon as the promised land was in the possession of the
twelve tribes descended from his sons. He had already before
his eyes, in his twelve sons with their children and children's
children, the first beginnings of the multiplication of his seed
into a great nation. Moreover, on his departure from Canaan
he had received the promise, that the God of his fathers would
make him into a great nation, and lead him up again to Canaan
(xlvi. 3, 4). To the fulfilment of this promise his thoughts and
hopes, his longings and wishes, were all directed. This consti-
tuted the firm foundation, though by no means the sole and ex-
clusive purport, of his words of blessing. The fact was not, as
Baumgarten and Kurtz suppose, that Jacob regarded the time
of Joshua as that of the completion ; that for him the end was
nothing more than the possession of the promised land by his
seed as the promised nation, so that all the promises pointed to
this, and nothing beyond it was either affirmed or hinted at.
Not a single utterance announces the capture of the promised
land ; not a single one points specially to the time of Joshua.
On the contrary, Jacob presupposes not only the increase of his
sons into powerful tribes, but also the conquest of Canaan, as
already fulfilled ; foretells to his sons, whom he sees in spirit as
populous tribes, growth and prosperity on the soil in their pos-
session ; and dilates upon their relation to one another in Canaan
and to the nations round about, even to the time of their final
subjection to the peaceful sway of Him, from whom the sceptre
of Judah shall never depart. The ultimate future of the patri-
archal blessing, therefore, extends to the ultimate fulfilment of
the divine promises — that is to say, to the completion of the
kingdom of God. The enlightened seer's-eye of the patriarch
surveyed, " as though upon a canvas painted without perspec-
tive," the entire development of Israel from its first foundation
as the nation and kingdom of God till its completion under the
rule of the Prince of Peace, whom the nations would serve in
willing obedience ; and beheld the twelve tribes spreading them-
selves out, each in his inheritance, successfully resisting their
enemies, and finding rest and full satisfaction in the enjoyment
of the blessings of Canaan.
It is in this vision of the future condition of his sons as
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XLIX. 8, 4. 389
grown into tribes that the prophetic character of the blessing
consists ; not in the prediction of particular historical events, all
of which, on the contrary, with the exception of the prophecy
of Shiloh, fall into the background behind the purely ideal por-
traiture of the peculiarities of the different tribes. The blessing
gives, in short sayings full of bold and thoroughly original pic-
tures, only general outlines of a prophetic character, which are to
receive their definite concrete form from the historical develop-
ment of the tribes in the future ; and throughout it possesses
both in form and substance a certain antique stamp, in which
its genuineness is unmistakeably apparent. Every attack upon
its genuineness has really proceeded from an a priori denial of
all supernatural prophecies, and has been sustained by such mis-
interpretations as the introduction of special historical allusions,
for the purpose of stamping it as a vaticinia ex eventu, and by
other untenable assertions and assumptions ; such, for example,
as that people do not make poetry at so advanced an age or in
the immediate prospect of death, or that the transmission of such
an oration word for word down to the time of Moses is utterly
inconceivable, — objections the emptiness of which has been de-
monstrated in Hengstenberg , s Christology i. p. 76 (transl.) by
copious citations from the history of the early Arabic poetry.
Vers. 3, 4. Reuben, my first-born thou, my might and first-
fruit of my strength ; pre-eminence in dignity and pre-eminence in
power. — As the first-born, the first sprout of the full virile power
of Jacob, Reuben, according to natural right, was entitled to the
first rank among his brethren, the leadership of the tribes, and a
double share of the inheritance (xxvii. 29 ; Deut. xxi. 17). (pxty :
elevation, the dignity of the chieftainship ; W, the earlier mode
of pronouncing ty, the authority of the first-born.) But Reu-
ben had forfeited this prerogative. " Effervescence like water —
thou shalt have no preference ; for thou didst ascend thy father's
marriage-bed: tlien hast ilwu desecrated; my couch has he as-
cended." W?B : Ut. the boiling over of water, figuratively, the
excitement of lust; hence the verb is used in Judg. ix. 4, Zeph.
iii. 4, for frivolity and insolent pride. With this predicate Jacob
describes the moral character of Reuben ; and the noun is stronger
than the verb nine of the Samaritan, and njnriK or nymK effer-
buistif astuasti of the Sam. Vers., i^v^purai of the LXX., and
Digitized by VjOOQlC
890 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
vTrep^ia-wi of Symm. ">nta is to be explained by "inj : have no
pre-eminence. His crime was, lying with Bilhah, his father's
concubine (xxxv. 22). Jv?n is used absolutely : desecrated hast
thou, sc. what should have been sacred to thee (cf. Lev. xviii. 8).
From this wickedness the injured father turns away with indig-
nation, and passes to the third person as he repeats the words,
" my couch he has ascended." By the withdrawal of the rank
belonging to the first-born, Reuben lost the leadership in Israel ;
so that his tribe attained to no position of influence in the na-
tion (compare the blessing of Moses in Deut. xxxiii. 6). The
leadership was transferred to Judah, the double portion to
Joseph (1 Chron. v. 1, 2), by which, so far as the inheritance
was concerned, the first-born of the beloved Rachel took the
place of the first-born of the slighted Leah ; not, however, ac-
cording to the subjective will of the father, which is condemned
in Deut. xxi. 15 sqq., but according to the leading of God, by
which Joseph had been raised above his brethren, but without
the chieftainship being accorded to him.
Vers. 5-7. " Simeon and Levi are brethren :" emphatically
brethren in the full sense of the word ; not merely as having the
same parents, but in their modes of thought and action. " Wea-
pons of wickedness are their swords'' The ewraf Xey. T130 is
rendered by Luther, etc., weapons or swords, from "R3=rn3, to
dig, dig through, pierce : not connected with fiayaipa. L. de
Dieu and others follow the Arabic and JEthiopic versions :
"plans;" but Don 73, utensils, or instruments, of wickedness,
does not accord with this. Such wickedness had the two brothers
committed upon the inhabitants of Shechem (xxxiv. 25 sqq.),
that Jacob would have no fellowship with it. " Into their coun-
sel come not, my soul; with tJieir assembly let not my honour
unite." "tfD, a council, or deliberative consessus. "inn, imperf.
of irp ; ^33, like Ps. vii. 6, xvi. 9, etc., of the soul as the noblest
part of man, the centre of his personality as the image of God.
" For in their wrath have they slain men, and in their wantonness
houghed oxen." The singular nouns E*K and "\W, in the sense of
indefinite generality, are to be regarded as general rather than
singular, especially as the plural form of both is rarely met
with ; of B*K, only in Ps. cxli. 4, Prov. viii. 4, and Isa. liii. 3 ; of
"rie s — D'Tt?, only in Hos. xii. 12. Jftn : inclination, here in a bad
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. \T.TX. fr-7. 391
sense, wantonness. IfW : vevpo/covrelv, to sever the houghs (ten-
dons of the hind feet), — a process hy which animals were not
merely lamed, but rendered useless, since the tendon once severed
could never be healed again, whilst as a rule the arteries were
not cut so as to cause the animal to bleed to death (cf. Josh. ad.
6, 9 ; 2 Sam. viii. 4). In chap, xxxiv. 28 it is merely stated
that the cattle of the Shechemites were carried off, not that they
were lamed. But the one is so far from excluding the other, that
it rather includes it in such a case as this, where the sons of
Jacob were more concerned about revenge than booty. Jacob
mentions the latter only, because it was this which most strik-
ingly displayed their criminal wantonness. On this reckless
revenge Jacob pronounces the curse, " Cursed be their anger, for
it was fierce ; and their wrath, for it was cruel : I shall divide them
in Jacob, and scatter them in Israel" They had joined together
to commit this crime, and as a punishment they should be divided
or scattered in the nation of Israel, should form no independent
or compact tribes. This sentence of the patriarch was so ful-
filled when Canaan was conquered, that on the second number-
ing under Moses, Simeon had become the weakest of all the
tribes (Num. xxvi. 14) ; in Moses' blessing (Deut. xxxiii.) it was
entirely passed over ; and it received no separate assignment of
territory as an inheritance, but merely a number of cities within
the limits of Judah (Josh. xix. 1—9). Its possessions, therefore,
became an insignificant appendage to those of Judah, into
which they were eventually absorbed, as most of the families of
Simeon increased but little (1 Chron. iv. 27) ; and those which
increased the most emigrated in two detachments, and sought
out settlements for themselves and pasture for their cattle out-
side the limits of the promised land (1 Chron. iv. 38-43). Levi
also received no separate inheritance in the land, but merely a
number of cities to dwell in, scattered throughout the possessions
of his brethren (Josh. xxi. 1-40). But the scattering of Levi
in Israel was changed into a blessing for the other tribes through
its election to the priesthood. Of this transformation of the
curse into a blessing, there is not the slightest intimation in
Jacob's address; and in this we have a strong proof of its
genuineness. After this honourable change had taken place
under Moses, it would never have occurred to any one to cast
such a reproach upon the forefather of the Levites. How dif-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
392 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
ferent is the blessing pronounced by Moses upon Levi (Deut.
xxxiii. 8 sqq.) ! But though Jacob withdrew the rights of primo-
geniture from Reuben, and pronounced a curse upon the crime
of Simeon and Levi, he deprived none of them of their share in
the promised inheritance. They were merely put into the back-
ground because of their sins, but they were not excluded from
the fellowship and call of Israel, and did not lose the blessing
of Abraham, so that their father's utterances with regard to
them might still be regarded as the bestowal of a blessing
(ver. 28).
Vers. 8-12. Judah, the fourth son, was the first to receive
a rich and unmixed blessing, the blessing of inalienable supre-
macy and power. "Judah thou, thee will thy brethren praise!
thy hand in the neck of thy foes! to thee will thy father's sons
bow down!" Jinn, thou, is placed first as an absolute noun,
like 'JK in chap. xvii. 4, xxiv. 27; IVTi' is a play upon rrwi»
like rnlK in chap. xxix. 35. Judah, according to chap. xxix.
35, signifies : he for whom Jehovah is praised, not merely the
praised one. "This nomen, the patriarch seized as an omen,
and expounded it as a presage of the future history of Judah."
Judah should be in truth all that his name implied (cf. xxvii.
36). Judah had already shown to a certain extent a strong and
noble character, when he proposed to sell Joseph rather than
shed his blood (xxxvii. 26 seq.) ; but still more in the manner in
which he offered himself to his father as a pledge for Benjamin,
and pleaded with Joseph on his behalf (xliii. 9, 10, xliv. 16 sqq.);
and it was apparent even in his conduct towards Thamar. In
this manliness and strength there slumbered the germs of the
future development of strength in his tribe. Judah would put
his enemies to flight, grasp them by the neck, and subdue them
(Job xvi. 12, cf. Ex. xxiii. 27, Ps. xviii. 41). Therefore his
brethren would do homage to him : not merely the sons of his
mother, who are mentioned in other places (xxvii. 29 ; Judg.
viii. 19), i.e. the tribes descended from Leah, but the sons of
his father — all the tribes of Israel therefore ; and this was really
the case under David (2 Sam. v. 1, 2, cf. 1 Sam. xviii. 6, 7, and
16). This princely power Judah acquired through his lion-like
nature. — Ver. 9. "A young lion is Judah ; from the prey, my
son, art thou gone up: he has lain down; like a lion there he lieth,
Digitized by LaOCKMC
CHAP. XLIX. 8-12 393
and like a lioness, who can rouse him up!" Jacob compares
Judah to a young, i.e. growing lion, ripening into its full
strength, as being the "ancestor of the lion-tribe." But he
quickly rises " to a vision of the tribe in the glory of its perfect
strength," and describes it as a lion which, after seizing prey,
ascends to the mountain forests (cf. Song of Sol. iv. 8), and
there lies in majestic quiet, no one daring to disturb it. To in
tensify the thought, the figure of a lion is followed by that of the
lioness, which is peculiarly fierce in defending its young. The
perfects are prophetic ; and n?V relates not to the growth or
gradual rise of the tribe, but to the ascent of the lion to its lair
upon the mountains. " The passage evidently indicates some
thing more than Judah's taking the lead in the desert, and in
the wars of the time of the Judges ; and points to the position
which Judah attained through the warlike successes of David "
(KnobeT). The correctness of this remark is put beyond ques-
tion by ver. 10, where the figure is carried out still further, but
in literal terms. " The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor
the ruler's staff from between his feet, till Shiloh come and the
willing obedience of the nations be to him" The sceptre is the
symbol of regal command, and in its earliest form it was a long
staff, which the king held in his hand when speaking in public
assemblies (e.g. Agamemnon, II. 2, 46, 101) ; and when he sat
upon his throne he rested it between his feet, inclining towards
himself (see the representation of a Persian king in the ruins of
Persepolis, Niebuhr Reisebeschr. ii. 145). pi?no the determining
person or thing, hence a commander, legislator, and a com-
mander's or rulers staff (Num. xxi. 18); here in the latter sense,
as the parallels, "sceptre" and "from between his feet," require.
Judah — this is the idea — was to rule, to have the chieftainship,
till Shiloh came, i.e. for ever. It is evident that the coming of
Shiloh is not to be regarded as terminating the rule of Judah,
from the last clause of the verse, according to which it was only
then that it would attain to dominion over the nations. '? *W
has not an exclusive signification here, but merely abstracts
what precedes from what follows the given terminus ad quern,
as in chap. xxvi. 13, or like i^K *W chap, xxviii. 15, Ps. cxii. 8,
or IV Ps. ex. 1, and eo>? Matt. v. 18.
But the more precise determination of the thought contained
in ver. 10 is dependent upon our explanation of the word Shiloh.
pekt. — VOL. i. a c
Digitized by VjOOQlC
394 THE VIBST BOOK OF MOSES.
It cannot be traced, as the Jerusalem Targum and the Rabbins
affirm, to the word ?& filius with the suffix >i = i "his son"
since such a noun as ?& is never met with in Hebrew, and
neither its existence nor the meaning attributed to it can be
inferred from nw, afterbirth, in Deut. xxviii. 57. Nor can the
paraphrases of Onkehs (donee veniat Messias cujus est regnum),
of the Greek versions («u? iav ebJBn rk anroKel/ieva avrco ; or eS
airoKeirai, as Aquila and Symmachus appear to have rendered
it), or of the Syriac, etc., afford any real proof, that the defec-
tive form IW, which occurs in 20 MSS., was the original form
of the word, and is to be pointed iwforw=v 1BW. For
apart from the fact, that B* for "H^K would be unmeaning here,
and that no such abbreviation can be found in the Pentateuch,
it ought in any case to read *«n w " to whom it (the sceptre)
is due," since W alone could not express this, and an ellipsis of
ton in such a case would be unparalleled. It only remains
therefore to follow Luther, and trace nTV to n?e>, to be quiet, to
enjoy rest, security. But from this root Shiloh cannot be ex-
plained according to the analogy of such forms as "tiT 1 ?, twyp.
For these forms constitute no peculiar species, but are merely
derived from the reduplicated forms, as BiajJ, which occurs as
well as tfo'p, clearly shows; moreover they are none of them
formed from roots of n"?. nyv points to P^B*, to the formation
of nouns with the termination 6n, in which the liquids are elimi-
nated, and the remaining vowel ^ is expressed by ri (Ew. § 84) ;
as for example in the names of places, fW or w, also v>V (Judg.
xxi. 21 ; Jer. vii. 12) and Htj (Josh. xv. 51), with their deriva-
tives *&y (1 Kings xi. 29, xii. 15) and "&i (2 Sam. xv. 12), also
rfraK (Prov. xxvii. 20) for p*nK (Prov. xv. 11, etc.), clearly prove.
Hence p? , B> either arose from p" w (nfe), or was formed directly
from TUS^fW, like P« from ^3. But if f>^ is the original form
of the word, •iT'B' cannot be an appellative noun in the sense of
rest, or a place of rest, but must be a proper name. For the
strong termination on loses its n after o only in proper names,
like nb^p, too by the side of ptio (Zech. xii. 11) and i"rtn
(Judg. x. 1). nMaK forms no exception to this ; for when used
in Prov. xxvii. 20 as a personification of hell, it is really a
proper name. An appellative noun like nT'B', in the sense of
rest, or place of rest, " would be unparalleled in the Hebrew
Uiesaurus; the nouns used in this sense are w, HW, Eh7V f
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XLIX 8-tt. 395
fiTOD." For these reasons even Delitesch pronounces the appel-
lative rendering, u till rest comes," or till " he comes to a place
of rest," grammatically impossible. Shiloh or Shilo is a proper
name in every other instance in which it is used in the Old
Testament, and was in fact the name of a city belonging to the
tribe of Ephraim, which stood in the midst of the land of
Canaan, upon an eminence above the village of Turmus Aya,
in an elevated valley surrounded by hills, where ruins belong-
ing both to ancient and modern times still bear the name of
Seilun. In this city the tabernacle was pitched on the conquest
of Canaan by the Israelites under Joshua, and there it remained
till the time of Eli (Judg. xviii. 31 ; 1 Sam. i. 3, ii. 12 sqq.),
possibly till the early part of Saul's reign.
Some of the Rabbins supposed our Shiloh to refer to the city.
This opinion has met with the approval of most of the expositors,
from Teller and JEichhorn to Tuch, who regard the blessing as a
vaticimum ex eventu, and deny not only its prophetic character,
but for the most part its genuineness. Delitz&ch has also decided
in its favour, because Shiloh or Shilo is the name of a town in
every other passage of the Old Testament ; and in 1 Sam. iv.
12, where the name is written as an accusative of direction, the
words are written exactly as they are here. But even if we do
not go so far as Hofmann, and pronounce the rendering " till he
(Judah) come to Shiloh " the most impossible of all renderings,
we must pronounce it utterly irreconcilable with the prophetic
character of the blessing. Even if Shilo existed in Jacob's time
(which can neither be affirmed nor denied), it had acquired no
importance in relation to the lives of the patriarchs, and is not
once referred to in their history ; so that Jacob could only have
pointed to it as the goal and turning point of Judah' s supremacy
in consequence of a special revelation from God. But in that
case the special prediction would really have been fulfilled : not
only would Judah have come to Shiloh, but there he would
have found permanent rest, and there would the willing subjec-
tion of the nations to his sceptre have actually taken place.
Now none of these anticipations are confirmed by history. It is
true we read in Josh, xviii. 1, that after the promised land had
been conquered by the defeat of the Canaanites in the south and
north, and its distribution among the tribes of Israel had com-
menced, and was so far accomplished, that Judah and the double
Digitized by VjOOQlC
396 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
tribe of Joseph had received their inheritance by lot, the con-
gregation assembled at Shilo,' and there erected the tabernacle,
and it was not till after this had been done, that the partition of
the land was proceeded with and brought to completion. But
although this meeting of the whole congregation at Shilo, and
the erection of the tabernacle there, was generally of significance
as the turning point of the history, it was of equal importance
to all the tribes, and not to Judah alone. If it were to this event
that Jacob's words pointed, they should be rendered, " till they
come to Shiloh," which would be grammatically allowable indeed,
but very improbable with the existing context. And even then
nothing would be gained. For, in the first place, up to the time
of the arrival of the congregation at Shilo, Judah did not possess
the promised rule over the tribes. The tribe of Judah took the
first place in the camp and on the march (Num. ii. 3-9, x. 14) —
formed in fact the van of the army ; but it had no rule, did not
hold the chief command. The sceptre or command was held by
the Levite Moses during the journey through the desert, and by
the Ephraimite Joshua at the conquest and division of Canaan.
Moreover, Shilo itself was not the point at which the leadership
of Judah among the tribes was changed into the command of
nations. Even if the assembling of the congregation of Israel
at Shiloh (Josh, xviii. 1) formed so far a turning point between
two periods in the history of Israel, that the erection of the
tabernacle for a permanent continuance at Shilo was a tangible
pledge, that. Israel had now gained a firm footing in the promised
land, had come to rest and peace after a long period of wander-
ing and war, had entered into quiet and peaceful possession of
the land and its blessings, so that Shilo, as its name indicates,
became the resting-place of Israel ; Judah did not acquire the
command over the twelve tribes at that time, nor so long as the
house of God remained at Shilo, to say nothing of the sub-
mission of the nations. It was not till after the rejection of
" the abode of Shiloh," at and after the removal of the ark of
the covenant by the Philistines (1 Sam. iv.), with which the
" tabernacle of Joseph" was also rejected, that God selected the
tribe of Judah and chose David (Ps. lxxviii. GO— 72). Hence it
was not till after Shiloh had ceased to be the spiritual centre for
the tribes of Israel, over whom Ephraim had exercised a kind of
rule so long as the central sanctuary of the nation continued in
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XLIX. 8-12. 397
its inheritance, that by David's election as prince O'M) over
Israel the sceptre and the government over the tribes of Israel
passed over to the tribe of Judah. Had Jacob, therefore, pro-
mised to his son Judah the sceptre or ruler's staff over the tribes
until he came to Shiloh, he would have uttered no prophecy, but
simply a pious wish, which would have remained entirely unful-
filled.
With this result we ought not to rest contented; unless,
indeed, it could be maintained that because Shiloh was ordinarily
the name of a city, it could have no other signification. But just
as many other names of cities are also names of persons, e.g.
Enoch (iv. 17), and Shechem (xxxiv. 2) ; so Shiloh might also
be a personal name, and denote not merely the place of rest, but
the man, or bearer, of rest. We regard Shiloh, therefore, as a
title of the Messiah, in common with the entire Jewish syna-
gogue and the whole Christian Church, in which, although there
may be uncertainty as to the grammatical interpretation of the
word, there is perfect agreement as to the fact that the patriarch
is here proclaiming the coming of the Messiah. " For no objec-
tion can really be sustained against thus regarding it as a per-
sonal name, in closest analogy to nb?e>" (Hofmann). The asser-
tion that Shiloh cannot be the subject, bnt must be the object in
this sentence, is as unfounded as the historiological axiom, " that
the expectation of a personal Messiah was perfectly foreign to
the patriarchal age, and must have been foreign from the very
' nature of that age," with which Kurtz sets aside the only explan-
ation of the word which is grammatically admissible as relating
to the personal Messiah, thus deciding, by means of a priori
assumptions which completely overthrow the supernaturally un-
fettered character of prophecy, and from a one-sided view of
the patriarchal age and history, how much the patriarch Jacob
ought to have been able to prophesy. The expectation of a per-
sonal Saviour did not arise for the first time with Moses, Joshua,
and David, or first obtain its definite form after one man had
risen up as the deliverer and redeemer, the leader and ruler of
the whole nation, but was contained in the germ in the promise
of the seed of the woman, and in the blessing of Noah upon
Shem. It was then still further expanded in the promises of God
to the patriarchs — " I will bless thee ; be a blessing, and in tltee
shall all the families of the earth be blessed," — by which Abraham,
Digitized by VjOOQlC
398 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
Isaac, and Jacob (not merely the nation to descend from them)
were chosen as the personal bearers of that salvation, which was
to be conveyed by them through their seed to all nations. When
the patriarchal monad was expanded into a dodekad, and Jacob
had before him in his twelve sons the founders of the twelve-
tribed nation, the question naturally arose, from which of the
twelve tribes would the promised Saviour proceed? Reuben
had forfeited the right of primogeniture by his incest, and it
could not pass over to either Simeon or Levi on account of their
crime against the Shechemites. Consequently the dying patri-
arch transferred, both by his blessing and prophecy, the chief-
tainship which belonged to the first-born and the blessing of the
promise to his fourth son Judah, having already, by the adoption
of Joseph's sons, transferred to Joseph the double inheritance
associated with the birthright. Judah was to bear the sceptre
with victorious lion-courage, until in the future Shiloh the obe-
dience of the nations came to him, and his rule over the tribes
was widened into the peaceful government of the world. It is
true that it is not expressly stated that SIriloh was to descend
from Judah ; but this follows as a matter of course from the
context, i.e. from the fact, that after the description of Judah as
an invincible lion, the cessation of his rule, or the transference
of it to another tribe, could not be imagined as possible, and the
thought lies upon the surface, that the dominion of Judah was
to be perfected in the appearance of Shiloh.
Thus the personal interpretation of Shiloh stands in the most
beautiful harmony with the constant progress of the same reve-
lation. To Shiloh will the nations belong. W refers back to
riW. nn^, which only occurs again in Prov. xxx. 17, from
nnj* with dagesh forte euphon., denotes the obedience of a son,
willing obedience ; and 0V3ff in this connection cannot refer to
the associated tribes, for Judah bears the sceptre over the tribes
of Israel before the coming of Shiloh, but to the nations uni-
versally. These will render willing obedience to S/iiloh, because
as a man of rest He brings them rest and peace.
As previous promises prepared the way for our prophecy,
so was it still further unfolded by the Messianic prophecies
which followed ; and this, together with the gradual advance
towards fulfilment, places the personal meaning of Shiloh beyond
all possible doubt. — In the order of time, the prophecy of Balaam
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAT. XLIX. 8-12 399
stands next, where not only Jacob's proclamation of the lion-
nature of Jndah is transferred to Israel as a nation (Num. xxiii.
24, xxiv. 9), but the figure of the sceptre from Israel, i.e. the
ruler or king proceeding from Israel, who will smite all his foes
(xxiv. 17), is taken verbatim from vers. 9, 10 of this address.
In the sayings of Ealaam, the tribe of Judah recedes behind the
unity of the nation. For although, both in the camp and on
the march, Judah took the first place among the tribes (Num.
ii. 2, 3, vii. 12, x. 14), this rank was no real fulfilment of
Jacob's blessing, but a symbol and pledge of its destination to
be the champion and ruler over the tribes. As champion, even
after the death of Joshua, Judah opened the attack by divine
direction upon the Canaanites who were still left in the land
(Judg. i. 1 sqq.), and also the war against Benjamin (Judg. xx.
18). It was also a sign of the future supremacy of Judah, that
the first judge and deliverer from the power of their oppressors
was raised up to Israel from the tribe of Judah in the person of
the Kenizzite Othniel (Judg. iii. 9 sqq.). From that time for-
ward Judah took no lead among the tribes for several centuries,
but rather fell back behind Ephraim, until by the election of
David as king over all Israel, Judah was raised to the rank of
ruling tribe, and received the sceptre over all the rest (1 Chron.
xxviii. 4). In David, Judah grew strong (1 Chron. v. 2), and
became a conquering lion, whom no one dared to excite. With
the courage and strength of a lion, David brought under his
sceptre all the enemies of Israel round about. But when God
had given him rest, and he desired to build a house to the Lord,
he received a promise through the prophet Nathan that Jehovah
would raise up his seed after him, and establish the throne of his
kingdom for ever (2 Sam. vii. 13 sqq.). " Behold, a son shall
be born to thee, who shall be a man of rest ; and I (Jehovah)
will give him rest from all his enemies round about ; for Solo-
mon (i.e. Friederich, Frederick, the peaceful one) shall be his
name, and I will give peace and rest unto Israel in his days . . .
and I will establish the throne of his kingdom over Israel for
ever." Just as Jacob's prophecy was so far fulfilled in David,
that Judah had received the sceptre over the tribes of Israel,
and had led them to victory over all their foes ; and David upon
the basis of this first fulfilment received through Nathan the
divine promise, that the sceptre should not depart from his
Digitized by VjOOQlC
400 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
house, and therefore not from Judah ; so the commencement of
the coming of Shiloh received its first fulfilment in the peaceful
sway of Solomon, even if David did not give his son the name
Solomon with an allusion to the predicted Shiloh, which one
might infer from the sameness in the meaning of nfcw and
riW when compared with the explanation given of the name
Solomon in 1 Chron. xxii. 9, 10. But Solomon was not the true
Shiloh. His peaceful sway was transitory, like the repose which
Israel enjoyed under Joshua at the erection of the tabernacle at
Shiloh (Josh. xi. 23, xiv. 15, xxi. 44) ; moreover it extended
over Israel alone. The willing obedience of the nations he did
not secure ; Jehovah only gave rest from his enemies round
about in his days, i.e. during his life.
But this first imperfect fulfilment furnished a pledge of the
complete fulfilment in the future, so that Solomon himself, dis-
cerning in spirit the typical character of his peaceful reign, sang
of the King's Son who should have dominion from sea to sea, and
from the river to the ends of the earth, before whom all kings
should bow, and whom all nations should serve (Ps. lxxii.) ; and
the prophets after Solomon prophesied of the Prince of Peace,
who should increase government and peace without end upon
the throne of David, and of the sprout out of the rod of Jesse,
whom the nations should seek (Isa. ix. 5, 6, xi. 1-10) ; and lastly,
Ezekiel, when predicting the downfall of the Davidic kingdom,
prophesied that this overthrow would last until He should come
to whom the right belonged, and to whom Jehovah would give
it (Ezek. xxi. 27). Since Ezekiel in his words, " till He come
to whom the right belongs," takes up, as is generally admitted,
our prophecy " till Shiloh come," and expands it still further in
harmony with the purpose of his announcement, more especially
from Ps. lxxii. 1-5, where righteousness and judgment are men-
tioned as the foundation of the peace which the King's Son would
bring ; he not only confirms the correctness of the personal and
Messianic explanation of the word Shiloh, but shows that Jacob's
prophecy of the sceptre not passing from Judah till Shiloh came,
did not preclude a temporary loss of power. Thus all prophe-
cies, and all the promises of God, in fact, are so fulfilled, as not
to preclude the punishment of the sins of the elect, and yet, not-
withstanding that punishment, assuredly and completely attain
to their ultimate fulfilment. And thus did the kingdom of
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XLIX. 8-12. 401
Jttdah arise from its temporary overthrow to a new and imperish-
able glory in Jesus Christ (Heb. vii. 14), who conquers all foes
as the Lion of the tribe of Judah (Rev. v. 5), and reigns as the
true Prince of Peace, as " our peace" (Eph. ii. 14), for ever
and ever.
In vers. 11 and 12 Jacob finishes his blessing on Judah by
depicting the abundance of his possessions in the promised land.
" Binding his she-ass to Hie vine, and to the choice vine his ass's
colt ; he washes his garment in wine, and his cloak in the blood of
the grape : dull are the eyes with wine, and white the teeth with
milk." The participle '"Vpk has the old connecting vowel, t,
before a word with a preposition (like Isa. xxii. 16 ; Mic. vii.
14, etc.) ; and ^3 in the construct state, as in chap. xxxi. 39.
The subject is not Shiloh, but Judah, to whom the whole bless-
ing applies. The former would only be possible, if the fathers
and Luther were right in regarding the whole as an allegorical
description of Christ, or if Hofmanris opinion were correct, that
it would be quite unsuitable to describe Judah, the lion-like
warrior and ruler, as binding his ass to a vine, coming so peace-
fully upon his ass, and remaining in his vineyard. But are
lion-like courage and strength irreconcilable with a readiness
for peace t Besides, the notion that riding upon an ass is an
image of a peaceful disposition seems quite unwarranted ; and
the supposition that the ass is introduced as an animal of peace,
in contrast with the war-horse, is founded upon Zech. ix. 9, and
applied to the words of the patriarch in a most unhistorical
manner. This contrast did not exist till a much later period,
when the Israelites and Canaanites had introduced war-horses,
and is not applicable at all to the age and circumstances of the
patriarchs, since at that time the only animals there were to lide,
beside camels, were asses and she-asses (xxii. 3 cf. Ex. iv. 20,
Num. xxii. 21) ; and even in the time of the Judges, and down
to David's time, riding upon asses was a distinction of nobility
or superior rank (Judg. i. 14, x. 4, xii. 14 ; 2 Sam. xix. 27).
Lastly, even in vers. 9 and 10 Judah is not depicted as a lion
eager for prey, or as loving war and engaged in constant strife,
but, according to Hofmann's own words, " as having attained,
even before the coming of Shiloh, to a rest acquired by victory
over surrounding foes, and as seated in his place with the
•nsignia of his dominion." Now, when Judah's conflicts are
Digitized by VjOOQlC
402 THE FIEST BOOK OF MOSES.
over, and he has come to rest, he also may bind his ass to the
vine and enjoy in peaceful repose the abundance of his inherit-
ance. Of wine and milk, the most valuable productions of
his land, he will have such a superabundance, that, as Jacob
hyperbolically expresses it, he may wash his clothes in the blood
of the grape, and enjoy them so plentifully, that his eyes shall
be inflamed with wine, and his teeth become white with milk. 1
The soil of Judah produced the best wine in Canaan, near
Hebron and Engedi (Num. xiii. 23, 24 ; Song of Sol. i. 14 ;
2 Chron. xxvi. 10 cf. Joel i. 7 sqq.), and had excellent pas-
ture land in the desert by Tekoah and Carmel, to the south of
Hebron (1 Sam. xxv. 2 ; Amos i. 1 ; 2 Chron. xxvi. 10). nrno :
contracted from nrmD, from rnD to envelope, synonymous with
mDD a veil (Ex. xxxiv. 33).
Ver. 13. Zebulun, to the shore of the ocean will he dwell,
and indeed (Wfn isque) towards the coast of ships, and his side
towards Zidon (directed up to Zidon)." This blessing on Leah's
sixth son interprets the name Zebulun (i.e. dwelling) as an omen,
not so much to show the tribe its dwelling-phce in Canaan, as
to point out the blessing which it would receive from the situa-
tion of its inheritance (compare Deut. xxxiii. 19). So far as the
territory allotted to the tribe of Zebulun under Joshua can be
ascertained from the boundaries and towns mentioned in Josh.
six. 10—16, it neither reached to the Mediterranean, nor touched
directly upon Zidon (see my Comm. on Joshua). It really lay
between the Sea of Galilee and the Mediterranean, near to both,
but separated from the former by Naphtali, from the latter by
Asher. So far was this announcement, therefore, from being a
vaticinium em eventu taken from the geographical position of the
tribe, that it contains a decided testimony to the fact that
Jacob's blessing was not written after the time of Joshua.
D^ denotes, not the two seas mentioned above, but, as Judg.
1 Jam de situ regionis loquitur, qux sorte JUiis Judas obtigil. Significat
autem tantam illic fore tritium copiam, ut passim obvite prosient non secus
atque alibi vepre* vel infrugifera arbusta. Nam quum ad sepes ligari soleant
asini, vites ad hunc contemptibilem usum aeputat. Eodempertinet quse sequun-
tar hyperbolical loqucndi forma, quod Judas lavabit vesjtem suam in vino, el
oculis erit rubicundus. Tantam enim vini abundantiajn fore intelligit, ut
promiscue ad lotiones, perinde ut aqua effundi queat si'me magno dispendio ;
assiduo autem largioreque illiuspotu rubedinem contracturisiht oculi. Calvm.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XLH. 14, 16. 403
v. 17 proves, the Mediterranean, as a great ocean (chap. i. 10).
" The coast of ships : " i.e. where ships are unloaded, and land
the treasures of the distant parts of the world for the inhabi-
tants of the maritime and inland provinces (Deut. xxxiii. 19).
Zidon, as the old capital, stands for Phoenicia itself.
Vers. 14 and 15. " Issachar is a bony ass, lying between the
hurdles. He saw that rest was a good (of\0 subst.), and the land
that it was pleasant ; and bowed his shoulder to bear, and became
a servant unto tribute." The foundation of this award also lies
in the name "Ofr *£, which is probably interpreted with refer-
ence to the character of Issachar, and with an allusion to the
relation between isfc* and ^ , 3fe', a daily labourer, as an indication
of the character and fate of his tribe. " Ease at the cost of
liberty will be the characteristic of the tribe of Issachar" (De-
litesch). The simile of a bony, i.e. strongly-built ass, particularly
adapted for carrying burdens, pointed to the fact that this tribe
would content itself with material good, devote itself to the
labour and burden of agriculture, and not strive after political
power and rule. The figure also indicated " that Issachar would
become a robust, powerful race of men, and receive a pleasant
inheritance which would invite to comfortable repose." (Accord-
ing to Jos. de bell. jud. iii. 3, 2, Lower Galilee, with the fruitful
table land of Jezreel, was attractive even to top tftctora 779
<f>i\oirovov). Hence, even if the simile of a bony ass contained
nothing contemptible, it did not contribute to Issachar's glory.
Like an idle beast of burden, he would rather submit to the
yoke and be forced to do the work of a slave, than risk his
possessions and his peace in the struggle for liberty. To bend
the shoulder to the yoke, to come down to carrying burdens
and become a mere serf, was unworthy of Israel, the nation
of God that was called to rule, however it might befit its foes,
especially the Ganaanites upon whom the curse of slavery
rested (Deut. xx. 11; Josh. xvi. 10; 1 Kings ix. 20, 21; Isa.
x. 27). This was probably also the reason why Issachar was
noticed last among the sons of Leah. In the time of the
Judges, however, Issachar acquired renown for heroic bravery
in connection with Zebulun (Judg. v. 14, 15, 18). The sons
of Leah are followed by the four sons of the two maids, ar-
ranged, not according to their mothers or their ages, but accord
Digitized by VjOOQlC
404 THE FIRST BOOK OF HOSES.
ing to the blessing pronounced upon them, so that the two
warlike tribes stand first.
Vers. 16 and 17. "Dan will procure his people justice as one
of the tribes of Israel. Let Dan become a serpent by the way, a
horned adder in the path, that biteth Hie horse's heels, so that its
rider falls back." Although only the son of a maid-servant,
Dan would not be behind the other tribes of Israel, but act
according to his name (1*T fj), and as much as any other of the
tribes procure justice to his people (i.e. to the people of Israel ;
not to his own tribe, as Diestel supposes). There is no allusion
in these words to the office of judge which was held by Samson ;
they merely describe the character of the tribe, although this
character came out in the expedition of a portion of the Danites
to Laish in the north of Canaan, a description of which is given
in Judg. xviii., as well as in the " romantic chivalry of the brave,
gigantic Samson, when with the cunning of the serpent he
overthrew the mightiest foes" (Del.). JB'BB*: Kepdtmn, the
very poisonous horned serpent, which is of the colour of the
sand, and as it lies upon the ground, merely stretching out its
feelers, inflicts a fatal wound upon any who may tread upon it
unawares (Diod. Sic. 3, 49 ; Pliny, 8, 23).
Yer. 18. But this manifestation of strength, which Jacob
expected from Dan and promised prophetically, presupposed
that severe conflicts awaited the Israelites. For these conflicts
Jacob furnished his sons with both shield and sword in the ejacu-
latory prayer, " I wait for Thy salvation, OJehovali!" which was
not a prayer for his own soul and its speedy redemption from all
evil, but in which, as Calvin has strikingly shown, he expressed
his confidence that his descendants would receive the help of his
God. Accordingly, the later Targums (Jerusalem and Jonathan)
interpret these words as Messianic, but with a special reference
to Samson, and paraphrase ver. 18 thus : " Not for the deliver-
ance of Gideon, the son of Joash, does my soul wait, for that is
temporary ; and not for the redemption of Samson, for that is
transitory ; but for the redemption of the Messiah, the Son of
David, which Thou through Thy word hast promised to bring
to Thy people the children of Israel : for this Thy redemption
my soul waits." *
1 This is the reading according to the text of the Jerusalem Targura, in
the London Polyglot as corrected from the extracts of Fagius in the CritL
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XXIX. 19-21 405
Ver. 19. " Gad — a press presses him, but he presses tJie
heel." The name Gad reminds the patriarch of "W to press, and
TH3 the pressing host, warlike host, which invades the land.
The attacks of such hosts Gad will bravely withstand, and press
their heel, i.e. put them to flight and bravely pursue them, not
smite their rear-guard ; for 3£>y does not signify the rear-guard
even in Josh. viii. 13, but only the reserves (see my commentary
on the passage). The blessing, which is formed from a triple
alliteration of the name Gad, contains no such special allusions
to historical events as to enable us to interpret it historically,
although the account in 1 Chron. v. 18 sqq. proves that the
Gadites displayed, wherever it was needed, the bravery promised
them by Jacob. Compare with this 1 Chron. xii. 8—15, where
the Gadites who come to David are compared to lions, and their
swiftness to that of roes.
Ver. 20. " Out of Asheb (cometh) fat, his bread, and lie
yieldeih royal dainties'' ton? is in apposition to njOB', and the
suffix is to be emphasized : the fat, which comes from him, is
his bread, his own food. The saying indicates a very fruitful
soil. Asher received as his inheritance the lowlands of Carmel
on the Mediterranean as far as the territory of Tyre, one of the
most fertile parts of Canaan, abounding in wheat and oil, with
which Solomon supplied the household of king Hiram (1 Kings
v. 11).
Ver. 21. "Naphtali is a hind let loose, who givetli goodly
words." The hind or gazelle is a simile of a warrior who is
skilful and swift in his movements (2 Sam. ii. 18 ; 1 Chron. xii.
8, cf. Ps. xviii. 33 ; Hab. iii. 19). nrw here is neither hunted,
nor stretched out or grown slim ; but let loose, running freely
about (Job xxxix. 5). The meaning and allusion are obscure,
since nothing further is known of the history of the tribe of
Naphtali, than that Naphtali obtained a great victory under
Sacr., to which the Targum Jonathan also adds, " for Thy redemption,
Jehovah, is an everlasting redemption." But whilst the Targumists and
several fathers connect the serpent in the way with Samson, by many others
♦he serpent in the way is supposed to be Antichrist. On this interpretation
LutJier remarks : Puto Diabolum kujusfabulss auctorem fuisse etfinxisse heme
glossam, ut nostras cogitationes a vero et prusente Antichristo abduceret.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
406 THE FIBST BOOK OF MOSES.
Barak in association with Zebulun over the Canaanitish king
Jabin, which the prophetess Deborah commemorated in her cele-
brated song (Judg. iv. and v.). If the first half of the verse be
understood as referring to the independent possession of a tract
of land, upon which Naphtali moved like a hind in perfect free-
dom, the interpretation of Maaius (on Josh, xix.) is certainly the
correct one : " Sicut cervus emissus et liber in herbosa et fertili
terra exultim ludit. ita et in sua fertili sorte ludet et excuUabit
Nephtali." But the second half of the verse can hardly refer to
" beautiful sayings and songs, in which the beauty and fertility
of their home were displayed." It is far better to keep, as Vata-
blius does, to the general thought : tribus Naphtali erit fortis-
simo, elegantissima et agillima et erit facundissima.
Vers. 22-26. Turning to Joseph, the patriarch's heart
swelled with grateful love, and in the richest words and figures
he implored the greatest abundance of blessings upon his head.
— Ver. 22. " Son of a fruit-tree is Joseph, son of a fruit-tree at
the well, daughters run over the wall." Joseph is compared to
the branch of a fruit-tree planted by a well (Ps. i. 3), which
sends its shoots over the wall, and by which, according to Ps.
lxxx., we are probably to understand a vine. J3 an unusual form
of the construct state for |3, and T)B equivalent to nna with the
old feminine termination ath, like mot, Ex. xv. 2. — rto are the
twigs and branches, formed by the young fruit-tree. The sin-
gular rnyx is to be regarded as distributive, describing poetically
the moving forward, i.e. the rising up of the different branches
above the wall (Ges. § 146, 4). v}7, a poetical form, as in ver.
17. — Vers. 23, 24. " Archers provoke him, and shoot and hate
him ; but his bow abides in strength, and the arms of his hands
remain pliant, from the hands of the Mighty One of Jacob, from
thence, from the Shepherd, the Stone of Israel" From the simile
of the fruit-tree Jacob passed to a warlike figure, and described
the mighty and victorious unfolding of the tribe of Joseph in
conflict with all its foes, describing with prophetic intuition the
future as already come (yid. the perf. con*ec). The words are
not to be referred to the personal history of Joseph himself, to
persecutions received by him from his brethren, or to his suffer-
ings in Egypt ; still less to any warlike deeds of his in Egypt
(Diestel) : they merely pointed to the conflicts awaiting his de-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XLIX. 25, 26. 407
scendants, in which they would constantly overcome all hostile
attacks. "V}D : Piel, to embitter, provoke, laeessere. *3*l : per/,
o from 33") to shoot. ]1VN3 : " in a strong, unyielding position"
(Del.). UB: to be active, flexible; only found here, and in
2 Sam. vi. 16 of a brisk movement, skipping or jumping.
'J^T : the arms, " without whose elasticity the hands could not
hold or direct the arrow." The words which follow, " from the
hands of the Mighty One of Jacob," are not to be linked to what
follows, in opposition to the Masoretic division of the verses ;
they rather form one sentence with what precedes : " pliant re-
main the arms of his hands from the hands of God," i.e. through
the hands of God supporting them. "The Mighty One of
Jacob," He who had proved Himself to be the Mighty One by
the powerful defence afforded to Jacob ; a title which is copied
from this passage in Isa. i. 24, etc. " From thence," an em-
phatic reference to Him, from whom all perfection comes —
"from the Shepherd (xlviii. 15) and Stone of Israel." God is
called " the Stone," and elsewhere " the Rock" (Deut. xxxii. 4,
18, etc.), as the immoveable foundation upon which Israel might
trust, might stand firm and impregnably secure.
Vers. 25, 26. " From the God of thy father, may He help
thee, and with the help of the Almighty, may He bless thee, (may
there come) blessings of heaven from above, blessings of the
deep, that lieth beneath, blessings of the breast and of the womb.
The blessing of thy father surpass the blessings of my progenitors
to the border of the everlasting hills, may they come upon the
head of Joseph, and upon the crown of the illustrious among his
brethren." From the form of a description the blessing passes
in ver. 25 into the form of a desire, in which the " from " of
the previous clause is still retained. The words " and may He
help thee," " may He bless thee," form parentheses, for " who
will help and bless thee." nto is neither to be altered into
7tX\ (and from God), as JEwald suggests, in accordance with
the LXX., Sam., Syr., and Vulg., nor into HKO as Knobel pro-
poses ; and even the supplying of |? before riK from the parallel
clause (Ges. § 154, 4) is scarcely allowable, since the repetition
of ]0 before another preposition cannot be supported by any
analogous case; but ntjt may be understood here, as in chap. iv.
1, v. 24, in the sense of helpful communion : " and with," i*j.
with (in) the fellowship of, " the Almighty, may He bless thee.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
408 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
let there be (or come) blessings," etc. The verb J^w follows in
ver. 26 after the whole subject, which is formed of many par-
allel members. The blessings were to come from heaven above
and from the earth beneath. From the God of Jacob and by
the help of the Almighty should the rain and dew of heaven
(xxvii. 28), and fountains and brooks which spring from the great
deep or the abyss of the earth, pour their fertilizing waters over
Joseph's land, " so that everything that had womb and breast
should become pregnant, bring forth, and suckle." * Onh from
fTin signifies parentes (CJiald., Vulg.); and njttn signifies not de-
siderium from njN, but boundary from HNFi, Num. xxxiv. 7, 8,
= nw, 1 Sam. xxi. 14, Ezek. ix. 4, to mark or bound off, as most
of the Rabbins explain it. 7$ "Q3 to be strong above, i.e. to sur-
pass. The blessings which the patriarch implored for Joseph
were to surpass the blessings which his parents transmitted to
him, to the boundary of the everlasting hills, i.e. surpass them
as far as the primary mountains tower above the earth, or so
that they should reach to the summits of the primeval moun-
tains. There is no allusion to the lofty and magnificent
mountain-ranges of Ephraim, Bashan, and Gilead, which fell to
the house of Joseph, either here or in Deut. xxxiii. 15. These
blessings were to descend upon the head of Joseph, the TO
among his brethren, i.e. " the separated one," from ">W separavit.
Joseph is so designated, both here and Deut. xxxiii. 16, not on
account of his virtue and the preservation of his chastity and
piety in Egypt, but propter dignitatem, qua excellit, ab omnibus
sit segregatus (Calv.), on account of the eminence to which he
attained in Egypt. For this meaning see Lam. iv. 7 ; whereas
no example can be found of the transference of the idea of
Nasir to the sphere of morality.
Ver. 27. " Benjamin — a wolf, which tears in pieces ; in the
morning he devours prey, and in the evening he divides spoil"
Morning and evening together suggest the idea of incessant
and victorious capture of booty (Del.). The warlike character
which the patriarch here attributes to Benjamin, was manifested
■ " Thus is the whole composed in pictorial words. Whatever of man and
cattle can be fruitful shall multiply' and have enough. Childbearing, and
the increase of cattle, and ot the corn in the field, are not our affair, but
the mercy and blessing of God." — Luther.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAr. XXIX. 29-88, L. 1-14. 409
by that tribe, not only in the war which he waged with all the
tribes on account of their wickedness in Gibeah (Jndg. xx.),
bnt on other occasions also (Judg. v. 14), in its distinguished
archers and slingers (Judg. xx. 16; 1 Chron. viii. 40, xii. ;
2 Chron. xiv. 8, xvii. 17), and also in the fact that the judge
Ehud (Judg. iii. 15 sqq.), and Saul, with his heroic son Jona-
than, sprang from this tribe (1 Sam. xi. and xiii. sqq. ; 2 Sam.
i. 19 sqq.).
The concluding words in ver. 28, " All these are the tribes
of Israel, twelve," contain the thought, that in his twelve sons
Jacob blessed the future tribes. " Every one with that which was
his blessing, he Blessed tliem," i.e. every one with his appropriate
blessing ("IB'K accus. dependent upon T?.? which is construed with
a double accusative) ; since, as has already been observed, even
Reuben, Simeon, and Levi, though put down through their own
fault, received a share in the promised blessing.
Vers. 29-33. Death of Jacob. — After the blessing, Jacob
"gain expressed to his twelve sons his desire to be buried in the
sepulchre of his fathers (chap, xxiv.), where Isaac and Rebekah
and his own wife Leah lay by the side of Abraham and Sarah,
which Joseph had already promised on oath to perform (xlvii.
29-31). He then drew his feet into the bed to lie down, for he
had been sitting upright while blessing his sons, and yielded up
the ghost, and was gathered to his people (via 1 , xxv. 8). J03M
instead of nb»l indicates that the patriarch departed from this
earthly life without a struggle. His age is not given here, be-
cause that has already been done at chap, xlvii. 28.
BURIAL OF JACOB, AND DEATH OF JOSEPH — CHAP. L.
Vers. 1-14. Bubial of Jacob. — Vers. 1-3. When Jacob
died, Joseph fell upon the face of his beloved father, wept over
him, and kissed him. He then gave the body to the physician*
to be embalmed, according to the usual custom in Egypt. Tht
physicians are called his servants, because the reference is to the
regular physicians in the service of Joseph, the eminent minister
of state ; and according to Herod. 2, 84, there were special phy-
sicians in Egypt for every description of disease, among whom
the Taricheuta, who superintended the embalming, were included}
PENT. — VOL. I. iD
Digitized by VjOOQlC
410 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
as a special but subordinate class. The process of embalming
lasted 40 days, and the solemn mourning 70 (ver. 3). This is
in harmony with the statements of Herodotus and Diodorus
when rightly understood (see Hengstenberg, Egypt and the Books
of Moses, p. 67 sqq). — Vers. 4, 5. At the end of this period of
mourning, Joseph requested " the house of Pharaoh," i.e. the
attendants upon the king, to obtain Pharaoh's permission for him
to go to Canaan and bury his father, according to his last will,
in the cave prepared by him there, «TC3 (ver. 5) signifies " to
dig" (used, as in 2 Ohron. xvi. 14, for the preparation of a tomb),
not "to buy." In the expression v W13 Jacob attributes to
himself as patriarch what had really been done by Abraham
(chap. xxiv.). Joseph required the royal permission, because he
wished to go beyond the border with his family and a large pro-
cession. But he did not apply directly to Pharaoh, because his
deep mourning (unshaven and unadorned) prevented him from
appearing in the presence of the king.
Vers. 6-9. After the king's permission had been obtained,
the corpse was carried to Canaan, attended by a large company.
With Joseph there went up " all the servants of Pharaoh, the
elders of his house, and all the elders of the land of Egypt," ue.
the leading officers of the court and state, " and all the house of
Joseph, and his bretliren, and his father's Iiouee," i.e. all the
members of the families of Joseph, of his brethren, and of his
deceased father, " excepting only their children and flocks ; also
chariots and horsemen? as an escort for the journey through the
desert, " a very large army'' The splendid retinue of Egyptian
officers may be explained, in part from the esteem in which
Joseph was held in Egypt, and in part from the fondness of the
Egyptians for such funeral processions (cf . Hengst. pp. 70, 71). —
Vers. 10 sqq. Thus they came to Goren A tad beyond the Jor-
dan, as the procession did not take the shortest route by Gaza
through the country of the Philistines, probably because so large
a procession with a military escort was likely to meet with diffi-
culties there, but went round by the Dead Sea. There, on the
border of Canaan, a great mourning and funeral ceremony was
kept up for seven days, from which the Canaanites, who watched
it from Canaan, gave the place the name of Abel-Mizraim, i.e.
meadow (73K with a play upon <OK mourning) of the Egyptians.
The situation of Goren Atad (the buck-thorn floor), or Abel-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. L. 16-21. 411
Mizraim, has not been discovered. According to ver. 11, it was
on the other side, i.e. the eastern side, of the Jordan. This is
put beyond all doubt by ver. 12, where the sons of Jacob are
said to have carried the corpse into the land of Canaan (the land
on this side) after the mourning at Goren Atad. 1 — Vers. 12, 13.
There the Egyptian procession probably stopped short ; for in
ver. 12 the sons of Jacob only are mentioned as having carried
their father to Canaan according to his last request, and buried
him in the cave of Machpelah. — Ver. 14. After performing this
filial duty, Joseph returned to Egypt with his brethren and all
their attendants.
Vers. 15-21. After their father s death, Joseph's brethren
were filled with alarm, and said, " If Joseph now should punish
us and requite all the evil that we liave done to him" sc. what
would become of us ! The sentence contains an aposiopesis, like
Fs. xxvii. 13 ; and £> with the imperfect presupposes a condition,
being used " in cases which are not desired, and for the present
not real, though perhaps possible" (Ew. § 358). The brethren
therefore deputed one of their number (possibly Benjamin) to
Joseph, and instructed him to appeal to the wish expressed by
their father before his death, and to implore forgiveness : "
pardon the misdeed of thy brethren and their sin, that they have
done thee evil; and now grant forgiveness to the misdeed of the
servants of Hie God of thy father." The ground of their plea is
contained in nnjn " and now," sc. as we request it by the desire
and direction of our father, and in the epithet applied to them-
selves, " servants of the God of thy father." There is no reason
whatever for regarding the appeal to their father's wish as a
mere pretence. The fact that no reference was made by Jacob
1 Consequently the statement of Jerome in the Onom. s. v. Area Atad —
" locus trans Jordanem, in quo planxerunt quondam Jacob, tertio ab Jerico
lapide, duobus millibus ab Jordane, qui nunc vocatur Bethagla, quod inter -
pretatur locus gyri, eo qnod ibi more plangentium circumierint in funere
Jacob" — is wrong. Beth Agla cannot be the same as Goren Atad, if only
because of the distances given by Jerome from Jericho and the Jordan. They
do not harmonize at all with his trans Jordanem, which is probably taken
from this passage, but point to a place on this side of the Jordan ; but still
more, because Beth Hagla was on the frontier of Benjamin towards Judah
(Josh. xv. 6, zviii. 19), and its name has been retained in the fountain and
tower of Hajla, an hour and a quarter to the S.E. of Riha (Jericho), and
three-quarters of an hour from the Jordan, by which the site of the ancient
Beth Hagla is certainly determined. ( Vid. Robinson, Pa., ii. p. 268 sqq.)
Digitized by VjOOQlC
412 THE FIRST BOOK OF MOSES.
in his blessing to their sin against Joseph, merely proved that
he as their father had forgiven the sin of his sons, since the
grace of God had made their misdeed the means of Israel's sal-
vation ; but it by no means proves that he could not have in-
structed his sons humbly to beg for forgiveness from Joseph,
even though Joseph had hitherto shown them only goodness and
love. How far Joseph was from thinking of ultimate retribu-
tion and revenge, is evident from the reception which he gave
to their request (ver. 17) : " Joseph wept at their address to him,"
viz. at the fact that they could impute anything so bad to him ;
and when they came themselves, and threw themselves as ser-
vants at his feet, he said to them (ver. 19), " Fear not, for am I
in tlie place of God ?" i.e. am I in a position to interfere of my own
accord with the purposes of God, and not rather bound to sub-
mit to them myself ? " Ye had indeed evil against me in your
mind, but God had it in mind for good (to turn this evil into
good), to do (ptyf. like nin xlviii. 11), as is now evident (lit. as has
occurred this day, cf. Deut. ii. 30, iv. 20, etc.), to preserve alive
a great nation (cf. xlv. 7). And now fear not, I shall provide for
you and your families" Thus he quieted them by his affectionate
words.
Vers. 22-26. Death of Joseph. — Joseph lived to see the
commencement of the fulfilment of his father's blessing. Having
reached the age of 110, he saw Ephraim's D'BW \m « sons f ife
third link," i.e. of great-grandsons, consequently great-great-grand-
sons. DW descendants in the third generation are expressly dis-
tinguished from "children's children" or grandsons in Ex. xxxiv.
7. There is no practical difficulty in the way of this explanation,
the only one which the language will allow. As Joseph's two sons
were born before he was 37 years old (chap. xli. 50), and Ephraim
therefore was born, at the latest, in his 36th year, and possibly
in his 34th, since Joseph was married in his 31st year, he might
have had grandsons by the time he was 56 or 60 years old, and
great-grandsons when he was from 78 to 85, so that great-great-
grandsons might have been born when he was 100 or 110 year3
old. To regard the " sons of the third generation" as children
in the third generation (great-grandsons of Joseph and grand-
sons of Ephraim), as many commentators do, as though the
construct ^3 stood for the absolute, is evidently opposed to the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. L. 22-28. 413
context, since it is stated immediately afterwards, that sons of
Machir, the son of Manasseh, i.e. great-grandsons, were also born
upon his knees, i.e. so that he could take them also upon his
knees and show them his paternal love. There is no reason for
thinking of adoption in connection with these words. And if
Joseph lived to see only the great-grandsons of Ephraim as well
as of Manasseh, it is difficult to imagine why the same expression
should not be applied to the grandchildren of Manasseh, as to
the descendants of Ephraim. — Ver. 24. When Joseph saw his
death approaching, he expressed to his brethren his firm belief
in the fulfilment of the divine promise (xlvi. 4, 5, cf. xv. 16, 18
sqq.), and made them take an oath, that if God should bring
them into the promised land, they would carry his bones with
them from Egypt. This last desire of his was carried out.
When he died, they embalmed him, and laid him (Dk*H from
Bfr, like xxiv. 33 in the chethib) " in the coffin," i.e. the ordinary
coffin, constructed of sycamore-wood (see Hengstenberg, pp. 71,
72), which was then deposited in a room, according to Egyptian
custom {Herod. 2, 86), and remained in Egypt for 360 years,
until they carried it away with them at the time of the exodus,
when it was eventually buried in Shechem, in the piece of land
which had been bought by Jacob there (chap, xxxiii. 19 ; Josh,
xxiv. 32).
Thus the account of the pilgrim-life of the patriarchs ter-
minates with an act of faith on the part of the dying Joseph ;
and after his death, in consequence of his instructions, the coffin
with his bones became a standing exhortation to Israel, to turn
its eyes away from Egypt to Canaan, the land promised to its
fathers, and to wait in the patience of faith for the fulfilment of
the promise.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
414
THE FIRST BOOK OK MOSES.
CHRONOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE LEADING EVENTS OP THE
PATRIARCHAL HISTORY,
Arranged according to the Hebrew Text, as a continuation of the Chronological
Table at p. 122, with an additional calculation of (he year before Christ.
The Events.
g
5|
a
"a
o o
2
Is
sS
>•
Abram's entrance into Canaan, . .
1
2021
2137
Birth of Isbmael,
11
2032
2126
Institution of Circumcision, ....
24
2045
2113
Birth of Isaac,
25
2046
2112
Death of Sarah,
62
2083
2075
Marriage of Isaac,
65
2086
2072
Birth of Esau and Jacob,
85
2106
2052
Death of Abraham,
100
2121
2037
Marriage of Esau,
125
2146
2012
Death of Ishmael,
148
2169
1989
Flight of Jacob to Padan Aram, . .
162
2183
1975
Jacob's Marriage,
169
2190
1968
Birth of Joseph,
176
2197
1961
Jacob's return from Padan Aram, . .
182
2203
1955
Jacob's arrival at Shechem in Canaan,
? 187
?2208
?1950
Jacob's return home to Hebron, . .
192
2213
1945
Sale of Joseph,
193
2214
1944
Death of Isaac,
205
2226
1932
Promotion of Joseph in Egypt, . .
206
2227
1931
Removal of Israel to Egypt, . . .
"l
215
2236
1922
17
232
2253
1905
71
286
2307
1851
350
565
2586
1572
Exodus of Israel from Egypt, . . .
430
645
2666
1492
The calculation of the years B.C. is based upon the fact, that
the termination of the 70 years' captivity coincided with the first
year of the sole government of Cyrus, and fell in the year 536
B.C. ; consequently the captivity commenced in the year 606 B.C.,
and, according to the chronological data of the books of Kings,
Judah was carried into captivity 406 years after the building
of Solomon's temple commenced, whilst the temple was built
480 years after the exodus from Egypt (1 Kings vi. 1).
Digitized by
Google
THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
(EXODUS.)
INTHODUCTION.
CONTENT8 AND ARRANGEMENT OF THE BOOK OF EXODUS.
j HE second book of Moses is called rptt» pfon iu th e
Hebrew Code x from the opening words ; but m the
S eptuagiq t HP/ 1 Y n1 ffP tA it has received the name
"J Sfoooy, Exodus, ir^/m the first half of its contents.
It gives an account of the first stage in the fulfilment of the
promises given to the patriarchs, with reference to the growth of
the children of Israel into a numerous people, their deliverance
from Egypt, and their adoption at Sinai as the people of God.
It e mbraces a period of 360 year s, extending fr om the death of
Joseph , with which the book of G enes is cto se^to__the _ bunding
of the~taEernacle > at the cojomenceme nt ofthe s econd year after
the departure from Egypt. During this period the rapid in-
crease ot theT'liildreTTOf Israel, which is described in chap. L,
and which caused such anxiety to the new sovereigns of Egypt
who had ascended the throne after the death of Joseph, that
they adopted measures for the enslaving and suppression of the
ever increasing nation, continued without interruption. With
the exception of this fact, and the birth, preservation, and edu-
cation of Moses, who was destined by God to be the deliverer of
His people, which are circumstantially related in chap, ii., the
entire book from chap, i ii. to chap. xl. is occupied_wkhan_elabx>-
rate accoun t of the events of two yeara^izT^EeJastjrear^efpre
the^departure ot Uie LsraeTHes Trdm T^gypt, and the first year of
Digitized by VjOOQlC
416 INTRODUCTION.
t heir journe y. This mode of treating the long period in qnes
tion, which seems ont of all proportion when judged by a merely
outward standard, may be easily explained from the nature and
design of the sacred history. The 430 years of the sojourn of
the Israel ites in Egypt were the" period during which the immi-
grant family was to increase and multiply, under the blessing
and protection of iiod } m the way of natural development; until
it hao^grownjuto a nation, and was ripe for tbj^jsoyenant which
J^hoyah_had_made _wkh_Abraham, to be completed with the
nation into which his seed had grown. During the whole of this
period the direct revelations from God to Israel were entirely
suspended ; so that, with the exception of what is related in chap,
i and ii., no event occurred of any importance to the kingdom
of God. It was not till the expiration of these 400 years, that
the execution of the divine plan of salvation commenced with the
call of Moses (chap, iii.) accompanied by the founding of the
kingdom of God in Israel. To this end Israel was liberated
from the power of Egypt, and, as a nation rescued from human
bondage, was adopted by God, the Lord of the whole earth, as
the people of His possession.
These two great facts of far-reaching consequences in the
| K history of the world, as well as in the history of salvation, form
■ ^ UP" the kernel and essential substance of this book, which may be
divided accordingly into two Hi^tinrt, p arts. In the first part,
chap, i.-xv. 21, we have seven sections , describing (1) the prepa-
v i ration for the saving work of God, through the multiplication of
<j ajr Israel into a great people and their oppression in Egypt (chap,
i.), and through the birth and preservation of their liberator
(chap, ii.); (2) the call and training of Moses to be the de-
liverer and leader of Israel (chap. iii. and iv.) ; (3) the mission
of Moses to Pharaoh (chap, v.-vii. 7); (4) the negotiations
between Moses and Pharaoh concerning the emancipation of
Israel, which were carried on both in words and deeds or mi-
raculous signs (chap. vii. 8-xi.) ; (5) the consecration of Israel
as the covenant nation through the institution of the feast of
Passover ; (6) the exodus of Israel effected through the slaying
of the first-born of the Egyptians (chap, xii.— xiii. 16) ; and
(7) the passage of Israel through the Eed Sea, and destruction
of Pharaoh and his host, with Israel's song of triumph at its
deliverance (xiii. 17-xv. 21). — In tho second part, chap. xv.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
u r
35
CONTENTS AND ARRANGEMENT OF THE BOOK OF EXODUS. 417
22-xl., we have also seven sections, describing the adoption
of Israel as the people of God ; viz. (1) the march of Israel
from the Red Sea to the mountain of God (chap. xv. 22-xvii.
7) ; (2) the attitude of the heathen towards Israel, as seen in
the hostility of Amalek, and the friendly visit of Jethro the
Midianite at Horeb (chap. xvii. 8-xviii.); (3) the establishment
of the covenant at Sinai through the election of Israel as the
people of Jehovah's possession, the promulgation of the funda-
mental law and of the fundamental ordinances of the Israelitish
commonwealth, and the solemn conclusion of the covenant itself
(chap, xix.-xxiv. 11) ; (4) the divine directions with regard to
the erection and arrangement of the dwelling-place of Jehovah
in Israel (chap. xxiv. 12-xxxi.); (5) the rebellion of the Israelites
and their renewed acceptance on the part of God (chap, xxxii.-
xxxiv.) ; (6) the building of the tabernacle and preparation of
holy things for the worship of God (chap, xxxv.-xxxix.) ; and
(7) the setting up of the tabernacle and its solemn consecration
(chap. xl.).
These different sections are not marked off, it is true, like
the ten parts of Genesis, by special headings, because the account
simply follows the historical succession of the events described ;
but they may be distinguished with perfect ease, through the in-
ternal grouping and arrangement of the historical materials.
The song of Moses at t he Red Sea (ch ap. xv. _l-?1) f" r mH mng *
u nmistakeably the~ cIoseof the first stage of jthe history, which
commenced with the call of Moses, and for which the way was
prepared, not only by the enslaving of Israel on the part of the
Pharaohs, in the hope of destroying its national and religious
independence, but also by the rescue and education of Moses,
and by his eventful life. And the setting up of the tabernacle
formed an equally significant close to the second stage of the
histor y. Ey thisTTheTovenant which Jehovah had made with
the patriarch Abram (Gen. xv.) was established with the people
Israel. By the filling of the dwelling-place, which had just been
set up, with the cloud of the glory of Jehovah (Ex. xl. 34-38),
the nation of Israel was raised into a congregation of the Lord
and the establishment of the kingdom of God in Israel fully
embodied in the tabernacle, with Jehovah dwelling in the
Most Holy Place; so that all subsequent legislation, and the
farther progress of the history in the guidance of Israel from
Digitized by VjOOQlC
418 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
Sinai to Canaan, only served to maintain and strengthen that
fellowship of the Lord with His people, which had already
been established by the conclusion of the covenant, and sym-
bolically exhibited in the building of the tabernacle. By this
marked conclusion, therefore, with a fact as significant in itself
as it was important in the history of Israel, Exodus, which com-
mences with a list of the names of the children of Israel who
went down to Egypt, is rounded off into a complete and inde-
pendent book among the five books of Moses.
INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF THE ISRAELITES. THEIR
BONDAGE IN EGYPT. — CHAP. I.
T^he pr omise which God gave to Jacob on his departure
fr om Canaan ("Gen, xlvi. 3) was perfectly ful filled. The chil-
dren of Israel settled down in the most fruitful province of the
fertile land of Egypt, and grew there into a great nation (vers.
1—7). But the words which the Lord had spoken to Abra m
(Gen. xv. 13) were also fulfilled in relation to his seed in
.ftgypt. - The children ot Israel were oppressed in a strange
land, were compelled to serve the Egyptians (vers. 8-14), and
were in great danger of being entirely crushed by them ("vers.
15-22).
Vera. 1-7. To place the multiplication of the children of
Israel into a strong nation in its true light, as the commencement
of the realization of the promises of God, the number of the
souls that went down with Jacob to Egypt is repeated from
Gen. xlvi. 27 (on the number 70, in which Jacob is included,
see the notes on this passage) ; and the repetition of the names
of the twelve sons of Jacob serves to give to the history which
follows a character of completeness within itself. " With Jacob
they came, every one and his house" i.e. his sons, together with
their families, their wives, and their children. The sons are
arranged according to their mothers, as in Gen. xxxv. 23—26,
and the sons of the two maid-servants stand last. Joseph,
indeed, is not placed in the list, but brought into special pro-
minence by the words, "for Joseph teas in Egypt" (ver. 5), sine*
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. L 8-H. 419
he did not go down to Egypt along with the house of Tacob,
and occupied an exalted position in relation to them there.—
Vers. 6 sqq. After the death of Joseph and his brethren and
the whole of the family that had first immigrated, there occurred
that miraculous increase in the number of the children of
Israel, by which the blessings of creation and promise were fully
realized. The words rig, VTiW* {swarmed^ , and *3"i* point back
to Gen. i. 28 and viii. 17, and «W£ to DWP >ij in Gen. xviii. 18.
" The land was filled tcith them," i.e. the land of Egypt, particu-
larly Goshen, where they were settled (Gen. xlvii. 11). The extra-
or d i nary fruitfuh igsfi of Frrypt, in hnt.h men and cattle ia_nUi\sfr d
n ot only by ancient writgja, bat by m,"d/f " trawjlf" nUf» (yid.
Aristotelis hist, animal, vii. 4, 5 ; C olume lla de re rust. iii. 8 ;
JPlmTflist. n. vii. 3 ; also Rosenmuller a. und n. Morgenland i.
p. 252). This blessing of nature was heightened still further in
the case of the Israelites by the grace of the promise, so that the
increase became extraordinarily great (see the comm. on chap,
xii. 37).
Vers. 8—14. The promised blessing was manifested chiefly
in the fact, that all the measures adopted by the cunning of
Pharaoh to weaken and diminish the Israelites, instead of check-
ing, served rather to promote their continuous increase. — Ver.
8. " There arose a new king over Egypt, who knew not Joseph?
Dig] signifies he came to the throne, pi? de notingJu3_,appejaiaiijea
'm\ti&aafr as in Deut. xxxiv. 10. A " new king" (LXX. :
fiao-ihei*} Srepof ; the other ancient versions, rex novus) i^Jking
w ho follows different principles of government from his prede-
cessors. Cf. P'B^ gi D'iftjj, " new gods /' in distinction from the
God that their fathers had worshipped, Judg. v. 8 ; Deut. xxxii.
17. That this king belonged to a new dynasty, as the majority
of commentators follow Josephus 1 in assuming, cannot be inferred
with certainty from the predicate new ; but it is very probable,
as furnishing the readiest explanation of the change in the prin-
ciples of government. The question itself, however, is of no
direct importance in relation to theology, though it has consider-
able interest in connection with Egyptological researches.* The
1 Ant. ii. 9, 1. T« fiavihuctf tit iJXAov »Tmp fctrecXtiXvSvtaf.
3 The want of trustworthy accounts of the history of ancient Egypt and
its rulers precludes the possibility of bringing this question to a decision. It
is true that attempts have been made to mix it up in various ways with the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
420 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
new king did not acknowledge Joseph, i.e. his great merits in
relation to Egypt. 3TP to sign i fies here, not to perceiv e, or ac-
knowledge, in the sense of not' wa nting toknow any thing about
him, as inl Sam. ii. 12, etc. Tn the natural course of things,
the merits of Joseph might very well have been forgotten long
before ; for the multiplication of the Israelites into a numerous
people, which had taken place in the meantime, is a sufficient
proof that a very long time had elapsed since Joseph's death.
At the same time such forgetfulness does not usually take place
all at once, unless the acconnt handed down has been inten-
statements which Josephus has transmitted from Manetho with regard to the
role of the Hyksos in Egypt (c. Ap. i. 14 and 26), and the rising up of the " new
king" ha s been identifi ed sometimes with the commen cement of the Hyks os
rule, and at other tunes with'tlie ri JlUTh ol : the na tive 1 dynasty on the exp ul-
si on oTtEe Hyfc gg: JtSut just as the accounts ol Ch'e ancients wiih regard to
the Hyksos bear throughout the stamp of very distorted legends and exagger-
ations, so the attempts of modern inquirers to clear up the confusion of these
legends, and to bring out the historical truth that lies at the foundation of
them all, have led to nothing but confused and contradictory hypotheses ;
so that the greatest Egyptologists of our own days, — viz. Lepsius, Bunten,
and Brugsch — difer throughout, and are even diametrically opposed to one
another in their views respecting the dynasties of Egypt. Hot a si ngle trace
o£ the Hy ksos d fnasty is to be found either in or upon the ancient monu -
menta l The cIo< umentaTproofs of Bus' existence of a dynasty of foreign
kings, which tho Vicomte de Rouge thought that he had discovered in the
Papyrus Saltier Ho. 1 of the British Museum, and which Brugsch pronounced
" an Egyptian document concerning the Hyksos period," have since then
been declared untenable both by Brugsch and Lepsius, and therefore given
up again. Neither Herodotus nor Diodorus Siculus heard anything at all
about the Hyksos, though the former made very minute inquiry of the Egyp-
tian priests of Memphis and Heliopolis. And lastly, t he notices of Egypt
and its kings, which w£ meet with in Genesis and Exodus, do not contain
the_^ightesiyntiiaation_that_there Were foreign klngrTirting _ therT5ttller in
Joseph j or Moses' days, or that the genuine Egyptian spirit which pervades
these notices was nothing more than the " outward adoption" of Egyptian
customs and mode) of thought. If wc add to this the unquestionably legen-
dary character of the Manetho accounts, there is always the greatest proba-
bility in the views of those inquirers who regard the two accounts given by
Manetho concerning the Hyksos as two different forms of one and the same
legend, and the historical fact upon which this legend was founded as being
the 430 years' sojourn of the Israelites, which had been thoroughly distorted
in the national interests of Egypt. — For a further expansion and defence of
this view see Ha'verniclc's Einlettung in d. A.T.i. 2, pp. 338 sqq., Ed. 2 (In-
troduction to the Pentateuch, pp. 235 sqq. English translation).
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. I. 8-14. 421
tionally obscured or suppressed. If the new king, therefore, did
not know Joseph, the reason must simply have been, that he did
not trouble himself about the past, and did not want to know
anything about the measures of his predecessors and the events
of their reigns. The passage is correctly paraphrased by Jona-
than thus : non ag novit (D^n) Josephum nee ambulavit in statutis
gjug- ForgetfulnesTof Joseph1>rought the favouTshown to the
Israelites by the kings of Egypt to a close. As they still c on-
t inued foreigners both in religion an d customs, their rapid In-
crease excited distrust in the mind of the Icing, and induced
h im to ta ke steps tor staying their increase and reducing their
s treng th. The statement that ' " Ike peopETof the cMtarerTof
Israel" faFfiC. '?.? Q ? ht. " nation, viz. the sons of Israel ;" for D?
with the dist. accent is not the construct state, and ^trie* m is
in apposition, cf. Ges. § 113) were " more and mightier" th an the
E gyptians, is no doubt an exag geration. — Ver. 10. "Let us deal
w isely with them" i.e. act craftily towards them. B?nnfl, sapien-
»em se gessit (Eccl. vii. 16), is used here oTpolitical craftiness,
or worldly wisdom combined with craft and cunning (jcaraao-
^)tad>fie0a, LXX.), and therefore is altered into ^Hil in Ps. cv.
25 (cf. Gen. xxxvii. 18). The reason assigned by the king for the
measures he was about to propose, was the fear that in case of
war the Israelites might make common causewith his enenijes, and
then remove from Egypt.Itwas not the conquest of his kingdom
that he was afraid of, but alliance with his enemies and emigra-
tion. ?w is used here, as in Gen. xiil. 1, etc., to denote removal
from Egypt to Canaan. He was acquainted with the home of
the Israelites therefore, and cannot have been entirely ignorant
of the circumstances of their settlement in Egypt. But he re-
garded them as his subjects, and was unwilling that they should
leave the country, and therefore was anxious to prevent the pos-
sibility of their emancipating themselves in the event of war. —
In the form fUttnpFi for nj^pn, according to the frequent inter-
change of the forms n"^ and K"S> (vid. Gen. xlii. 4), ru is trans-
ferred from the feminine plural to the singular, to distinguish
the 3d pers. fern, from the 2d pers., as in Judg. v. 26, Job xvii.
16 (vid. Ewald, § 191c, and Ges. § 47, 3, Anm. 3). Conse-
quently there is no necessity either to understand npriTO collec-
tively as signifying soldiers, or to regard Utn.i»?, the reading
adopted by the LXX. (cvjiftfj fnuv), the Samaritan, Chaldee,
Digitized by VjOOQlC
^
422 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
Syriac, and Vulgate, as " certainly the original," as Knobel lias
done.
The first measure adopted (ver. 11) consisted in the appoint-
ment of taskmasters over the Israelites, to bend them down by
hard labour. O'BO nb bailiffs o ver the serf s. O'BO from DO
signifies, not feudal service, but feudal labourers, serfs (see my
Commentary on 1 Kings iv. 6). nay to bend, to wear out ap y
one's strength (Ps. cii. 24). By hard feudal labour (ni^D bur-
densTburdenSome toil) Pharaoh hoped, according to the ordinary
maxims of tyrants (Aristot. polit. 5, 9 ; Liv. hist. i. 56, 59), to
break down the physical strength of Israel and lessen its increase,
— since a population always grows more slowly under oppression
than in the midst of prosperous circumstances, — and also to crush
their spirit so as to banish the very wish for liberty. — J3JJ, and
so Israel built (was compelled to build) provision or magazine
cities (vid. 2 Chron. xxxii. 28, ci ties for the s toring of the har-
v est), in which the produce of the land w as housed, partlytor
p urpos es of t rade, and partly for provisioning the arm y in time
o f war 1^— not fortresses. iro\et? 6%ypai, as the L AX\ have ren-
dered it. Pithom was Harovficx; ; it was situated, according to
Herodotus (2, 158), upon the canal which commenced above
Bybastus and connected the Nile with the Bed Sea. This city
is called Thou or Thoum in the Itiner. Anton., the Egyptian
article pi being dropped, and according to Jomard (descript. t. 9,
p. 368) is to be sought for on the site of the modern Abassieh in
the Wady Tumilat. — Raemses (cf . Gen. xlvii. 11) was the ancient
Heroopolis^ and is not to be looked for on the site of the modern
Belbeis. In support of the latter supposition, Stickel, who agrees
with Kurtz and Knobel, adduces chiefly the statement of the
Egyptian geographer Makrizi, that in the (Jews') book of the
law Belbeis is called the land of Goshen, in which Jacob dwelt
when he came to his son Joseph, and that the capital of the
province was el Sharkiyeh. This place is a day's journey (or
as others affirm, 14 hours) to the north-east of Cairo on the
Syrian and Egyptian road. It served as a meeting-place in the
middle ages for the caravans from Egypt to Syria and Arabia
{Bitter, Erdkunde 14, p. 59). It is said to have been in exist-
ence before the Mohammedan conquest of Egypt. But the clue
cannot be traced any farther back ; and it is too far from the
Red Sea for the Raemses of the Bible (vid. chap. xii. 37). The
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. I. 8-14. 423
authority of Makrisi is quite counterbalanced by the much older
statement of the Septuagint, in which Jacob is made to meet his
son Joseph in Heroopolis; the words of Gen. xlvi. 29, "and
Joseph went up to meet Israel his father to Goshen" being
rendered thus : eli owdvm)<riv 'lapaijX t^S Trarpl avrov tcaff
'Hpoxov -jroXiv. Hengstenberg is not correct in saying that the
later name Heroopolis is here substituted for the older name
Raemses ; and Gesenins, Kurtz, and Knobel are equally wrong
in affirming that icaff 'Hpaxov iroKtv is supplied ex ingenio suo ;
but the place of meeting, which is given indefinitely as GosJieu
in the original, is here distinctly named. Now if this more pre-
cise definition is not an arbitrary conjecture of the Alexandrian
translators, but sprang out of their acquaintance with the country,
and is really correct, as Kurtz has no doubt, it follows that
Heroopolis belonged to the yrj 'Pa/j^aai) (Gen. xlvi. 28, LXX.),
or was situated within it. But this district formed the centre
of the Israelitish settlement in Goshen ; for according to Gen.
xlvii. 11, Joseph gave his father and brethren " a possession in
the best of the land, in the land of Raemses." Following this
passage, the LXX. have also rendered JB>3 rrcnK in Gen. xlvi. 28
by et? yfjv 'Pafte<raij, whereas in other places the land of Goshen
is simply called frj Teaep, (Gen. xlv. 10, xlvi. 34, xlvii. 1, etc.).
But if Heroopolis belonged to the yfj 'Pafteaarj, or the province
of Raemses, which formed the centre of the land of Goshen that
was assigned to the Israelites, this city must have stood in the
immediate neighbourhood of Raemses, or have been identical
with t. Now, since the researches of the scientific men attached
to the great French expedition, it has been generally admitted
that Heroopolis occupied the site of the modern Abu Keisheib in
the Wady Tumilat, between Thoum = JPUkom and the Birhet
Temsah or Crocodile Lake ; and according to the Itiner. p. 170,
it was only 24 Roman miles to the east of Pithom, — a position
that was admirably adapted not only for a magazine, but also
for the gathering-place of Israel prior to their departure (chap,
xii. 37).
But Pharaoh's first plan did not accomplish his purpose (ver.
12). The multiplication of Israel went on just in proportion to
the amount of the oppression (J| =ltfK? prout, ita; ps as in Gen.
xxx. 30, xxviii. 14), so that the Egyptians were dismayed at the
Israelites (pp to feel dismay, or fear, Num. xxii. 3). In this in-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
424 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
crease of their numbers, which surpassed all expectation, there
was the manifestation of a higher, supernatural, and to them
awful power. But instead of bowing before it, they still en-
deavoured to enslave Israel through hard servile labour. In
vers. 13, 14 we have not an account of any fresh oppression ;
but " the crushing by hard labour" is represented as enslaving
the Israelites and embittering their lives. *P)B hard oppression,
from the Chaldee *pB to break or crush in pieces. " They em-
bittered tlieir life with liard labour in clay and bricks (making
clay into bricks, and working with the bricks when made), and
in all kinds of labour in the field (this was very severe in Egypt
on account of the laborious process by which the ground was
watered, Deut. xi. 10), Drnbjp>3 TlK with regard to all their labour,
which they worked (i.e. performed) through them (viz. the Israel-
ites) with severe oppression." jr$0 TIN is also dependent upon
^J?* as a second accusative (Ewald, § 277d). Bricks of clay
were the building materials most commonly used in Egypt. The
e mploym ent of foreignersjn this kind of labour is t o be seen
r epresen tJcTTn a painting, discovered in the ruins of Thebes,
and given TntEe Egyptological works otTZbselttftt and Wilkinson,
in which workmen who are evidently not Egyptians are occupied
in making bricks^ whilst two Egyptians with sticks are standing
as overlookers ;— even~if the labourers are not ihtende(I~for "the
Israelites, as the Jewish physiognomies would lead us to sup-
pose. (For fuller details, see Hengstetiberg's Egypt and the
Books of Moses, p. 80 sqq. English translation).
Vers. 15-21. As the first plan miscarried, the king proceeded
to try a second, and that a bloody act of cruel despotism. He
commanded the midwives to destroy the male children in the
birth and to leave only the girls alive. The midwives named
in ver. 15, who are not Egyptian but Hebrew women, were no
doubt the heads of the whole profession, and were expected to
communicate their instructions to their associates, lotf*) in ver.
16 resumes the address introduced by "iDm in ver. 15. The ex-
pression op JMrrey . of which such various renderings have been
given, is used in Jer. xviii. 3 to denote the revolving table of a
potter, i.e. the two round discs between which a potter forms his
earthenware vessels by turning, and appears to be transferred
here to the vagina out of which the child twists itself, as it were
like the vessel about to be formed out of the potter's discs.
Digitized by LaOCKMC
chap. i. n. 425
Knobel has at length decided in favour of this explanation, at
which the Targumists hint with their NTOjltD. When the mid-
wives were called in to assist at a birth, they were to look care-
fully at the vagina ; and if the child were a boy, they were to
destroy it as it came out of the womb, njm for nj'n from *n,
see Gen. iii. 22. The 1 takes kametz before the major pause,
as in Gen. xliv. 9 (cf. Ewald, § 243a).— Ver. 17. But the mid-
wives feared God (Tia-Elohim^ the personal T true QodV and did
not execute the king's command. — Ver. 18. When questioned
upon the matter, the explanation which they gave was, that
the Hebrew women were not like the delicate women of Egypt,
but were rf'll " vigorous" (had much vital energy : Abenezrd),
so that they gave birth to their children before the midwives
arrived. They succeeded in deceiving the king with this reply,
as chil dbirth is remarkably rapid and easy in the_case of Arabian
women (see Burckhardt, Beduinen, p. 78 ; Tiscliendorf, Metse
i. p. 108). — Vers. 20, 21. God rewarded them for their con-
duct, and " made them houses," i.e. gave them families and pre-
served their posterity. In this sense to " make a house" in 2
Sam. vii. 11 is interchanged with to " build a house" in ver. 27
(vid. Ruth iv. 11). orb for tn? as in Gen. xxxi. 9, etc. Through
not carrying out the ruthless command of the king, they had
helped to build up the families of Israel, and their own families
were therefore built up by God. Thus God r ewarded them .
" n ot, however, beca use they lied, b ut because they, wpra mftrci-
f uj to the people of _G od ; it was not their falsehood therefore
that was rewarded, but their kindness (more correctly, their fear
of God), their benignity of mind, not the wickedness of their
lying ; and for the sake of what was good, God forgave what
was evil." (Augustine, contra mendac. c. 19.)
Ver. 22. The failure of his second plan drove the king to
acts of open violence. He issued commands to all his subjects
to throw every Hebrew boy that was born into the river (i.e.
the Nile). The fact, that this command, if carried out, would
necessarily have resulted in the extermination of Israel, did not
in the least concern the tyrant ; and this cannot be adduced as
forming any objection to the historical credibility of the narra-
tive, since other cruelties of a similar kind are to be found
recorded in the history of the world. Clericus has cited the
conduct of the Spartans towards the helots. Nor can the num-
PENT. — VOL. I. 2 13
Digitized by VjOOQlC
/ \
\£*
426 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
bers of the Israelites at the time of the exodus be adduced as a
proof that no such murderous command can ever have been
issued ; for nothing more can be inferred from this, than that
the command was neither fully executed nor long regarded, as
the Egyptians were not all so hostile to the Israelites as to be
very zealous in carrying it out, and the Israelites would cer-
tainly neglect no means of preventing its execution. Even
\ Pharaoh's obstinate refusal to let the people go, though it cer-
; tainly is inconsistent with the intention to destroy them, cannot
y/ shake the truth of the narrative, but may be accounted for on
psychological grounds, from the very nature of pride and ty-
ranny which often act in the most reckless manner without at
all regarding the consequences, or on historical grounds, from
the supposition not only that the king who refused the permis-
sion to depart was a different man from the one who issued the
murderous edicts (cf. chap. ii. 23), but that when the oppression
had continued for some time the Egyptian government generally
discovered the advantage they derived from the slave labour of
the Israelites, and hoped through a continuance of that oppres-
sion so to crush and break their spirits, as to remove all ground
for fearing either rebellion, or alliance with their foes.
BIRTH AND EDUCATION OF MOSES ; FLIGHT FROM EGYPT, AND
LIFE IN MIDIAN. — CHAP. II.
Vers. 1-10. Bikth and education of Moses. — Whilst
Pharaoh was urging forward the extermination of the Israelites,
God was preparing their emancipation. According to the
divine purpose, the murderous edict of the king was to lead to
the training and preparation of the human deliverer of Israel.
— Vers. 1, 2. At the time when all the Hebrew boys were
ordered to be thrown into the Nile, u there went (tpn contri-
.- butes to the pictorial character of the account, and serves to
Uroiing out its importance, just as in Gen. xxxv. 22, Deut. xxxi. 1)
' vt a man of the house of Levi — according to chap. vi. 20 and Num.
xxvi. 59, it was Amram, of the Levitical family of Kohath —
and married a daughter (i.e. a descendant) of Levi," named Joche-
bed, who bore him a son, viz. Moses. From chap. vi. 20 we
learn that Moses was not the first child of this marriaffej bnt hi s
Digitized by VjOOQlC
chap. n. 1-10. 427
brother Aaron ; and fr om yer. _Z oi^ih^j^hapter, it is evident
th at when Mos es was born, his sis ter M iriam was byjnomeans a
c hild (Num. xxvi. 59). Both of these had been born beforethe
murderous edict was issued (chap. i. 22). They are not men-
tioned here, because the only question in hand was the birth and
deliverance of Moses, the future deliverer of Israel. " WJten
the mother saw that the child teas beatUiful" (aio as in Gen. vi.
2 ; LXX. acrrehs:), she began to think about his preservation.
The ve ry beau ty of the ch ild was to her " a peculiar token of
divine approval, an d a sign that Gpil hafLjSOn^, &p£CiaT^3fi3gn
concerning him" {Delitzsch on Heb. xi. 23). The expression
aore'tb? rq> He$ in Acts vii. 20 points to this. She therefore hid
the new-born child for three months, in the hope of saving him
alive. This hope, however, neither sprang from a revelation
made to her husband before the birth of her child, that he was
appointed to be the saviour of Israel, as Josephus affirms (Ant.
ii. 9, 3), either from his own imagination or according to the
belief of his age, nor from her faith in the patriarchal promises,
but primarily from the nature 1 love of parents for their off-
spring. And if the hiding of the child is praised in Heb. xi. 23
as an act of faith, that faith was manifested in their not obey-
ing the king's commandment, but fulfilling without fear of man
all that was required by that parental love, which God approved,
and which was rendered all the stronger by the beauty of the
child, and in their confident assurance, in spite of all apparent
impossibility, that their effort would be successful (vid. Delitzsch
ut supra). This confidence was shown in the means adopted by
the mother to save the child, when she could hide it no longer.
— Ver. 3. She placed the infant in an ark of bulrushes by the
bank of the Nile, hoping that possibly it might be found by
some compassionate hand, and still be delivered. The dagesh
dirim. in frBVn serves to separate the consonant in which it
stands from the syllable which follows (vid. Ewald, § 92c; Ges.
§ 20, 2b). WO i T\2R a little chest of rushes . Th e use o f the
word nan (ark) is pr obably intended to call to mind the ar k in
wh ich Noa h was saved" Jmd. Tien. vi. 14). XQ^papyrus, the
paper_r£ed_l_a kind of rush which was very common in ancient
Egypt, but has almost entirely disappeared, or, as Pruner affirms
(dgypt. Naturgesch. p. 55), is nowhere to be found. It had a
triangular stalk about the thickness of a finger, which grew to
Digitized by VjOOQlC
428 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
the height of ten feet; and from this the lighter Nile boats were
made, whilst the peeling of the plant was used for sails, mat-
tresses, mats, sandals, and other articles, but chiefly for the
preparation of paper (vid. Celsii Hierobot. ii. pp. 137 sqq. ; Heng-
Sternberg, Egypt and the Books of Moses, pp. 85, 86, transl.).
^l 1 ?™?]* for > s ni?nn with mappik omitted : and cemented (pitched)
it with ion bitumen, the asphalt of the Dead Sea, to fasten the
papyrus stalks, and with pitch, to make it water-tight, and put it
in the reeds by the bank of the Nile, at a spot, as the sequel
shows, where she knew that the king's daughter was accustomed
to bathe. For " the sagacity of the mother led her, no doubt,
so to arrange the whole, that the issue might be just what is re-
lated in vers. 5-9" (Baumgarten). The daughter stationed
herself a little distance off, to see what happened to the child
(ver. 4). This sister of Moses was most probably the Miriam
who is frequently mentioned afterwards (Num. xxvi. 59). 3imri
for 3£nn. The infinitive form nyn as in Gen. xlvi. 3. — Ver. 5.
Pharaoh's dau ghter is called Thermoytliis or Merris in Jewi sh
tradition, and by the Rabbins WO. i Joa'ty is to be connected
with Tin, and the construction with ?J? to be explained as referring
to the descent into (upon) the river from the rising bank. The
fact t hat a king's daughter should bathe in_the o pen river is cer-
tainly opposed to the customs of the modern, Mohammedan East,
where this is only done by women of the lower orders, and that
in remote places (Lane, Manners and Customs); but it is in ha r-
mony with the c ustoms of ancient Eg ypt, 1 and in perfect agree-
ment with the notions of the early Egyptians respecting the
sanctity of the Nile, to which divine honours even were paid
(vid. Hengstenberg's Egypt, etc. pp. 109, 110), and with the be-
lief, which was common to both ancient and modern Egyptians,
in the power of its waters to impart fruitfulness and prolong
life (vid. Strabo, xv. p. 695, etc., and Seetzen, Travels iii. p. 204).
Vers. 6 sqq. The exposure of the child at once led the king's
daughter to conclude that it was one of the Hebrews' children.
The fact that she took compassion on the weeping child, and
notwithstanding the king's command (i. 22) took it up and had
it brought up (of course, without the knowledge of the king),
may be accounted for from the love to children which is innate
I 1 Wilkinson gives a picture of a bathing scene, in which an Egyptian
woman of rank is introduced, attended by four female servants.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
chap, it 1-10. 429
in the female sex, and the superior adroitness of a mother's heart,
which co-operated in this case, though without knowing or in-
tending it, in the realization of the divine plan of salvation.
Competens fuit divina vindicta, ut suis affectibm puniatur parri-
cida et filice provisione pereat qui genitrices interdixerat parturire
{August. Sermo 89 de temp.). — Ver. 9. With the directions,
" Take this child away ('? 7*!? for "O^n used here in the sense of
leading, bringing, carrying away, as in Zech. v. 10, Eccl. x.
20) and suckle it for me" the king's daughter gave the child to
its mother, who was unknown to her, and had been fetched as a
nurse. — Ver. 10. When the child had grown large, i.e. had
been weaned fa? as in Gen. xxi. 8), the mother, who acted as
nurse, brought it back to the queen's daughter, who then adopted
it as her own son, and called it Moses (pfo) : u for" she said,
" out of the water have I drawn him" (3nrPE>a) . As Pharaoh's
daughter gave this name to the child as her adopted son, it
must be an Egyptian name. The Greek form of the name,
Mwvafp (LXX.), also points to this, as Josephus affirms. " Ther-
muthis," he says, " imposed this name upon him, from what had
happened when he was put into the river ; for the Egyptian s l/,TL/^ l ,
c all water mo, and those who are resc ued from the water uses*" r^^f/
(Ant. ii. 9, 6, Whiston's translation). The correctness of this
statement is confirmed by the Coptic, which is derived from the
old Egyptian. 1 Now, t h ough we find the name explained in .the
text from the Hebrew nc^, this is not to be regarded as a philo-
l ogical or etymological explanation, but as^ a theological inter-
pretation, referring to the importance of the person rescued from*
the water to the Israelitish nation. In the lips of an Israelite,
the name Mouje, which was so little suited to the Hebrew organs
of speech, might be involuntarily altered into Moshe ; " and this
t ransformation be came an unin tentional prophecy, for the_person
d rawn out did become, in fact, the drawer out" (Kurtz). Conse-
quently KnobeVs supposition~th~at the writer' regarded nB*D as a
participle Poal with the o dropped, is to be rejected as inad-
missible. — There can be no doubt that, as the adopted son of
1 Josephus gives a somewhat different explanation in his book against
Apion (i. 81), when he says, " His true name was Mouses, and signifies a
person who is rescued from the water, for the Egyptians call water Moii."
Other explanations, though less probable ones, are attempted by Gesenius
in his Thes. p. 824, and Knobel in he.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
430 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
Pharaoh's daughter, Moses received a thoroughly Egyptian
training, and was educated in all the wisdom of the Egyptians,
as Stephen states in Acts vii. 22 in accordance with Jewish tra-
dition. 1 Through such an education as this, he received just the
training required for the performance of the work to which
God had called him. Thus the wisdom of Egypt was employed
by the wisdom of God for the establishment of the kingdom of
God.
Vers. 11-20. Flight of Moses from Egypt to Midian.
— The education of Moses at the Egyptian court could not ex-
tinguish the feeling that he belonged to the people of Israel.
Our history does not inform us how this feeling, which was in-
herited from his parents and nourished in him when an infant
by his mother's milk, was fostered still further after he had been
handed over to Pharaoh's daughter, and grew into a firm, de-
cided consciousness of will. All that is related is, how this con-
sciousness broke forth at length in the full-grown man, in the
slaying of the Egyptian who had injured a Hebrew (vers. 11,
12), and in the attempt to reconcile two Hebrew men who were
quarrelling (vers. 13, 14). Both of these occurred " in those
days," i.e. in the time of the Egyptian oppression, when Moses
had become great (W as in Gen. xxi. 20), i.e. had grown to be
a man. According to tr adition he wns then forty years ol d
(Acts vii. 23). What impelled him to this was not " a carnal
ambition and longing for action," or a desire to attract the atten-
tion of his brethren, but fiery love to his brethren or fellow-
countrymen, as is shown in the expression, " one of his brethren "
(ver. 11), and deep sympathy with them in their oppression and
sufferings ; whilst, at the same time, they undoubtedly displayed
the fire of his impetuous nature, and the ground-work for his
future calling. It was from this point of view that Stephen
cited these facts (Acts vii. 25, 26), for the purpose of proving to
the Jews of his own age, that they had been from time imme-
morial " stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears" (ver.
51). And this view is the correct one. Not only did Moses
1 The tradition, on the other hand, that Moses was a priest of Heliopolis,
named Osarsiph (Jos. c. Ap. i. 26, 28), is just as unhistorical as the legend
of his expedition against the Ethiopians (Jos. Ant. ii. 10), and many others
with which the later, glorifying Saga embellished his life in Egypt.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. 1L 11-20. 431
intend to help his brethren when he thus appeared among them,
but this forcible interference on behalf of his brethren could and
should have aroused the thought in their minds, that God would
send them salvation through him. " But they understood not "
(Acts vii. 25). At the same time Moses thereby declared that
he would no longer " be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter ;
and chose rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than
to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season ; esteeming the re-
proach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt "
(Heb. xi. 24-26 ; see Delitzsch in loc). And this had its roots
in faith (jrurrei). But his conduct presents another aspect also,
which equally demands consideration. His zeal for the welfare
of his brethren urged him forward to present himself as the
umpire and judge of, his brethren before God had called him to
this, and drove him to the crime of murder, which cannot be
excused as resulting from a sudden ebullition of wrath. 1 For
he acted with evident deliberation. " He looked this way and that
way ; and when he saw no one, he slew the Egyptian, and hid him
in the sand" (ver. 12). Through his life at the Egyptian court
his own natural inclinations had been formed to rule, and they
manifested themselves on this occasion in an ungodly way. This
was thrown in his teeth by the man " in the wrong " (V&y?,
ver. 13), who was striving with his brother and doing him an
1 The judgment of Augustine is really the true one. Thus, in his
c. Faustum Manich. 1. 22, c. 70, he says, " I affirm, that the man, though
criminal and really the offender, ought not to have been put to death by
one who had no legal authority to do so. But minds that are capable of
virtues often produce vices also, and show thereby for what virtue they
would have been best adapted, if they had but been properly trained. For
just as farmers, when they see large herbs, however useless, at once conclude
that the land is good for growing corn, so that very impulse of the mind
which led Moses to avenge his brother when suffering wrong from a native,
without regard to legal forms, was not unfitted to produce the fruits of
virtue, but, though hitherto uncultivated, was at least a sign of great fer-
tility." A ugustine then comp ares thiB deed to that of Peter, when attempt-
ing to defend his Lord with a swoM (MuLli/xiVl. 31),' and adds, " Both of I
them broke through the rules of justice, not through any base inhumanity,
but through animosity that needed correction : both sinned through their
hatred of another's wickedness, and their love, though carnal, in the one case
towards a brother, in the other to the Lord. Thh fault needed pruning or
rooting up ; but yet so great a heart could be as readily cultivated for bear-
ing virtues, as land for bearing fruit."
Digitized by VjOOQlC
432 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
injury : " Who made thee a ruler and judge over us " (ver. 14) ?
and so far he was right. The murder of the Egyptian had also
become known ; and as soon as Pharaoh heard of it, he sought
to kill Moses, who fled into the land of Midian in fear for his
life (ver. 15). Thus dread of Pharaoh's wrath drove M oses from
E gypt into the des ert. For all that, it is stated in Heb. xi. 27,
that " by faith (irurrei) Moses forsook Egypt, not fearing the
wrath of the king." This faith, however, he manifested not by
fleeing — his flight was rather a sign of timidity — but by leaving
Egypt ; in other words, by renouncing his position in Egypt,
where he might possibly have softened down the king's wrath,
and perhaps even have brought help and deliverance to his
brethren the Hebrews. By the fact that he did not allow such
human hopes to lead him to remain in Egypt, and was not
afraid to increase the king's anger by his flight, he manifested
faith in the invisible One as though he saw Him, commending
not only himself, but his oppressed nation, to the care and pro-
tection of God (yid. Delitzsch on Heb. xi. 27).
The situation of the land of Midian, to which Moses fled,
cannot be determined with certainty. The Midianites, who were
descended from Abraham through Keturah (Gen. xxv. 2, 4),
had their principal settlements on the eastern side of the Elanitic
Gulf, from which they spread northwards into the fields of
Moab (Gen. xxxvi. 35 ; Num. xxii. 4, 7, xxv. 6, 17, xxxi. 1 sqq. ;
Judg. vi. 1 sqq.), and carried on a caravan trade through Canaan
to Egypt (Gen. xxxvii. 28, 36 ; Isa. lx. 6). On the eastern side
of the Elanitic Gulf, and five days' journey from Aela, there
stood tne towii""bF Madian, the ruins of which are mentioned
by Edrisi and Abulfeda, who also speak of a well there, from
which Moses watered the flocks of his father-in-law Shoeib (i.e.
Jethro). But we are precluded from fixing upon this as the
home of Jethro by Ex. iii. 1, where Moses is said to have come
to Horeb, when he drove Jethro's sheep behind the desert. The
Midianites on the eastern side of the Elanitic Gulf could not
possibly have led their flocks as far as Horeb for pasturage. We
must assume, therefore, that, on . fi branch of t h e Midianites, to
whom Jet hro was priest, had crosse d the Elani tic Gulf, and
settled In the southern half of the peninsula of Sinai (ci. chap,
iii. 1). There is nothing improbable in such a supposition.
There are several branches of the Towara Arabs occupying the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
chap. n. 11-20. 433
southern portion of Arabia, that have sprung from Hedjas in
this way; and even in the most modern times considerable
intercourse was carried on between the eastern side of the gulf
and the peninsula, whilst there was formerly a ferry between
Szytta, Madian, and Nehba. — The words u and lie sat down (3B»1,
i.e. settled) in the land of Midian, and eat down by the well" are
hardly to be understood as simply meaning that " when he was
dwelling in Midian, he sat down one day by a well " (Baumg.),
but that i mmediately upon his arrival ia Midi&B,. where hejn-
te nded to dwell or_stayj_he sat down by the well. The definite
article before 1N3 points to the well as the only one, or the
principal well in that district. Knobel refers to " the well at
Sherm ; " but at Sherm el Moye (i.e. water-bay) or Sherm el Bir
(well-bay) there are " several deep wells finished off with stones,"
which are " evidently the work of an early age, and have cost
great labour " (Burckhardl, Syr. p. 854) ; so that the expression
" the well " would be quite unsuitable. Moreover there is but a
very weak support for KnobeVs attempt to determine the site of
Midian, in the identification of the Mapavlrai, or Mapavek (of
Strabo and Artemidorus) with Madyan.
Vers. 16. sqq. Here Moses secured for himself a hospitable
reception from a priest of Midian, and a home at his house, by
doing as Jacob had formerly done (Gen. orix. 10), viz. helping
his daughters to water their father's sheep, and protecting them
against the other shepherds. — On the form JVB^ for jyEn > vid.
Gen. xix. 19 ; and for the masculine suffixes to B1tsn£ and DjtfX,
Gen. xxxi. 9. ruVrn for nrWin, as in Job v. 12, cf. Ewald, § 198a.
— The flock of this priest consisted of nothing but jtfv, »"•*• sheep
and goats (vid. chap. iii. 1). Even now there are no oxen reared
upon the peninsula of Sinai, as there is not sufficient pasturage
or water to be found. For the same reason there are no horses
kept there, but only camels and asses (cf. Seetzen, R. iii. 100 ;
WelUted, R. in Arab. ii. p. 66). In ver. 18 the priest is called
Reguel, in chap. iii. 1 Jethro. This title, " the priest of Midian,"
shows that he was the spiritual head of t Ke~B ranch of the
Midian it es located thereTou t hardly that ne w_as th e prmc e^or
t empor al Read as well, like Melchizedek, as the Targumists have
indicated by nan, and as Artapanus and the poet Ezekiel dis-
tinctly affirm. The other shepherds would hardly have treated
the daughters of the Emir in the manner described in ver. 17.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
434 THE SECOND HOOK OF MOSES.
The name /yP "| ( Reguel, friend pf God) indicates that this jpnest
se rved the old Semitic God El (?ff) . This Reguel, who gave his
daughter Zipporali to Moses, was unquestionably the same person
as Jethro (i" in, - ) the jnh of Moses and priest of Midian (chap. iii.
1). Now, as RegueTs son Chobab is called Moses' \\}~ in Num.
x. 29 (cf. Judg. Iv . 11), the Targumigts and others supposed
Re guel to be the g rand father of Zipporali, in which case 3N
would mean the grandfather in ver. 18, and rfl the granddaugh-
ter in ver. 21. This hypothesis would undoubtedly be admis-
sible, if it were probable on other grounds. But as a comparison
of Num. x. 29 with Ex. xviii. does not necessarily prove that
Chobab and Jethro were the same persons, whilst Ex. xviii. 27
seems to lead to the very opposite conclusion, and )nn, like the
Greek yapfipos, may be used for both father-in-law and brother-
in-law, it would probably be more correct to regard Chobab as
Moses' brother-in-law, Reguel as the proper name of his father-
in-law, and Jetliro, for which Jether (proestantia) is substituted
in chap. iv. 18, as either a title, or the surname which showed
the rank of Reguel in his tribe, like the Arabic Imam, i.e. prce-
positus, spec, saerorum antistes. Ranke's opinion, that Jethro
and Chobab were both of them sons of Reguel and brothers-in-
law of Moses, is obviously untenable, if only on the ground that
according to the analogy of Num. x. 29 the epithet " son of
Reguel " would not be omitted in chap. iii. 1.
Vers. 21-25. Moses' life in Midian. — As Reguel gave a
hospitable welcome to Moses, in consequence of his daughters'
report of the assistance that he had given them in watering
their sheep ; it pleased Moses (?$1) to dwell with him. The
primary meaning of ?*Ktn is voluit (yid. Ges. thes.). JtO? for
MJKTp: like \5>Vf in Gen. iv. 23. — Although Moses received
Reguel' s daughter Zipporah as his wife, probably after a
lengthened stay, his life in Midian was still a banishment and
a school of bitter humiliation. He gave expression to this feel-
ing at the birth of his first son in the name which he gave it,
viz. Gjrshom (DE*" 1 , 3 ., i.e. banishment, from EH3 to drive or thru st
away ) ; "for," he said, interpreting the name according to the
sound, " I liave been a stranger (13) in a strange land." In a
strange land he was obliged to live, far away from his brethren
in Egypt, and far from his fathers' land of promise ; and in this
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHA1'. II. 28-28. 435
strange land the longing for home seems to have been still
further increased by his wife Zipporah, who, to judge from chap,
iv. 24 sqq., neither understood nor cared for the feelings oTjhis
heart . By this he was urgecTon to perfect and unconditional
submission to the will of his God. To this feeling of submission
and confidence he gave expression at the birth of his second son,
by calling him Eliezer piy? K God is help) ; for he said, " The
God of my father (Abraham or We three patriarchs, cf . in. 6) is
my help, and has delivered me from the tword of Pharaoh " (xviii.
4). The birth of this son is not mentioned in the Hebrew text,
but his name is given in chap, xviii. 4, with this explanation. 1
In the names of his two sons, Moses expressed all that h ad
affected his mind in the land of Midian. The pride and self-
will with which he had ottered Himself in Egypt as the deliverer
and judge of his oppressed brethren, had been broken down by
the feeling of exile. This feeling, however, had not passed into
despair, but had been purified and raised into firm confidence in
the God of his fathers, who had shown himself as his helper by
delivering him from the sword of Pharaoh. In this state of
mind, not only did "his attachment to his people, and his longing
to rejoin them, instead of cooling, grow stronger and stronger "
(Kurtz), but the hope of the fulfilment of the promise given to
the fathers was revived within him, and ripened into the firm
confidence of faith.
Vers. 23-25 form the introduction to the next chapter. The
cruel oppression of the Israelites in Egypt continued without in-
termission or amelioration. "In those many days the king of
Egypt died, and the children of Israel sighed by reason of the ser-
vice" (i.e. their hard slave labour). The " many days" are the
years of oppression, or the time between the birth of Moses and
the birth of his children in Midian. The king of Egypt who
died, was in any case the king mentioned in ver. 15 ; but whether
he was one and the same with the " new king" (i. 8), or a suc-
cessor of his, cannot be decided. If the former were the case,
we should have to assume, with Baumgarten, that the death of
the king took place not very long after Moses' flight, seeing that
\ * In the Vulgate the account of his birth and name is interpolated here,
and so also insome of the later codices of the LXX. But in the oldest and
best of the Greek codices it is wanting here, so that there is no ground for
the supposition that it has fallen out of the Hebrew text.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
436 THE SECOND BOOK OF HOSES.
he was an old man at the time of Moses' birth, and had a grown-
up daughter. But the greater part of the " many days" would
then fall in his successor's reign, which is obviously opposed to
the meaning of the words, " It came to pass in those many days,
that the king of Egypt died." For this reason the other sup-
position, that the king mentioned here is a successor of the one
mentioned in chap. i. 8, has far greater probability. At the
same time, all that can be determined from a comparison of
chap. vii. 7 is, that the Egyptian oppression lasted more than
80 years. This allusion to the complaints of the Israelites, in
connection with the notice of the king's death, seems to imply
that they hoped for some amelioration of their lot from the
change of government ; and that when they were disappointed,
and groaned the more bitterly in consequence, they cried to
God for help and deliverance. This is evident from the remark,
" Tlieir cry came up unto God" and is stated distinctly in Deut.
xxvi. 7. — Vers. 24, 25. God heard their crying, and remembered
His covenant with tlie fathers : " and God saw the children of
Israel, and God noticed (them)." "This seeing and noticing
had regard to the innermost nature of Israel, namely, as the
chosen seed of Abraham" (Baumgarten). God's notice has all
the energy of love and pity. Lyra has aptly explained jnjl thus :
"ad modum cognoscentis se habuit, ostendendo dilectionem circa
eos " and LutJier has paraphrased it correctly : " He accepted
them."
CALL OF HOSES, AND HIS RETURN TO EGYPT. —
CHAP. III. AND IV.
Chap. iii. 1-iv. 18. Call of Moses. — Whilst the children
of Israel were groaning under the oppression of Egypt, God
had already prepared the way for their deliverance, and had not
only chosen Moses to be the saviour of His people, but had
trained him for the execution of His designs. — Ver. 1. When
Moses was keeping the flock of Jethro, his father-in-law, he
drove them on one occasion behind the desert, and came to the
mountains of Horeb. njft iVn, Ut, " he was feeding ;" the par-
ticiple expresses the continuance of the occupation. I3"7?n inK
does not mean ad interiora deserti (Jerome) ; but Moses drove
the sheep from Jethro' s home as far as Horeb, so that he passed
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. III. 2-5. 437
through a desert with the flock before he reached the pasture
land of Horeb. For u in this, the most elevated ground of the '
peninsula, you find the most fertile valleys, in which even fruit-
trees grow. Water abounds in this district ; consequently it is
the resort of all the Bedouins when the lower countries are dried
up" (Rosenmullef). Jethro's home was separated from Horeb,
t herefor e, by a desert, and is to be so ught 10 the sou th-east^and
n ot to the nof Ul -WBC FoTItisonly a south-easterly situation
that will explain these two facts : First, that when Moses re-
turned from Midian to Egypt, he touched again at Horeb, where
Aaron, who had come from Egypt, met him (iv. 27) ; and,
secondly, that the Israelites never came upon any Midianites on
their journey through the desert, whilst the road of Hobab the
Midianite separated from theirs as soon as they departed from
Sinai (Num. x. 30). 1 Horeb is called the Mount of God_ by
anticipation , with reference to the consecration which it subse-
quently received through the revelation of God upon its summit.
The supposition that it had been a holy locality even before the
calling of Moses, cannot be sustained. Moreover, the name is
not restricted to one single mountain, but applies to the central
group of mountains in the southern part of the peninsula (vid.
chap. xix. 1). Hence the spot where God appeared to Moses
cannot be precisely determined, although tradition has very suit-
ably given the name Wady Shoeib, i.e. Jethro's Valley, to the
valley which bounds the Jebel Musa towards the east, and sepa-
rates it from the Jebel ed Deir, because it is there that Moses is
supposed to have fed the flock of Jethro. The monastery of
Sinai, which is in this valley, is said to have been built upon the
spot where the thorn-bush stood, according to the tradition in
Antonini Placent. Itinerar. c. 37, and the annals of JEutychius
(vid. Robinson, Palestine).
Vers. 2-5. Here, at Horeb, God appeared to Moses as the
Angel of the Lord (vid. p. 185) " in aflame of fire out of the midst
of the thorn-bush" (^P, /3dro<;, rubus), which burned in the fire
and was not consumed. ?3K, in combination with U3'K, must be
a participle for 'SSD. When Moses turned aside from the road
1 The hypothesis, that, after the calling of Moses, this branch of the
Midianites left the district they had hitherto occupied, and sought out fresh
pasture ground, probably on the eastern side of the Elanitic Gulf, is as need-
lass is it is without support.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
438 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES
or spot where he was standing, " to look at this great sight" (fltOD),
i.e. the miraculous vision of the bush that was burning and yet not
burned up, Jehovah called to him out of the midst of the thorn-
bush, " Moses, Moses (t he redup lication as in Gen. xxii. 11),
draw not nigh hither : put-off thy shoes from off thy feet, for Ihe
place whereon thou standest is Italy ground" (pctvfy. The sym-
"bolical meaning of this miraculous vision, — that is to say, the
lact that it was a figurative representation of the nature and
^OT" contents of the ensuing message from God, — has long been ad-
' | * mitted. The thorn-bush in contrast with the more noble and
(. ifj/** lofty trees! Judg. ix. la) represen tedthe people ot Israel in IllHlr
lj 1^ . humiliation , as a' peopTe despised by the world. Jb'ire and the
yr* flame of fire were not " symbols of theTionness of God ;" for,
as the Holy One, " God is light, and in Him is no darkness at
all " (1 John i. 5), He " dwells in the light which no man can
approach unto" (1 Tim. vi. 16) ; and that not merely according
to the New Testament, but according to the Old Testament view
as well, as is evident from Isa. x. 17, where "the Light of Israel"
and "the Holy One of Israel" are synonymous. But " the Light
of Israel became fire, and the Holy One a flame, and burned
and consumed its thorns and thistles." Nor is " fire, from its
very nature, the source of light," according to the scriptural
view. On the contrary, light, the condition of all life, is also
the source of fire. The sun enlightens, warms, and burns (Job
xxx. 28 ; Sol. Song i. 6) ; the rays of the sun produce warmth,
heat, and fire; and light was created before the sun. Fire.
t herefor e, regarded as burning and consuming, is a figurative
repres entatio n ^ $f^ejnm^.afflicilaft.an.d destroying punishment^
(1 Oor. iii. 11 sqq.), or a s ymbol of the chastening and punitive
ju stice of the indignation and wrath of Go3T"""Tris tn nre that
the Lord comes to judgment (Dan. vii. 9, 10 ; Ezek. i. 13, 14,
27, 28; Rev. i. 14, 15). Fire sets forth the fiery indignation
which devours the adversaries (Heb. x. 27). He who "judges
and makes war in righteousness" has eyes as a flame of fire
(Rev. xix. 11, 12). Accordingly, the b urning thorn-bush repre-
s ented the people o f Israel as they wereTiurning In the tireof
affl iction, the iron furnace of -Egypt (Dent. rrr£0)r — Yofy t hough
t hlTthom-buslrwns'irarriirig; i n the fire, it was not consumed ; for ~
i n the fl ame was Jehovah, who chastens His people^ Tint does
notgive them 75ver~unto7Ieath (Ps. cxvui. 18)1 The" God of
Digitized by VjOOQlC
chap. m. 2-5. 439
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had come down to deliver His people
ont of the hand of the Egyptians (ver. 8). Although the afflic-
tion of Israel in Egypt proceeded from Pharaoh, yet was it also
a fire which the Lord had kindled to purify His people and pre-
pare it for its calling. In the flame of the burning bush the
Lord manifested Himself as the " jealous God, who visits the
sins of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth
generations of them that hate Him, and showeth mercy unto
thousands of them that love Him and keep His commandments'
(chap. xx. 5 ; Deut. v. 9, 10), who cannot tolerate the worship of
another god (xxxiv. 14), and whose anger burns against idolaters,
to destroy them (Deut. vi. 15). The "jealous God" was a
" consuming fire" in the midst of Israel (Deut. iv. 24). These
passages show that the great sight which Moses saw not only
had reference to the circumstances of Israel in Egypt, but was
a prelude to the manifestation of God on Sinai for the establish-
ment of the covenant (chap. xix. and xx.), and also a representa-
tion of the relation in which Jehovah would stand to Israel
through the establishment of the covenant made with the fathers.
For this reason it occurred upon the spot where Jehovah intended
to set up His covenant with Israel. But, as a jealous God, He
also " takes vengeance upon His adversaries" (Nahum i. 2 sqq.).
Pharaoh, who would not let Israel go, He was about to smite
with all His wonders (iii. 20), whilst He redeemed Israel with
outstretched arm and great judgments (vi. 6). — The transition
from the Angel of Jehovah (ver. 2) to Jehovah (ver. 4) proves the
identity of the two ; and the interchange of Jehovah and Elohim,
in ver. 4, precludes the idea of Jehovah being merely a national
God. The command of God to Moses to put off his shoes, may
be accounted for from the custom in the East of wearing shoes
or sandals merely as a protection from dirt. No Brahmin enters
a pagoda, no Moslem a mosque, without first taking off at least
his overshoes (Rosenm. Morgenl. i. 261 ; Robinson, Pal. ii. p.
373) ; and even in the Grecian temples the priests and priestesses
performed the service barefooted (Justin, Apol. i. c. 62 ; Bdhr,
Symbol, ii. 96). When entering other holy places also, the
Arabs and Samaritans, and even the Yezidis of Mesopotamia,
take off their shoes, that the places may not be denied by the
dirt or dust upon them (yid. Robinson, Pal. iii. 100, and LayarcCs
Nineveh and its Remains). The place of the burning bush was
Digitized by VjOOQlC
440 THE SECOND bOOK OF MOSEb.
holy because cf the presence of the holy God, and putting off
the shoes was intended to express not merely respect for the
place itself, but that reverence which the inward man (Eph. iii.
16) owes to the holy God.
Ver. 6. Jehovah then made Himself known to Moses as the
God of his fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, reminding him
through that name of the promises made to the patriarchs, which
He was about to fulfil to their seed, the children of Israel. In
the expression, " thy father," the three patriarchs are classed
together as one, just as in chap, xviii. 4 (" my father "), " be-
cause each of them stood out singly in distinction from the
nation, as having received the promise of seed directly from
God" (Baumgarten). " And Moses hid his face, for he was afraid
to look upon God" The sight of the holy God no sinful man
can bear (cf. 1 Kings xix. 12). — Vers. 7-10. Jehovah had seen
the affliction of His people, had heard their cry under their task-
masters, and had come down (TV, vid. Gen. xi. 5) to deliver them
out of the hand of the Egyptians, and to bring them up to a
good and broad land, to the place of the Canaanites ; and He
was about to send Moses to Pharaoh to bring them forth. The
land to which the Israelites were to be taken up is called a "good"
land, on account of its great fertility (Deut. viii. 7 sqq.), and a
" broad" land, in contrast with the confinement and oppression
of the Israelites in Egypt. The epithet " good" is then explained
by the expression, " a land flowing with milk and lioney " (H3J,
a participle of 3lt in the construct state ; vid. Ges. § 135) ; a pro-
verbial description of the extraordinary fertility and loveliness
of the land of Canaan (cf. ver. 17, chap. xiii. 5, xvi. 14, etc.).
Milk and honey are the simplest and choicest productions of a
land abounding in grass and flowers, and were found in Pale-
stine in great abundance even when it was in a desolate condi-
tion (Isa. vii. 15, 22 ; see my Comm. on Josh. v. 6). The
epithet broad is explained by an enumeration of the six tribes
inhabiting the country at that time (cf. Gen. x. 15 sqq. and xv.
20, 21). — Vers. 11, 12. To the divine commission Moses made
this reply : " Who am I, that I should go to Pharaoli, and bring
forth the children of Israel out of Egypt f" Some time before
he had offered himself of his own accord as a deliverer and
judge ; but now h e had learned humjlitv in the school of Midian,
and was filled in consequence with distrusTor His own power and
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. III. 0-12. 44 1
fitness. The son of Pharaoh's daughter had become a shepherd,
and felt himself too weak to go to Pharaoh. Bat God met this
distrust by the promise, " / will be with thee" which He con-
firmed by a sign, na mely, that when Israel was brought out of
Egypt, they should se rve (^V ^^ w ?r s t 1 U>)^Cf.9J ^pop" that
oses of the
mountain . Tins' sign, which was to be a pledge to Moses
success of his mission, was one indeed that required faith itself ;
but, at the same time, it was a sign adapted to inspire both
courage and confidence. God pointed out to him the success of
his mission, the certain result of his leading the people out:
Israel should serve Him upon the very same mountain in which
He had appeared to Moses. As surely as Jehovah had appeared
to Moses as the God of his fathers, so surely should Israel serve
Him there. The reality of the appearance of God formed the
pledge of His announcement, that Israel would there serve its
God ; and this truth was to fill Moses with confidence in the
execution of the divine command. The expression " serve God"
(Xarpeveiv t$> Sep, LXX.) means something more than the
immolare of the Vulgate, or the "sacrifice" of Luther; for even
though sacrifice formed a leading element, or the most important
part of the worship of the Israelites, the patriarchs before this
had served Jehovah by calling upon His name as well as offering
sacrifice. And the serv ic e of Israel at Mo unt Horeb consisted
i n their en tering into covenant with Jehovah (chap, xxiv.) ; not
only in then* receiving the law as the covenant nation, but their
manifesting obedience by presenting free-will offerings for the
building of the tabernacle (chap, xxxvi. 1-7 ; Num. vii.). 1
1 Kurtz follows the Lutheran rendering " sacrifice, ," and understands by
it the first national sacrifice ; and then, from the significance of the first,
which included potentially all the rest, supposes the covenant sacrifice to be
intended. But not only is the original text disregarded here, the fact is also
overlooked, that Luther himself has translated *ny correctly, to " serve," in
every other place. And it is not sufficient to say, that by the direction of
God (iii. 18) Moses first of all asked Pharaoh for permission merely to go a
three days' journey into the wilderness to sacrifice to their God (v. 1—3), in
consequence of which Pharaoh afterwards offered to allow them to sacrifice
(viii.'s) within the land, and at a still later period outside (viii. 21 sqq.).
For the fact that Pharaoh merely spoke of sacrificing may be explained on
the ground that at first nothing more was asked. But this first demand
arose from the desire on the part of God to make known His purposes con-
cerning Israel only step by step, that it might be all the easier for the hard
heart of the king to grant what was required. But even if Pharaoh under-
PENT. — VOL. I. 2 F
Digitized by VjOOQlC
442 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
Vers. 13-15. When Moses had been thus emboldened by the
assurance of divine assistance to undertake the mission, he in-
quired what he was to say, in case the people asked him for the
name of the God of their fathers. The supposition that the
people might ask the name of their fathers' God is not to be
attributed to the fact, that as the Egyptians had separate names
for their numerous deities, the Israelites also would want to know
the name of their own God. For, apart from the circumstance
that the name by which God had revealed Himself to the fathers
cannot have vanished entirely from the memory of the people,
and more especially of Moses, the mere knowledge of the name
would not have been of much use to them. T he question ,
"Wha t is His na me?" presupposed that the name exp ressed th e
n ature and operat ions of God, and that God would manifest in
deeds the nature expressed in His name. God therefore told
him His name, or, to speak more correctly, He explained the
name nw, by which He had made Himself known to Abraham
at the making of the covenant (Gen. xv. 7), in this way, nvnt
iTiTK "\vfa f «/ am tliat I am," and designated Himself by this
name as the absolute God of the fathers, acting with unfettered
liberty and self-dependence (cf . pp. 74—6). This name precluded
any comparison between the God of the Israelites and the deities
of the Egyptians and other nations, and furnished Moses and
his people with strong consolation in their affliction, and a power-
ful support to their confidence in the realization of His purposes
of salvation as made known to the fathers. To establish them
in this confidence, God added still further : " This is My name
for ever, and My memorial unto all generations;" that is to say,
God would even manifest Himself in the nature expressed by
the name Jehovah, and by this He would have all generations
both know and revere Him. OV}, the name, expresses the objec-
tive manifestation of the divine nature ; "I3T, memorial, the sub-
jective recognition of that nature on the part of men. iM "ft, as
in chap. xvii. 16 and Prov. xxvii. 24. The repetition of the
same word suggests the idea of uninterrupted continuance and
stood nothing more by the expression " serve God" than the offering of
sacrifice, this would not justify us in restricting the words -which Jehovah
addressed to Moses, " When thou hast brought forth the people out of Egypt,
ye shall serve God upon this mountain," to the first national offering, or to
the covenant sacrifice.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. IIL 16-20. 443
boundless duration (Ewald, § 313a). The more usual expres-
sion is l 1 ^ "iM, Deut. xxxii. 7 ; Ps. x. 6, xxxiii. 11 ; or D^M "fa,
Ps. lxxii. 5, cii. 25 ; Isa. li. 8.
Vers. 1&-20. With the command, " Go and gather Hie elders
of Israel together" God then gave Moses further instructions
with reference to the execution of his mission. On his arrival
in Egypt he was first of all to inform the elders, as the repre-
sentatives of the nation (i.e. the heads of the families, house-
holds, and tribes), of the appearance of God to him, and the
revelation of His design, to deliver His people out of Egypt and
bring them to the land of the Canaanites. He was then to go
with them to Pharaoh, and make known to him their resolution,
in consequence of this appearance of God, to go a three days'
journey into the wilderness and sacrifice to their God. The
words, " / have surely visited" point to the fulfilment of the last
words of the dying Joseph (Gen. 1. 24). «7? • T 3P? (ver. 18)
does not mean " He is named upon us" (LXX., Onk., Jon.), nor
"He has called us" (Vulg., Luth.). The latter is grammatically
wrong, for the verb is Niphal, or passive ; and though the former
has some support in the parallel passage in chap. v. 3, inasmuch
as *np? is the verb used there, it is only in appearance, for if the
meaning really were " His name is named upon (over) us," the
word lOB* (Deo would not be omitted (vid. Deut. xxviii. 10;
2 Chron. vii. 14). The real meaning is, " He has met with us,"
from iT}??, obruam fieri, ordinarily construed with ?K, but here
with ?J?, because. God comes down from above to meet with man.
The plural us is used, although it was only to Moses that God
appeared, because His appearing had reference to the whole
nation, which was represented before Pharaoh by Moses and the
elders. In the words W-rwj, "to* will go, then," equivalent to
" let us go," the request for Pharaoh's permission to go out is
couched in such a form as to answer to the relation of Israel to
Pharaoh. He had no right to detain them, but he had a right
to consent to their departure, as his predecessor had formerly
done to their settlement. Still less had he any good reason for
refusing their request to go a three days' journey into the wil-
derness and sacrifice to their God, since their return at the close
of the festival was then taken for granted. But the purpose of
God was, that Israel should not return. Was it the case, then,
that the delegates were " to deceive the king," as Knobel affirms 1
Digitized by VjOOQlC
444 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
By no means. God knew the hard heart of Pharaoh, and there-
fore directed that no more should be asked at nrst than he must
eit her grant, or display the h"arcTness""oi nis neart. Had he con-
sented, God would then have~made~knoWir'to him His whole
design, and demanded that His people should be allowed to
depart altogether. But when Pharaoh scornfully refused the
first and smaller request (chap, v.), Moses was instructed to
demand the entire departure of Israel from the land (vi. 10), and
to show the omnipotence of the God of the Hebrews before and
upon Pharaoh by miracles and heavy judgments (vii. 8 sqq.).
Accordingly, Moses persisted in demanding permission for the
people to go and serve their God (vii. 16, 26, viii. 16, ix. 1, 13,
x. 3) ; and it was not till Pharaoh offered to allow them to sacri-
fice in the land that Moses replied, " We will go three days'
journey into the wilderness, and sacrifice to Jehovah our God"
I (viii. 27) ; but, observe, with this proviso, " as He shall command
-4-us," which left, under the circumstances, no hope that they would
I return. It was an act of mercy to Pharaoh, therefore, on the
one hand, that the entire departure of the Israelites was not de-
manded at the very first audience of Moses and the representa-
tives of the nation ; for, had this been demanded, it would have
been far more difficult for him to bend his heart in obedience to
the divine will, than when the request presented was as trifling
as it was reasonable. And if he had rendered obedience to the
will of God in the smaller, God would have given him strength
to be faithful in the greater. On the other hand, as God fore-
saw his resistance (ver. 19), this condescension, which demanded
no more than the natural man could have performed, was also
to answer the purpose of clearly displaying the justice of God.
It was to prove alike to Egyptians and Israelites that Pharaoh
was "without excuse," and that his eventual destruction was (
the well-merited punishment of his obduracy. 1 n^jn *P3. lft>1, " not ,
even by means of a strong hand ;" " except through great power"
is not the true rendering, for JW does not mean iav fir), nisi.
What follows, — viz. the statement that God would so smite the /
* " This moderate request was made only at the period of the earlier
plagues. It served to put Pharaoh to the proof. God did not come fdstl'
with His whole plan and desire at first, that his obduracy might appf *•
so much the more glaring, and find no excuse in the greatness of the f°
quirement. Had Pharaoh granted this request, Israel would not have gtf
Digitized by VjOOQl
I
CHAP. III. 21, 21 445
Egyptians with miracles that Pharaoh would, after all, let Israel
go (ver. 20), — is not really at variance with this, the only admis-
sible rendering of the words. For the meaning is, that Pharaoh
would not be willing to let Israel depart even when he should
be smitten by the strong hand of God ; but that he would be
compelled to do so against his will, would be forced to do so by
the plagues that were about to fall upon Egypt. Thus even
after the ninth plague it is still stated (chap. x. 27), that " Pharaoh
would (>*iatt) not let them go ;" and when he had given permission,
in consequence of the last plague, and in fact had driven them out
(xii. 31), he speedily repented, and pursued them with his army to
bring them back again (xiv. 5 sqq.) ; from which it is clearly to
be seen that the strong hand of God had not broken his will, and
yet Israel was brought out by the same strong hand of Jehovah.
Vers. 21, 22. Not only would God compel Pharaoh to let
Israel go ; He would not let His people go out empty, but, ac-
cording to the promise in Gen. xv. 14, with great substance. "/
trill give this people favour in the eyes of the Egyptians;" that is
to say, the Egyptians should be so favourably disposed towards
them, that when they solicited of their neighbours clothes and
ornaments of gold and silver, their request should be granted.
" So shall ye spoil the Egyptians." What is here foretold as a
promise, the Israelites are directed to do in chap. xi. 2, 3 ; and
according to chap. xii. 35, 36, it was really carried out. Imme-
diately before their departure from Egypt, the Israelites asked
(w) the Egyptians for gold and silver ornaments (Dv3 not
vessels, either for sacrifice, the house, or the table, but jewels ;
cf. Gen. xxiv. 53 ; Ex. xxxv. 22 ; Num. xxxi. 50) and clothes ;
and God gave them favour in the eyes of the Egyptians, so that
they gave them to them. For ne>K "?*&, "Let every woman ask
of her (female) neighbour and of her that sojourneth in her house"
(rUVarra, from which it is evident that the Israelites did not live
apart, but along with the Egyptians), we find in chap. xi. 2,
"Let every man ask of his neighbour, and every woman of her
(female) neighbour." — ^j"^, "and put them upon your sons and
beyond it ; but bad not God foreseen, what He repeatedly says (compare,
for instance, chap. iii. 18), that he would not comply with it, He would not
thus have presented it ; He would from the beginning have revealed His
whole design. Thus Augustine remarks (quscst. 13 in Ex.)." HengsUnberg,
Diss, on the Pentateuch, vol. ii. p. 427, Ryland's translation. Clark, 1847.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
446 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
daughters" 7? tn&, to put on, applied to clothes and ornaments
in Lev. viii. 8 and Gen. xii. 42. This command and its execu-
tion hare frequently given occasion to the opponents of the
Scriptures to throw contempt upon the word of God, the asking
being regarded as borrowing, and the spoiling of the Egyptians
as purloining. At the same time, the attempts made to vindicate
this purloining from the wickedness of stealing have been in
many respects unsatisfactory. 1 But the only meaning of ?WB> ig
to ask or beg^ and t^ 7 }, which is~only met'with in chap. xii. 36
an d 1 Sam, i. 28, does'ndt mean to lend, hilt to su ffer to ask, to
hear andgra n't a reque st. OvKtr (chap. xii. 36), lit. they allowed
themToask; i.e. "the Egyptians did not turn away the petition-
ers, as not wanting to listen to them, but received their petition
with good-will, and granted their request. No proof ca n be
brought that TWtPn means to lend, as is commonly supposed ; the
word occurs again in 1 Sam. i. 28, and there it means to grant
or give" (Knobel on chap. xii. 36). Moreover the circum-
stances under which the ?KB* and T'Wffn took place, were quite at
variance with the idea of borrowing and lending. For even if
Moses had not spoken without reserve of the entire departure of
the Israelites, the plagues which followed one after another, and
with which the God of the Hebrews gave emphasis to His de-
mand as addressed through Moses to Pharaoh, " Let My people
go, that they may serve Me," must have made it evident to every
Egyptian, that all this had reference to something greater than
a three days' march to celebrate a festival. And under these
circumstances no Egyptian could have cherished the thought,
that the Israelites were only borrowing the jewels they asked of
them, and would return them after the festival. What they
gave under such circumstances, they could only give or present
without the slightest prospect of restoration. Still less could
the Israelites have had merely the thought of borrowing in their
mind, seeing that God had said to Moses, "I will give the
Israelites favour in the eyes of the Egyptians ; and it will come
to pass, that when ye go out, ye shall not go out empty" (ver.
21). If, therefore, it is " natural to suppose that these jewels
1 For the different views as to the supposed borrowing of the gold and
silver vessels, see Hengsienberg, Dissertations on the Pentateuch, vol. ii. pp.
419 sqq., and Kurtz, History of the Old Covenant, vol. ii. 819 sqq.
* Even in 2 Kings v. 6 ; see my commentary on the passage.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. IV. l-». 447
were festal vessels, with which the Egyptians furnished the poor
Israelites for the intended feast," and even if "the Israelites
had their thoughts directed with all seriousness to the feast
which they were about to celebrate to Jehovah in the desert"
(Baumgarteri) ; their request to the Egyptians cannot have re-
ferred to any borrowing, nor have presupposed any intention to
restore what they received on their return. From the very first >
the Israelites asked without intending to restore, and the Egyp-
tians granted their request without any hope of receiving back,
because God had made their hearts favourably disposed to the
Israelites. The expressions DnXDTiK Brow in ver. 22, and vJB^l in
chap. xii. 36, are not at variance with this, but rather require it.
For 7X3 does not mean to purloin, to steal, to take away secretly
by cunning and fraud, but to plunder (2 Chron. xx. 25), as both
the LXX. (aKvXeveiv) and Vulgate (spoliare) have rendered it.
Rosenmuller, therefore, is correct in his explanation : u Et tpoli-
abitU jEgyptios, ita ut db JEgyptiis, qui vos tarn dura servitute
oppretserunt, spolia avferetis." So also is Hengstenberg, who
says, "The author represents the Israelites as going forth,
laden as it were with the spoils of their formidable enemy,
trophies of the victory which God's power had bestowed on
their weakness. While he represents the gifts of the Egyp-
tians as spoils which God had distributed to His host (as
Israel is called in chap. xii. 41), he leads us to observe that
the bestowment of these gifts, which outwardly appeared to be
the effect of the good-will of the Egyptians, if viewed more
deeply, proceeded from another Giver ; that the outwardly free
act of the Egyptians was effected by an inward divine constraint
which they could not withstand" (Dissertations, vol. ii. p. 431). —
Egypt had spoiled Israel by the tributary labour so unjustly en-
forced, and now Israel carried off the spoil of Egypt — a prelude
to the victory which the people of God will one day obtain in
their conflict with the power of the world (cf. Zech. xiv. 14).
Chap. iv. 1-9. Moses now started a fresh difficulty : the
Israelites would not believe that Jehovah had appeared to him.
There was so far a reason for this difficulty, that fj&m_ Jhe time
of Jacob — an interval, therefore, of 430 years — God had never
appejirjeajo-juiy^lsjaellter God therefore removed it by giving
him three signs by which he might attest his divine mission to his
people. These three signs were intended indeed for the Israelites,
Digitized by VjOOQlC
448 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
to convince them of the reality of the appearance of Jehovah to
Moses ; at the same time, as even Ephraem Syrus observed, they
also served to strengthen Moses* faith, and dissipate his fears as
to the result of his mission. For it was apparent enough that
Moses did not possess true and entire confidence in God, from
the fact that he still raised this difficulty, and distrusted the
divine assurance, " They will hearken to thy voice," chap. iii.
18). And finally, these signs were intended for Pharaoh, as is
stated in ver. 21 ; and to him the rrink (ayfieta) were to become
D'neb (repaTa). By these signs Moses was installed as the ser-
vant of Jehovah (xiv. 31), and furnished with divine power,
with which he could and was to appear before the children of
Israel and Pharaoh as the messenger of Jehovah. The character
of the three signs corresponded to this intention.
Vers. 2-5. The first bign. — The turning of Moses' staff
into a serpent, which became a staff again when Moses took it
by the tail, hjd reference to the calling of Moses. The staff in
his hand was his shepherd's crook (JTO ver. 3, for nrni?, in this
place alone), and represented his calling as a shepherd. At the
bidding of God he threw it upon the ground, and the staff be-
came a serpent, before which Moses fled. The giving up of his
shepherd-life wonld expose him to dangers, from which he would
desire to escape. At the same time, there was more implied in
the figure of a serpent than danger which merely threatened his
life. The serpent had been the constant enemy of the seed of
the woman (Gen. iii.), and represented the power of the wicked
one which prevailed in Egypt. The explanation in Pirke Elieser,
c. 40, points to this : ideo Deum hoe signum Mori ostendisse, quia
ricut serpens mordet et morte afficit homines, ita quoqxte Pharao et
uEgyptii mordebant etnecabant Israelites. But at the bidding of
God, Moses seized the serpent by the tail, and received his staff
again as " the rod of God," with which he smote Egypt with
great plagues. From this sign the people of Israel would neces-
sarily perceive, that Jehovah had not only called Moses to be the
leader of Israel, but had endowed him with the power to over-
come the serpent-like cunning and the might of Egypt ; in other
words, they would u believe that Jehovah, the God of the fathers,
had appeared to him." (On the special meaning of this sign for
Pharaoh, see chap. vii. 10 sqq.)
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. IV. 6, 7. 449
Vers. 6, 7. The second sign. — Moses' hand became leprous,
and was afterwards cleansed again. The expression i?&S njnto,
covered with leprosy like snow, refers to the white leprosy (vid.
Lev. xiii. 3). — u Woe turned again as his flesh ;" Le. was restored,
became healthy, or clean like the rest of his body. So far as
the meaning of this sign is concerned, Mj2Sfis!_hand has been
explained in a perfectly arbitrary manner a a. representing the
Israelitish nation, and his bosom as representing first Egypt, and
then Canaan, as the hidin g-place of Israe li If the shepherd's
staff represented Moses' calling, the hand was that which directed
or ruled the calling. It is in the bosom that the nurse carries
the sucking child (Num. xi. 12), the shepherd the lambs (Isa.
xl. 11), and the sacred singer the many nations, from whom he
has suffered reproach and injury (Ps. lxxxix. 50). So Moses
also carried his people in his bosom, i.e. in his heart : of that his
first appearance in Egypt was a proof (chap. ii. 11, 12). But
now he was to set his hand to deliver them from the reproach
and bondage of Egypt. He put (K , ? i !?) his hand into his bosom,
and his hand was covered with leprosy. The nation was like a
leper, who defiled every one that touched him. The Jeprosy
represented not only " the servitude and contemptuous treatment
of the TsraeTItes in Egypt" (Kurtz), but the aaefSeia of the
E gyptia ns also, as Theodoret expresses it, or rather the impurity
of Egypt in which Israel was sunken. This Moses soon dis-
covered (cf. chap. v. 17 sqq.), and on more than one occasion
afterwards (cf . Num. xi.) ; so that he had to complain to Jehovah,
"Wherefore hast Thou afflicted Thy servant, that Thou layest the
burden of all this people upon me ? . . . Have I conceived all
this people, that Thou shouldest say to me, Carry them in thy
bosom t" (Num. xi. 11, 12). But God had the power to purify
the nation from this leprosy, and would endow His servant
Moses with that power. At the command of God, Moses put
his hand, now covered with leprosy, once more into his bosom,
and drew it out quite cleansed. This was what Moses was to
learn by the sign ; whilst Israel also learned that God both could
and would deliver it, through the cleansed hand of Moses, from
all its bodily and spiritual misery. The object of the first miracle
was to_exhibit Moaes as the_man_whom Jehovah had called to
be the leader o f His people ; that of the second, to show that, as.
the messenger of Jehovah, he was furnished with the necessary
Digitized by VjOOQlC
450 THE SECOND BOOK OF HOSES.
p ower for the execution of this ca lling. In this sense God says,
in ver. 8, "If they will not hearken to the voice of the first sign,
they will believe the voice of the latter sign." A voice is ascribed
to the sign, as being a clear witness to the divine mission of the
person performing it (Ps. cv. 27).
Yer. 9. The third sign. — If the first two signs should not
be sufficient to lead the people to believe in the divine mission of
Moses, he was to give them one more practical demonstration of
the power which he had received to overcome the might and
gods of Egypt. He was to take of the water of the Nile (the
river, Gen. xli. 1) and pour it upon the dry land, and it would
become blood (the second Wi is a resumption of the first, cf.
chap. xii. 41). The Nile received divine honours as the source
of every good and all prosperity in the natural life of Egypt,
and was even identified with Osiris (cf . Hengstenberg, Egypt and
the Books of Moses, p. 109 transl.). If Moses t herefore had
p ower to tu rn the life-distrib uting w ater oTIthe Nile into blood,
he must also have r eceived power to destoqy_PLSaohllanarThis
godsT Israel was to learn this from the sign, whilst Pharaoh
ana" the Egyptians were afterwards to experience this might of
Jehovah in the form of punishment (chap. vii. 15 sqq.). Thus
Moses was not only entrusted wit h the w ord of God, but also
endowedwith the i power of God ; andjas hewas the first God-sent
prophet, so was he also the first wnrlrer pf mirnplps, and in this
capacity a type of the Apostle of our profession (Heb. iii. 1), even
the God-man, ChrisTIIesus.
Vers. 10-18. Moses raised another difficulty. " I am not a
man of words" he said (i.e. I do not possess the gift of speech),
" but am heavy in mouth and heavy in tongue" (i.e. I find a diffi-
culty in the use of mouth and tongue, not exactly "stammering") ;
and that " both of yesterday and the day before" (i.e. from the very
first, Gen. xxxi. 2), "and also since Thy speaking to Thy servant."
Moses meant to say, "I neitherpossess thejjift of speech Jby
nature, nor have I received it since Thou hast spoken to me." —
VersrTl, 12. JehovaTTboth could and~wouloV provide for this
defect. He had made man's mouth, and He made dumb or deaf,
seeing or blind. He possessed unlimited power over all the
senses, could give them or take them away ; and He would be
with Moses' mouth, and teach him what he was . to say, i.e.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. IV. 10-18. 451
impart to him the necessary qualification both as to matter
and mode. — Moses' difficulties were now all exhausted, and re-
moved by the assurances of God. But this only brought to light
t he secret reason in h> hftP'ti. Hf AiA ~" n % Tgg ft to undertak a
t he divine m ission. — Ver. 13. " Send, I pray Thee" he says, " by
whom Thouuntt tend;" i.e. carry out Thy mission by whomsoever
Thou wilt. TO fw : to carry out a mission through any one,
originally with aceus. rei (1 Sam. xvi. 20 ; 2 Sam. zi. 14), then
without the object, as here, " to send a person" (cf. 2 Sam. xii.
25 ; 1 Kings ii. 25). Before n?eki the word "KW is omitted,
which stands with TO in the construct state (vid. Ges. § 123, 3).
The anger of God was now excited by this groundless opposition.
But as this unwillingness also arose from weakness of the flesh,
the mercy of God came to the help of his weakness, and He
referred Moses to his brother Aaron, who could speak well, and
would address the people for him (vers. 14-17). Aaron is called
^?n } the Levite, from his lineage, possibly with reference to the
primary signification of nw " to connect one's self" (Bautngarten),
but not with any allusion to the future calling of the tribe of Levi
(Rashi and Calvin). KVl 1ST ~\2R speak will he. The inf. abs.
gives emphasis to the verb, and the position of tan to the subject.
He both can and will speak, if thou dost not know it. — Vers. 14,
15. And Aaron is quite ready to do so. He is already coming
to meet thee, and is glad to see thee. The statement in ver. 27,
where Jehovah directs Aaron to go and meet Moses, is not at
variance with this. They can both be reconciled in the following
simple manner : " As soon as Aaron heard that his brother had
left Midian, he went to meet him of his own accord, and then God
showed him by what road he must go to find him, viz. towards
the desert" (R.Mose ben Naehman). — "Put the words" (sc. which
I have told thee) u into his mouth ;" and I will support both thee
and him in speaking. " He will be mouth to thee, and thou shah
be God to him." Cf . vii. 1, " Thy brother Aaron shall be thy
prophet." Aaron would stand in the same relation to Moses, as
a prophet to God : the prophet only spoke what God inspired
him with, and Moses should be the inspiring God to him. The
Targum softens down the word u God" into u master, teacher."
Moses was called God, as being the possessor and medium of the
divine word. As Luther explains it, u Whoever possesses and
believes the word of God, possesses the Spirit and power of God;
Digitized by VjOOQlC
452 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
and also the divine wisdom, truth, heart, mind, and everything
that belongs to God." In ver. 17, the plural u signs" points to the
penal wonders that followed; for only one of the three signs given
to Moses was performed with the rod. — Ver. 18. In consequence
of this appearance of God, Moses took leave of his father-in-law
to return to his brethren in Egypt, though without telling him
the real object of his journey, no doubt because Jethro had not
the mind to understand such a divine revelation, though he sub-
sequently recognised the miracles that God wrought for Israel
(chap, xviii.). By the " brethren" we are to understand not
merely the nearer relatives of Moses, or the family of Amram,
but the Israelites generally. Considering the oppression under
which they were suffering at the time of Moses' night, the ques-
tion might naturally arise, whether they were still living, and
had not been altogether exterminated.
Vers. 19-31. Return of Moses to Egypt. — Vers. 19-23.
On leaving Midian, Moses received another communication from
God with reference to his mission to Pharaoh. The word of
Jehovah, in ver. 19, is not to be regarded as a summary of the
previous revelation, in which case iDlto would be a pluperfect,
nor as the account of another writer, who placed the summons
to return to Egypt not in Sinai but in Midian. It is not a fact
that the departure of Moses is given in ver. 18 ; all that is
stated there is, that Jethro consented to Moses' decision to return
to Egypt. It was not till after this consent that Moses was able
to prepare for the journey. During these preparations God
appeared to him in Midian, and encouraged him to return, by
informing him that all the men who had sought his life, i.e.
Pharaoh and the relatives of the Egyptian whom he had slain,
were now dead. — Ver. 20. Moses then set out upon his journey,
with his wife and sons. W3 is not to be altered into fcs, as
Knobel supposes, notwithstanding the fact that the birth of only
one son has hitherto been mentioned (chap. ii. 22) ; for neither
there, nor in this passage (ver. 25), is he described as the only
son. The wife and sons, who were still young, he placed upon
the ass (the one taken for the purpose), whilst he himself went
on foot with " the staff of God" — as the staff was called with
which he was to perform the divine miracles (ver. 17) — in his
hand. Poor as his outward appearance might be, he had in his
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. IV. 19-31. 453
hand the staff before which the pride of Pharaoh and all his
might would have to bow. — Ver. 21. u In thy going (returning)
to Egypt, behold, all the wonders which I have put into thy Iiand,
tliou doest them before Pharaoh." IDto, to repot, portentum, is
any object (natural event, thing, or person) of significance which
surpasses expectation or the ordinary course of nature, and
excites wonder in consequence. It is frequently connected with
rriK, GTjfulov, a sign (Deut. iv. 34, vi. 22, vii. 19, etc.), and em-
braces the idea of nta within itself, i.e. wonder-sign. The ex-
pression, u all those wonders," does not refer merely to the three
signs mentioned in chap. iv. 2-9, but to all the miracles which
were to be performed by Moses with the staff in the presence of
Pharaoh, and which, though not named, were put into his hand
potentially along with the staff. — But all the miracles would not
induce Pharaoh to let Israel go, for Jehovah would harden his
heart. toTTiK P*™? '?*!» lit- 1 will make his heart firm, so that it
will not move, his feelings and attitude towards Israel will not
change. For ptTOj -i« or •'Jfim (xiv. 4) and P?no <JK (xiv. 17),
we find Wi?K '?¥| in chap. vii. 3, " I will make Pharaoh's heart
hard, or unfeeling ;" and in chap. x. 1, ^"issn 'JK " I have made
his heart heavy," i.e. obtuse, or insensible to impressions or divine
influences. These three words are expressive of the hardening
of the heart.
The hardening of Pharaoh is ascribed to God, not only in
the passages just quoted, but also in chap. ix. 12, x. 20, 27,
xi. 10, xiv. 8 ; that is to say, ten times in all ; and that not
merely as foreknown or foretold by Jehovah, but as caused and
effected by Him. In the last five passages it is invariably
stated that " Jehovah hardened (PW?) Pharaoh's heart." But
it is also stated just as often, viz. ten times, that Pharaoh har-
dened his own heart, or made it heavy or firm ; e.g. in chap,
vii. 13, 22, vih. 15, ix. 35, & prriM " and Pharaoh's heart was
(or became) hard ;" chap. vii. 14, 3? 133 " Pharaoh's heart was
heavy;" in chap. ix. 7, ^''33^; in chap. viii. 11, 28, ix. 34,
teWiK n23>l or 133m ; in chap.'xiii. 15, Bfwpn '3 « for Pharaoh
made his heart hard." According to this, the hardening of
Pharaoh was quite as much his own act as the decree of God.
But if, in order to determine the precise relation of the divine
to the human causality, we look more carefully at the two classea
of expressions, we shall find that not only in connection with
Digitized by VjOOQlC
;.;<■**
(
J
454 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
the first sign, by which Moses and Aaron were to show their
credentials as the messengers of Jehovah, sent with the demand
that he would let the people of Israel go (chap. vii. 13, 14),
but after the first five penal miracles, the hardening is invari-
ably represented as his own. After every one of these miracles,
it is stated that Pharaoh's heart was firm, or dull, ue. insensible
to the voice of God, and unaffected by the miracles performed
before his eyes, and the judgments of God suspended over him
and his kingdom, and he did not listen to them (to Moses and
^ j ' ^ Aaron with their demand), or let the people go (chap. vii. 22,
viii. 8, 15, 28, ix. 7). It is not till after the sixth plaguethat it
is stated that Jehovah made the heart of Pharaoh firm (ix. 12).
At the seventh the statement is repeated, that "Pharaoh made
his heart heavy" (ix. 34, 35) ; but the continued refusal on the
part of Pharaoh after the eighth and ninth (x. 20, 27) and his
resolution to follow the Israelites and bring them back again,
are attributed to the hardening of his heart by Jehovah (chap,
xiv. 8, cf. vers. 4 and 17). This hardening of his own heart was
manifested first of all in the fact, that he paid no attention to the
demand of Jehovah addressed to him through Moses, and would
not let Israel go ; and that not only at the commencement, so
long as the Egyptian magicians imitated the signs performed by
Moses and Aaron (though at the very first sign the rods of the
magicians, when turned into serpents, were swallowed by Aaron's,
vii. 12, 13), but even when the magicians themselves acknow-
ledged, " This is the finger of God" (viii. 19). It was also con-
tained after the fourth and fifth plagues, when a distinction was
made between the Egyptians and the Israelites, and the latter
were exempted from the plagues, — a fact of which the king took
care to convince himself (ix. 7). And it was exhibited still
further in his breaking his promise, that he would let Israel go
if Moses and Aaron would obtain from Jehovah the removal of
the plague, and in the fact, that even after he had been obliged
to confess, " I have sinned, Jehovah is the righteous one, I and
my people are unrighteous" (ix. 27), he sinned again, as soon as
breathing-time was given him, and would not let the people go
(ix. 34, 35). Thus Pharaoh would not bend his self-will to the
will of God, even after he had discerned the finger of God and
the omnipotence of Jehovah in the plagues suspended over him
and his nation ; he would not withdraw his haughty refusal, not
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. IV. 19-8L 455
withstanding the fact that he was obliged to acknowledge that it
was sin against Jehovah. Looked at from this side, th? harden-
ing was a fruit of sin, a consequence of that self-will, high-mind-
edness, and pnde wntcirflow from sin, and a continuous and
ever increasing abuse of that freedom of the win* w hicfais inn ate
i n man, a ndTwSch involves the possibility of obstinate resistance
to the word and chastisement of God even until death. As the
freedom of the will has its fixed limits in the unconditional
dependence of the creature upon the Creator, so the sinner may
resist the will of God as long as he lives. But such resistance
plunges him into destruction, and is followed inevitably by death
and damnation. God never allows any man to scoff at Him.
Whoever will not suffer himself to be led, by the kindness
and earnestness of the divine admonitions, to repentance and
humble submission to the will of God, must inevitably perish,
and by his destruction subserve the glory of God, and die mani-
festation of the holiness, righteousness, and omnipotence of
Jehovah.
But God not only perm its aman to harden hjmselfi He also /
prodnce^obduracy, and suspends this sentence over the impeni-
tent. Not as~~thrnigh" God took pleasure in the death of the
wicked ! No ; God desires that the wicked should repent of his
evil way and live (Ezek. xxxiii. 11) ; and He desires this most
earnestly, for " He will have all men to be saved and to come
unto the knowledge of the truth " (1 Tim. ii. 4, cf . 2 Pet. iii. 9).
As God causes His earthly sun to rise upon the evil and the
good, and sendeth rain on the just and the unjust (Matt. v. 45),
so He causes His sun of grace to shine upon all sinners, to lead
them to life and salvation. But as the earthly sun produces dif-
ferent effects upon the earth, according to the nature of the soil
upon which it shines, so the influence of the divine sun of grace
manifests itself in different ways upon the human heart, accord-
ing to its moral condition. 1 The penitent permit the proofs of
divine goodness and grace to lead them to repentance and salva-
tion - t but the impenitent harden themselves more and more
1 ' ' The jnm, by the force of its heat, moistens the wax and dries the clay,
softening the one and hardening the other ; and as this produces opposite
effects by the same power, so, through the long-suffering of God, which
reaches to all, some receive good and others evil, some are softened and
others hardened." — (Theodoret, qruat. 12 t'n Ex.)
\
Digitized by VjOOQlC
456 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
against the grace of God, and so become ripe for the judgment
of damnation. The very same manifestation of the mercy of
God leads in the case of the one to salvation and life, and in
that of the other to judgment and death, because he hardens
himself against that mercy. In this increasing hardness on the
part of the impenitent sinner against the mercy that is mani-
fested towards him, there is accomplished the judgment of re-
probation, first in God's furnishing the wicked with an oppor-
tunity of bringing fully to light the evil inclinations, desires,
and thoughts that are in their hearts ; and then, according to an
invariable law of the moral government of the world, in His
rendering the return of the impenitent sinner more and more
difficult on account of his continued resistance, and eventually
rendering it altogether impossible. It is the curse of sin, that it
renders the hard heart harder, and less susceptible to the gracious
manifestations of divine love, long-suffering, and patience. In
this twofold manner God produces hardness, not only permissive
" hut effective ; i.e. not only by giving time and space for the mani-
festation of human opposition, even to the utmost limits of
creaturely freedom, but still more by those continued manifes-
tations of His will which drive the hard heart to such utter
obduracy that it is no longer capable of returning, and so giving
over the hardened sinner to the judgment of damnation. This
is what we find in the case of Pharaoh. After he had hardened
his heart against the revealed will of God during the first five
plagues, the hardening commenced on the part of Jehovah with
the sixth miracle (ix. 12), when the omnipotence of God was
displayed with such energy that even the Egyptian magicians
were covered with the boils, and could no longer stand before
Moses (ix. 11). And yet, even after this hardening on the part
of God, another opportunity was given to the wicked king to
repent and change his mind, so that on two other occasions he
acknowledged that his resistance was sin, and promised to submit
to the will of Jehovah (ix. 27 sqq., x. 16 sqq.). Bat when at
length, even after the seventh plague, he broke his promise to
let Israel go, and hardened his heart again as soon as the plague
was removed (ix. 34, 35), Jehovah so hardened Pharaoh's heart
that he not only did not let Israel go, but threatened Moses with
death if he ever came into his presence again (x. 20, 27, 28).
The hardening was now completed, so that he necessarily fell a
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. IV. 22, 28. 457
victim to judgment ; though the very first stroke of judgment
in the slaying of the first-horn was an admonition to consider
and return. And it was not till after he had rejected the mercy
displayed in this judgment, and manifested a defiant spirit once
more, in spite of the words with which he had given Moses and
Aaron permission to depart, "Go, and bless me also" (xii. 31, 32),
that God completely hardened his heart, so that he pursued the
Israelites with an army, and was overtaken by the judgment of
utter destruction.
Now, although the hardening of Pharaoh on the part of
Jehovah was only the complement of Pharaoh's hardening of
his own heart, in the verse before us the former aspect alone is
presented, because the principal object was not only to prepare
Moses for the opposition which he would meet with from Pha-
aoh, but also to strengthen his weak faith, and remove at the
very outset every cause for questioning the omnipotence of
Tehovah. If it was by Jehovah Himself that Pharaoh was
hardened, this hardening, which He not only foresaw and pre-
dicted by virtue of His omniscience, but produced and inflicted
through His omnipotence, could not possibly hinder the perform-
ance of His will concerning Israel, bat must rather contribute
to the realization of His purposes of salvation and the manifes-
tation of His glory (cf. chap. ix. 16, x. 2, xiv. 4, 17, 18).
Vers. 22, 23. In order that Pharaoh might form a true esti-
mate of the solemnity of the divine command, Moses was to
make known to him not only the relation of Jehovah to Israel,
but also the judgment to which he would be exposed if he re-
fused to let Israel go. The relation in which Israel stood to
Jehovah was expressed by God in the words, u Israel is My first-
born son." Israel was Jehovah's son by virtue of his election to
be the people of possession (Dent. xiv. 1, 2). This election
began with the call of Abraham to be the father of the nation
in which all the families of the earth were to be blessed. On
the ground of this promise, which was now to be realized in the
seed of Abraham by the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt, the
nation of Israel is already called Jehovah's " son," althongh it
was through the conclusion of the covenant at Sinai that it was
first exalted to be the people of Jehovah's possession out of all
the nations (xix. 5, 6). The divine sonship of Israel was there-
fore spiritual in its nature : it neither sprang from the fact that
PENT. — VOL. I. it)
Digitized by VjOOQlC
458 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
God, as the Creator of all nations, was also the Creator, or Be-
getter, and Father of Israel, nor was it founded, as Baumgarten
supposes, upon "the physical generation of Isaac, as having
its origin, not in the power of nature, but in the power of grace."
The relation of God, as Creator, to man His creature, is never
referred to in the Old Testament as that of a father to a son ;
to say nothing of the fact that the Creator of man is Elokim,
and not Jehovah. Wherever Jehovah is called the Father,
Begetter, or Creator of Israel (even in Deut. xxxii. 18 ; Jer. ii.
27 ; Isa. Ixiv. 8 ; Mai. i. 6 and ii. 10), the fatherhood of God
relates to the election of Israel as Jehovah's people of possession.
But the election upon which the vloOe&Ca of Israel was founded,
is not presented in the aspect of a "begetting through the
Spirit;" it is spoken of rather as acquiring or buying (HJiJ),
making (n&P), founding or establishing (pi, Deut. xxxii. 6).
Even the expressions, " the Rock that begat thee," " God that
I bare thee" (Deut. xxxii. 18), do not p oint to the idea of spiritu al
-veneratio n, but are tobe understoooTas referring to the creatjpa-j
I Just as in Ps. xc. 2, where Moses~speaTcs~~of th^Tnountains as
"brought forth" and the earth as "born." The choosing of
Israel as the son of God was an adoption flowing from the free
grace of God, which involved the loving, fatherly treatment of
the son, and demanded obedience, reverence, and confidence
towards the Father (Mai. i. 6). It was this which constituted
the very essence of the covenant made by Jehovah with Israel,
that He treated it with mercy and love (Hos. xi. 1 ; Jer. xxxi.
9, 20), pitied it as a father pitieth his children (Ps. ciii. 13),
chastened it on account of its sins, yet did not withdraw His
mercy from it (2 Sam. vii. 14, 15 ; Ps. lxxxix. 31—35), and
trained His son to be a holy nation by the love and severity of
paternal discipline. — Still Israel was not only a son, but the
"first-born son" of Jehovah. In this title the calling of the
heathen is implied. Israel was not to be Jehovah's only son,
but simply the first-born, who was peculiarly dear to his Father,
and had certain privileges above the rest. Jehovah was about
to exalt Israel above all the nations of the earth (Deut. xxviii. 1).
Now, if Pharaoh would not let Jehovah's first-born son depart,
he would pay the penalty in the life of his own first-born (cf .
xii. 29). In this intense earnestness of the divine command,
Moses had a strong support to his faith. If Israel was Jehovah's
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. IV. 24r-26- 459
first-born son, Jehovah could not relinquish him, but must deliver
His son from the bondage of Egypt.
Vers. 24-26. But if Moses was to carry out the divine com-
mission with success, he must first of all prove himself to be a
faithful servant of Jehovah in his own house. This he was to
learn from the occurrence at the inn : an occurrence which has
many obscurities on account of the brevity of the narrative, and
has received many different interpretations. When Moses was
on the way, Jfihoyahjoet him at the resting-place (ifo, see Gen.
xlii. 27), andjought to kill him. In what manner, is not stated :
w hether by a sudden seizure wi th some fatal disease, or, what is
more probable, by some ac t proceeding directly from Himself,
which threatened Moses with_deatn7 TEis^ hostile 'attitude on
the part of God was occasioned by his neglect to circumcise his
son ; for, as soon as Zipporah cut off (circumcised) the foreskin
other son with a stone, Jehovah let him go. lix="Wt, a rock,
or stone, here a stone knife, with which, according to hereditary
custom, the circumcision commanded by Joshua was also per-
formed ; not, however, because " stone knives were regarded as
less dangerous than those of metal," nor because " for symbolical
reasons preference was given to them, as a simple production of
nature, over the metal knives that had been prepared by human
bands and were applied to daily use." For if the Jews had de-
tected any religious or symbolical meaning in stone, they would
never have given it up for iron or steel, but would have retained
it, like the Ethiopian tribe of the Alnaii, who used stone knives
for that purpose as late as 150 years ago ; whereas, in the Tal-
mud, the use of iron or steel knives for the purpose of circum-
cision is spoken of, as though they were universally employed.
StQne_knives_belong to a .time anterior to the manufacture of
i£Qn_or_ steel ; and wherever they were employed at a later
peried^Jthis arose from a devoted adherence to. the older and
simpler custom (see my Commentary on Josh. v. 2). From the
word "her ion," it is evident that Zipporah only circumcised
one of the two sons of Moses (ver. 20) ; so that the other, no
doubt the elder, had already been circumcised in accordance
with the law. Circumcision had been enjoined upon Abraham
by Jehovah as a covenant sign for all his descendants ; and the
sentence of death was pronounced upon any neglect of it, as
being a breach of the covenant (Gen. xvii. 14). Although in
Digitized by VjOOQlC
A
460 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
this passage it is the uncircnmcised themselves who are threat-
ened with death, yet in the case of children the punishment fell
upon the parents, and first of all upon the father, who had ne-
glected to keep the commandment of God. Now, though Moses
had probably omitted circumcision simply from regard to his
Midianitish wife, who disliked this operation, he had been guilty
of a capital crime, which God could not pass over in the case of
one whom He had chosen to be His messenger, to establish His
covenant with Israel. Hence He threatened him with death, to
bring him to a consciousness of his sin, either by the voice of
conscience or by some word which accompanied His attack upon
Moses ; and also to show him with what earnestness God de-
manded the keeping of His commandments. Still He did not
kill him ; for his sin had sprung from weakness of the flesh, from
a sinful yielding to his wife, which could both be explained and
excused on account of his position in the Midianite's house.
That Zipporah's dislike to circumcision had been the cause of
the omission, has been justly inferred by commentators from the
fact, that on Jehovah's attack upon Moses, she proceeded at once
to perform what had been neglected, and, as it seems, with in-
ward repugnance. The expression, " She threw (the foreskin of
her son) at his (Moses') feet," points to this (? JT? 1 ^ as in Isa.
xxv. 12). The suffix in VW (At* feet) cannot refer to the son,
not only because such an allusion would give no reasonable
sense, but also because the suffix refers to Moses in the imme-
diate context, both before (in frM?L!> ver. 24) and after (in USD,
ver. 26) ; and therefore it is simpler to refer it to Moses here.
From this it follows, then, that the words, " a blood-bridegroom
art thou to me," were addressed to Moses, and not to the boy.
Zipporah calls Moses a blood-bridegroom, " because she had been
compelled, as it were, to acquire and purchase him anew as a
husband by shedding the blood of her son" (Glass). u Moses
had been as good as taken from her by the deadly attack which
had been made upon him. She purchased his life by the blood
of-herj3onj she received him back>_as it were, from the dead,
': and married him anew ; he was, in fact, a bridegroom of blood
' to her" (Kurtz). Thtrshe said,asthe1nstbnan adds, after God
had let Moses go, riTOSp, « with reference to the circumcisions."
The plural is used quite generally and indefinitely, as Zipporah
referred not merely to this one instance, but to circumcision
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. IV. 27-81, V.-V1I. 7. 461
generally. Moses was apparently induced by what had occurred
to decide not to take his wife and children with him to Egypt,
but to send them back to his father-in-law. We may infer this
from the fact, that it was not till after Israel had arrived at Sinai
that he brought them to him again (chap, xviii. 2).
Vers. 27-31. After the removal of the sin, which had ex-
cited the threatening wrath of Jehovah, Moses once more
received a token of the divine favour in the arrival of Aaron,
under the direction of God, to meet him at the Mount of God
(chap. Hi. 1). To Aaron he related all the words of Jehovah,
with which He had sent (commissioned) him (fw with a doable
accusative, as in 2 Sam. xi. 22 ; Jer. xlii. 5), and all the signs
which He had commanded him (njv also with a double accusa-
tive, as in Gen. vi. 22). Another proof of the favour of God
consisted of the believing reception of his mission on the part of
the elders and the people of Israel. " The people believed"
(19*3) when Aaron communicated to them the words of Jehovah
to Moses, and did the signs in their presence. " And when they
heard that Jehovah had visited the children of Israel, and had
looked upon their affliction, they bowed and worshipped." (Knobel
is wrong in proposing to alter W?& into "Upfe^, according to the
Sept. rendering, xal e%apn). The faith of the people, and the
worship by which their faith was expressed, proved that the
promise of the fathers still lived in their hearts. And although
this faith did not stand the subsequent test (chap, v.), yet, as the
first expression of their feelings, it bore witness to the fact that
Israel was willing to follow the call of God.
MOSES AND AARON ARE 8ENT TO PHARAOH. — CHAP. V.-VII. 7.
The two events which form the contents of this section, — viz.
(1) the visit of Moses and Aaron to Pharaoh to make known
the commands of their God, with the harsh refusal of their re-
quest on the part of Pharaoh, by an increase of the tributary
labours of Israel (chap, v.); and (2) the further revelations of
Jehovah to Moses, with the insertion of the genealogies of
Moses and Aaron, — not only hang closely together so far as
the subject-matter is concerned, inasmuch as the fresh declare,
tions of Jehovah to Moses were occasioned by the complaint of
Moses that his first attempt had so signally failed, but both of
Digitized by VjOOQlC
462 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
them belong to the complete equipment of Moses for bis divine
mission. Their visit to Pharaoh was only preliminary in its
character. Moses and Aaron simply made known to the king
the will of their God, without accrediting themselves by miracu-
lous signs as the messengers of Jehovah, or laying any particular
emphasis upon His demand. For this first step was only in-
tended to enlighten Moses as to the attitude of Pharaoh and the
people of Israel in relation to the work of God, which He was
about to perform. Pharaoh answered the demand addressed to
him, that he would let the people go for a few days to hold a
sacrificial festival in the desert, by increasing their labours ; and
the Israelites complained in consequence that their good name
had been made abhorrent to the king, and their situation made
worse than it was. Moses might have despaired on this account ;
' but he laid his trouble before the Lord, and the Lord filled his
despondent heart with fresh courage through the renewed and
strengthened promise that He would now for the first time dis-
play His name Jehovah, perfectly — that He would redeem the
children of Israel with outstretched arm and with great judg-
ments — would harden Pharaoh's heart, and do many signs and
wonders in the land of Egypt, that the Egyptians might learn
through the deliverance of Israel that He was Jehovah, i.e. the
absolute God, who works with unlimited freedom (cf. p. 75).
At the same time God removed the difficulty which once more
arose in the mind of Moses, namely, that Pharaoh would not
listen to him because of his want of oratorical power, by the
assurance, H I make thee a god for Pharaoh, and Aaron shall be thy
prophet" (chap. vii. 1), which could not fail to remove all doubt
as to his own incompetency for so great and severe a task. With
this promise Pharaoh was completely given up into Moses' power,
and Moses invested with all the plenipotentiary authority that
was requisite for the performance of the work entrusted to him.
Chap. v. Pharaoh's answer to the request of Moses
and Aaron. — Vers. 1-5. When the elders of Israel had lis-
tened with gladness and gratitude to the communications of
Moses and Aaron respecting the revelation which Moses had re-
ceived from Jehovah, that He was now about to deliver His
people out of their bondage in Egypt ; Moses and Aaron pro-
ceeded to Pharaoh, and requested in the name of the God of
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. V. 1-fi. 463
Israel, that he would let the people of Israel go and celebrate a
festival in the wilderness in honour of their God. When we
consider that every nation presented sacrifices to its deities,
and ce lebrated festivals jn their honour, arid that they had nil
t heir o wn modes of worship, which were supposed to he ap-
pointed by the gods themselves, so that a god could not be wor-
shipped acceptably in__every places the demand presented' to
Pharaoh on the part of the God of the Israelites, that he would
let His people go into the wilderness and sacrifice to Him, ap-
pears so natural and reasonable, that Pharaoh could not have
refused their request, if there had been a single trace of the
fear of God in his heart. But what was his answer ? " Who is
Jehovah, tliat I should listen to His voice, to let Israel go? I know
not Jehovah!' There was a certain truth in these last words.
The God of Israel had not yet made Himself known to him.
But this was no justification. Although as a heathen he might
naturally measure the power of the God by the existing condi-
tion of His people, and infer from the impotence of the Israel-
ites that their God must be also weak, he would not have dared
to refuse the petition of the Israelites, to be allowed to sacrifice
to their God or celebrate a sacrificial festival, if he had had any
faith in gods at all. — Ver. 3. The messengers founded their re-
quest upon the fact that the God of the Hebrews had met them
(&Oj?3, vid. chap. iii. 18), and referred to the punishment which
the neglect of the sacrificial festival demanded by God might
bring upon the nation. «$>3B)"ja ; " lest He strike us (attack us)
with pestilence or sword." JUB : to strike, hit against any one, either
by accident or with a hostile intent ; ordinarily construed with a,
also with an accusative, 1 Sam. x. 5, and chosen here probably
with reference to K"^? = rrijpj. "Pestilence or sword: " these are
mentioned as expressive of a violent death, and as the means
employed by the deities, according to the ordinary belief of the
nations, to punish the neglect of their worship. The expression
"God of the Hebrews," for "God of Israel" (ver. 1), is not
chosen as being "more intelligible to the king, because the
Israelites were called Hebrews by foreigners, more especially
by the Egyptians (i. 16, ii. 6)," as Knobel supposes, but to con
vince Pharaoh of the necessity for their going into the desert
to keep the festival demanded by their God. In Egypt they
might sacrifice to the gods of Egypt, but not to the God of the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
464 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
Hebrews. — Vers. 4, 5. But Pharaoh would hear nothing of any
worship. He believed that the wish was simply an excuse for
procuring holidays for the people, or days of rest from their
labours, and ordered the messengers off to their slave duties:
" Get you unto your burdens" For as the people were very
numerous, he would necessarily lose by their keeping holiday.
He called the Israelites " the pe ople of the land. " not " as being
his own property, because he was the lord of the land " (Baum-
garten), but as th e working cla ss. " land-people," equivalent to
" common people, in distinction from the ruling castes of the
Egyptians (yid. Jer. lii. 25 ; Ezek. vii. 27).
Vers. 6-18. As Pharaoh possessed neither fear of God
(evarefteut) nor fear of the gods, but, in the proud security of his
might, determined to keep the Israelites as slaves, and to use
them as tools for the glorifying of his kingdom by the erection
of magnificent buildings, he suspected that their wish to go into
the desert was nothing but an excuse invented by idlers, and
prompted by a thirst for freedom, which might become danger-
ous to his kingdom, on account of the numerical strength of the
people. He therefore thought that he could best extinguish
such desires and attempts by increasing the oppression and add-
ing to their labours. For this reason he instructed his bailiffs to
abstain from delivering straw to the Israelites who were engaged
in making bricks, and to let them gather it for themselves ; but
yet not to make the least abatement in the number (rubno) to
be delivered every day. DJ?3 atofin f " those who urged the people
»," were the bailiffs selected from t he Egyptians and placed
over the Israelitish workmen, the geiieraT managers of the work.
Under them there were the O^Pfe* ( lit, writer s, ypafifMTeisLXX.,
from~'Tt?ty~to write), who were chosen fro m th e Is raelite s (yid.
ver. 14), and ^adjo Jdlatribute the work among the people, and
I hand it oye r, when finished, to the royal officers. OT35p?: to
| make bricks, not to burn them; for the bricks in the ancient
monuments of Egypt, and in many of the pyramids, are not
burnt but dried in the sun (Herod, ii. 136 ; Hengst. Egypt and
Books of Moses, pp. 2 and 79 sqq.). Bfe>p: a denom. verb from
VP_, to gather stubble, then to stubble, to gather (Num. xv. 32,
33). }3n, of uncertain etymology, is chopped straw ; here, the
stubble that was left standing when the corn was reaped, or the
straw that lay upon the ground. This they chopped up and
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. V. 19-23 4fi5
mixed with the clay, to give greater durability tc the bricks, as
may be seen in bricks found in the oldest monuments (cf. Hgst.
p. 79). — Ver. 9. "Let the work be heavy (press heavily) upon the
people, and they shall make witli it (i.e. stick to their work), and
not look at lying words" By " lying words" the king meant the
words of Moses, that the God of Israel had appeared to him,
and demanded a sacrificial festival from His people. In ver.
11 special emphasis is laid upon DRK "ye:" "Go, ye yourselves,
fetch your straw" not others for you as heretofore ; "for nothing
is taken (diminished) from your work." The word '3 for has
been correctly explained by Kimchi as supposing a parenthetical
thought, et quidem alacriter vobis eundum est. — Ver. 12. "P tWp?:
"to gather stubble for straw ;" not " stubble for, in the sense of
instead of straw," for f is not equivalent to nnn, but to gather
the stubble left in the fields for the chopped straw required for
the bricks. — Ver. 13. toto Di' "13*1, the quantity fixed for every
day, "just as when the straw was (there)," i.e. was given out for
the work. — Vers. 14 sqq. As the Israelites could not do the work
appointed them, their_o yerlo okers were beaten by the .Egyptian
bailiffs ; and when they complained to the king of this treat-
ment, they were repulsed with harshness, and told " Ye are idle,
idle; therefore ye say, Let us go and sacrifice to Jehovah." INtprn
^BJ? : " and thy people sin ;" i.e. not " thy people (the Israelites)
must be sinners," which might be the meaning of NBn accord-
ing to Gen. xliii. 9, but " thy (Egyptian) people sin." " Thy
people" must be understood as applying to the Egyptians, on
account of the antithesis to " thy servants," which not only re-
fers to the Israelitish overlookers, but includes all the Israelites,
especially in the first clause, risen is an unusual feminine form,
for ntetpn (yid. Gen. xxxiii. 11); and D? is construed as a femi-
nine, as in Judg. xviii. 7 and Jer. viii. 5.
Vers. 19—23. "Vy 1 '"" tlm Tgranlitiali nyArWIfftrg! agwj.hafjlipy
were_in evil (V)3 as in Ps. x. 6, i.e. in an evil condition), they
came to meet Moses and Aaron, wait ing for them _asjhevcame
out from the king, and reproaching them with only making the
circumstances of the people worse. — Ver. 21. v JeTwvaTTlook
upon you and judge" \i.e. punish you, because) " ye have made
the smell of us to stink in tlie eyes of Pharaoh and his servants,"
i.e. destroyed our good name with the king and his servants,
and turned it into hatred and disgust, rrn, a pleasant smell,
Digitized by VjOOQlC
466 THE SECOND BuoS OF MOSES.
is a figure employed for a good name or repute, and the figu-
rative use of the word explains the connection with the eyes
instead of the nose. " To give a sword into their hand to kill
us." Moses and Aaron, they imagined, through their appeal to
Pharaoh had made the lung and his counsellers suspect them of
being restless people, and so had put a weapon into their hands
for their oppression and destruction. What perversity of the
natural heart ! They call upon God to judge, whilst by their
i very complaining they show that they have no confidence in God
and His power to save. Moses turned (pvftl ver. 22) to Jehovah
with the question, " Why hast Thou done evil to this people"
— increased their oppression by my mission to Pharaoh, and yet
not delivered them ? " These are not words of contumacy or
indignation, but of inquiry and prayer" {Aug. quatst. 14). The
question and complaint proceeded from faith, which flies to God
when it cannot understand the dealings of God, to point out to
Him how incomprehensible are His ways, to appeal to Him to
help in the time of need, and to remove what seems opposed to
His nature and His will.
Chap, vi.-vii. 7. Equipment of Moses and Aason aa
MES8ENGEB8 OF Jehoyah. — Ver. 1. In reply to the complain-
ing inquiry of Moses, Jehovah promised him the deliverance of
Israel by a strong hand (cf. iii. 19), by which Pharaoh would be
compelled to let Israel go, and even to drive them out of his
land. Moses did not receive any direct answer to the question,
" Why hast Thou so evil-entreated this people ? " He was to
gather this first of all from his own experience as the leader of
Israel. For the words were strictly applicable here : " What I
do thou knowest not now, but thou shalt know hereafter " (John
xiii. 7). If, even after the miraculous deliverance of the Israel-
ites from Egypt and their glorious march through the desert, in
which they had received so many proofs of die omnipotence
and mercy of their God, they repeatedly rebelled against the
guidance of God, and were not content with the manna pro-
vided by the Lord, but lusted after the fishes, leeks, and onions
of Egypt (Num. xi.) ; it is certain that in such a state of mind as
this, they would never have been willing to leave Egypt and
enter into a covenant with Jehovah, without a very great in-
crease in the oppression they endured in Egypt. — The brief but
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. VL 1-8. 467
comprehensive promise was still farther explained by the Lord
(vers. 2-9), and Moses was instructed and authorized to cany out
the divine purposes in concert with Aaron (vers. 10-13, 28-30,
chap. vii. 1-6). The genealogy of the two messengers is then in-
troduced into the midst of these instructions (vi. 14-27) ; and the
age of Moses is given at the close (vii. 7). This section does not
contain a different account of the calling of Moses, taken from
some other source than the previous one ; it rather presupposes
chap, iii.-v., and completes the account commenced in chap. iii.
of the equipment of Moses and Aaron as the executors of the
divine will with regard to Pharaoh and Israel. For the fact
that the first visit paid by Moses and Aaron to Pharaoh was
simply intended to bring out the attitude of Pharaoh towards
the purposes of Jehovah, and to show the necessity for the great
judgments of God, is distinctly expressed in the words, " Now
shalt thou see what I will do to Pharaoh." But before these
judgments commenced, Jehovah announced to Moses (ver. 2),
and through him to the people, that henceforth He would mani-
fest Himself to them in a much more glorious manner than to
the patriarchs, namely, as Jehovah; whereas to Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob, He had only appeared as El Shaddai. The
words, " By My name Jehovah was I not known to them," do
not mean, however, that the patriarchs were altogether ignorant
of the name Jehovah. This is obvious from the significant use
of that name, which was not an unmeaning sound, but a real
expression of the divine nature, and still more from the unmis-
takeable connection between the explanation given by God here
and Gen. xvii. 1. When the establishment of the covenant
commenced, as described in Gen. xv., with the institution of the
covenant sign of circumcision and the promise of the birth of
Isaac, Jehovah said to Abram, " I am El Shaddai, God Al-
mighty," and from that time forward manifested Himself to
Abram and his wife as the Almighty, in the birth of Isaac, which
took place apart altogether from the powers of nature, and also
in the preservation, guidance, and multiplication of his seed.
It was in His attribute as El Shaddai that God had revealed His
nature to the patriarchs ; but now He was about to reveal Him-
self to Israel as Jehovah, as the absolute Being working with
unbounded freedom in the performance of His promises. For
not only had He established His covenant with the fathers
Digitized by VjOOQlC
468 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
(ver. 4), but He had also heard the groaning of the children of
Israel, and remembered His covenant (ver. 5 ; MV— Ml, not only
— but also). The divine promise not only commences in ver. 2,
but concludes at ver. 8, with the emphatic expression, " /
1 Jehovah," to show that the work of Israel's redemption resided
in the power of the name Jehovah. In ver. 4 the covenant pro-
mises of Gen. xvii. 7, 8, xxvi. 3, xxxv. 11, 12, are all brought
together ; and in ver. 5 we have a repetition of chap. ii. 24, with
the emphatically repeated 'JN (7). On the ground of the erec-
tion of His covenant on the one hand, and, what was irrecon-
cilable with that covenant, the bondage of Israel on the other,
Jehovah was now about to redeem Israel from its sufferings and
make it His own nation. This assurance, which God would carry
out by the manifestation of His nature as expressed in the name
Jehovah, contained t hree distinct eleme nts : (a) the deliverance
of Israel from the bondage of .Egypt, which, because so utterly
different from all outward appearances, is described in three
parallel clauses : bringing them out from under the burdens of
the Egyptians ; saving them from their bondage ; and redeeming
them with a stretched-out arm and with great judgments ; —
(b) the adoption of Israel as the nation of God ; — (c) the guid-
ance of Israel into the land promised to the fathers (vers. 6-8).
iVttM jrtiT, a stretched-out arm, is most appropriately connected
with Dyll 2 , t?DE' ) great judgments ; for God raises, stretches out
His arm, when He proceeds in judgment to smite the rebellious.
These expressions repeat with greater emphasis the " strong
hand" of ver. 1, and are frequently connected with it in the
rhetorical language of Deuteronomy (e.g. chap. iv. 34, v. 15, vii.
19). The " great judgments " were the plagues, the judgments
of God, by which Pharaoh was to be compelled to let Israel go.
— Ver. 7. The adoption of Israel as the nation of God took place
at Sinai (xix. 5). '«l 'JlKbJ 1V», « with regard to which Iliavii
lifted tip My hand to give it " (ver. 8). Lifting up the hand (sc.
towards heaven) is the attitude of swearing (Deut. xxxii. 40
cf. Gen. xiv. 22) ; and these words point back to Gen. xxii. 16
sqq. and xxvi. 3 (cf. chap. xxiv. 7 and 1. 24).
Vers. 9-13. When Moses communicated this solemn assur-
ance of God to the people, they did not listen to him nn tVpB, lit.
"for sJwrtness of breath ;" not u from impatience" (like nw~iSj?,
Prov. xiv. 29, in contrast to D*BK iriN), but from anguish, inward
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. VI. 14-27. 469
pressure, which prevents a man from breathing properly. Thus
the early belief of the Israelites was changed into the despond-
ency of unbelief through the increase of their oppression. This
result also produced despondency in Moses' mind, so that he
once more declined the commission, which followed the promise,
viz. to go to Pharaoh and demand that he would let Israel go
out of his land (ver. 11). If the children of Israel would not
listen to him, how should Pharaoh hear him, especially as he
was uncircumcised in the lips (ver. 12) ? O^Bt? ^2 ' 8 one whose
lips are, as it were, covered with a foreskin, so that he cannot
easily bring out his words ; in meaning the same as " heavy of
mouth" in chap. iv. 10. The reply of God to this objection is
given in chap. vii. 1-5. For, before the historian gives the de-
cisive answer of Jehovah which removed all further hesitation
on the part of Moses, and completed his mission and that of
Aaron to Pharaoh, he considers it advisable to introduce the
genealogy of the two men of God, for the purpose of showing
clearly their genealogical relation to the people of Israel. — Ver.
13 forms a concluding summary, and prepares the way for the
genealogy that follows, the heading of which is given in ver. 14. 1
Vers. 14-27. The genealogy op Moses and Aabon. —
" These are tlieir (Moses' and Aaron's) father's-koiues" TV?
ntoN fatherVhouses (not fathers' house) is a composite noun, so
formed that the two words not only denote one idea, but are
treated grammatically as one word, like D'axjrrva idol-houses
(1 Sam. xxxi. 9), and rriDSTl'a high-place-houses (cf . Ges. § 108,
3 ; Evoald, § 270c). Father 1 s-house was a technical term applie d
tr> a fyillwtipn ftf families, called by the name of a common_an-
cestor. TheJathj als-house s were the larger divisions into which
the families (muhpachoih) , the"1afg65t subdivisions oi the tribes
of JsxaeL were gron pecE To show cfeul v ihe geuuuloglcarposi-
tion of Levi, the tribe-father of Moses and Aaron, among the
sons of Jacob, the genealogy commences with Reuben, the first-
born of Jacob, and gives the names of such of his sons and those
of Simeon as were the founders of families (Gen. xlvi. 9, 10).
1 The organic connection of this genealogy with the entire narrative
has been bo conclusively demonstrated by Ranke, in his Unterss. ub. d. Pent.
i. p. 68 sqq. and ii. 19 sqq., that even Knobtl has admitted it, and thrown
away the fragmentary hypothesis.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
470 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
Then follows Levi ; and not only are the names of his three
sons given, but the length of his life is mentioned (ver. 16), also
that of his son Kohath and his descendant Am ram, because they
were the tribe-fathers of Moses and Aaron. But the Amram
mentioned in ver. 20 as the father of Moses, cannot be the same
person as the Amram who was the son of Kohath (ver. 18), but
must be a later descendant. For, however the sameness of names
may seem to favour the identity of the persons, if we simply look
at the genealogy before us, a comparison of this passage with
Num. iii. 27, 28 will show the impossibility of such an assump-
tion. "According to Num. iii. 27, 28, the Kohathites were
divided (in Moses' time) into the four branches, Amramites,
Izharites, Hebronites, and Uzzielites, who consisted together of
8600 men and boys (women and girls not being included). Of
these, about a fourth, or 2150 men, would belong to the Am-
ramites. Now, according to Ex. xviii. 3, 4, Moses himself had
only two sons. Consequently, if Amram the son of Kohath,
and tribe-father of the Amramites, was the same person as
Amram the father of Moses, Moses must have had 2147 brothers
and brothers' sons (the brothers' daughters, the sisters, and their
daughters, not being reckoned at all). But as this is absolutely
impossible, it must be granted that Amram the son of Kohath
was not the father of Moses, and that an indefinitely long list of
generations has been omitted between the former and his de-
scendant of the same name" (Tiele, Chron. des A. T. p. 36). 1
The enumeration of only four generations, viz. Levi, Kohath,
Amram, Moses, is unmistakeably related to Gen. xv. 16, where
it is stated that the fourth generation would return to Canaan.
Amram's wife Jochebed, who is merely spoken of in general
terms as a daughter of Levi (a Levitess) in chap, ii* 1 and
Num. xxvi. 59, is called here the STTto " aunt" (father's sister)
of Amram, a marriage which was prohibited in the Mosaic law
(Lev. xviii. 12), but was allowed before the giving of the law ;
' The objections of M. Bavmgarten to these correct remarks have been
conclusively met by Kurtz (Hist, of 0. C. vol. ii. p. 144). We find a
similar case in the genealogy of Ezra in Ezra vii. 3, which passes over from
Azariah the son of Meraioth to Azariah the son of Johanan, and omits five
links between the two, as we may see from 1 Chron vi. 7-11. In the same
way the genealogy before us skips over from Amram the son of Kohath to
Amram the father of Moses without mentioning the generations between.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. VI. 28-VIL 7. 471
so that there is no reason for following the LXX. and Vulgate,
and rendering the word, in direct opposition to the usage of the
language, patruelis, the father's brother's daughter. Amram's
sons are placed according to their age : Aaron, then Moses, as
Aaron was three years older than his brother. Their sister
Miriam was older still (vid. ii. 4). In the XXX., Vulg., and
one Hebrew MS., she is mentioned here ; but this is a later in-
terpolation. In vers. 21 sqq. not only are the sons of Aaron
mentioned (ver. 23), but those of two of Amram's brothers,
Izhar and Uzziel (vers. 21, 22), and also Phinehas, the son of
Aaron's son Eleazar (ver. 25) ; as the genealogy was intended to
trace the descent of the principal priestly families, among which
again special prominence is given to Aaron and Eleazar by the
introduction of their wives. On the other hand, none of the
sons of Moses are mentioned, because his dignity was limited to
his own person, and his descendants fell behind those of Aaron,
and were simply reckoned among the non-priestly families of
Levi. The Korahites and Uzzielites are mentioned, but a supe-
rior rank was assigned to them in the subsequent history to
that of other Levitical families (cf. Num. xvi., xvii., xxvi. 11,
and iii. 30 with Lev. x. 4). Aaron's wife Elisheba was of the
princely tribe of Judah, and her brother Naashon was a tribe-
prince of Judah (cf . Num. ii. 3). rrt3K *tW"} (ver. 25), a frequent
abbreviation for rrtatrn^ 'cto, heads of the father's-houses of
the Levites. In vers. 26 and 27, with which the genealogy
closes, the object of introducing it is very clearly shown in the
expression, " These are that Aaron and Moses" at the beginning
of ver. 26 ; and again, " These are that Moses and Aaron," at
the close of ver. 27. The reversal of the order of the names is
also to be noticed. In the genealogy itself Aaron stands first,
as the elder of the two ; in the conclusion, which leads over to
the historical narrative that follows, Moses takes precedence of
his elder brother, as being the divinely appointed redeemer of
Israel. "On the expression, "according to their armies," see
chap. vii. 4.
Ver. 28-vii. 7. In vers. 28-30 the thread of the history,
which was broken off at ver. 12, is again resumed. TOi Dtai, on
the day, i.e. at the time, when God spake. BfC is the construct
state before an entire clause, which is governed by it without a
relative particle, as in Lev. vii. 35, 1 Sam. xxv. 15 (vid. Ewald,
Digitized by VjOOQlC
472 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
§ 286i). Moses' last difficulty (vi. 12, repeated in ver. 30) was
removed by God with the words : " See, 1 have made thee a god
to Pharaoh, and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet" (chap,
vii. 1). According to chap. iv. 16, Moses was to be a god to
Aaron ; and in harmony with that, Aaron is here called the pro-
,phet of Moses, as being the person who would announce to Pha-
Traoh the revelations of Moses. At the same time Moses was
also made a god to Pharaoh; i.e. he was promised divine autho-
rity and power over Pharaoh, so that henceforth there was no
more necessity for him to bo afraid of the king of Egypt, but
the latter, notwithstanding all resistance, would eventually bow
before him. Moses was a god to Aaron as the revealer of the
divine will, and to Pharaoh as the executor of that will. — In
vers. 2-5 God repeats in a still more emphatic form His assur-
ance, that notwithstanding the hardening of Pharaoh's heart, He
would bring His people Israel out of Egypt, r&en (ver. 2) does
not mean ut dimittat or mittat (Vulg. Bos.; " that lie send," Eng.
ver.) ; but 1 is van consec. per/., u and so lie wiU send." On ver.
3 cf. chap. iv. 21.— Ver. 4. n v TiK Wm : « I will lay My hand on
Egypt," i.e. smite Egypt, " and bring out My armies, My people,
the children of Israel." rf>H2i (armies) is used of Israel, with
reference to its leaving Egypt equipped (chap. xiii. 18) and
organized as an army according to the tribes (cf. vi. 26 and xii.
51 with Num. i. and ii.), to contend for the cause of the Lord,
and fight the battles of Jehovah. In this respect the Israelites
were called the hosts of Jehovah. The calling of Moses and
Aaron was now concluded. Vers. 6 and 7 pave the way for the
account of their performance of the duties consequent upon
their call.
HOSES' NEGOTIATIONS WITH PHARAOH. — CHAP. VII. 8-XI. 10.
The negotiations of Moses and Aaron as messengers of
Jehovah with the king of Egypt, concerning the departure of
Israel from his land, commenced with a sign, by which the mes-
sengers of God attested their divine mission in the presence of
Pharaoh (chap. vii. 8-13), and concluded with the announcement
of the last blow that God would inflict upon the hardened king
(chap. xi. 1-10). The centre of these negotiations, or rather
the main point of this lengthened section, which is closely con-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
chap. vn. 8-xi. io. 473
nected throughout, and formally rounded off by chap. xi. 9, 10
Into an inward unity, is found in the. nine plagues which the mes-
sengers of Jehovah brought upon Pharaoh and his kingdom at
the command of Jehovah, to bend the defiant spirit of the king,
and induce him to let Israel go out of the land and serve their
God. If we carefully examine the account of these nine penal
miracles, we shall find that they are arranged i n three groups
o f three plagues eac h. For the first and second, the fourth
and fifth, and the seventh and eighth were announced before-
hand by Moses to the king (vii. 15, viii. 1, 20, ix. 1, 13, x. 1),
whilst the third, sixth, and ninth were sent without any such
announcement (viii. 16, ix. 8, x. 21)., Again, the first, fourth,
and seventh were announced to Pharaoh in the morning, and
the first and fourth by the side of the Nile (vii. 15, viii. 20),
both of them being connected with the overflowing of the
river; whilst the place of announcement is not mentioned in the
case of the seventh (the hail, chap. ix. 13), because hail, as com-
ing from heaven, was not connected with any particular locality.
This grouping is not a merely external arrangement, adopted by
the writer for the sake of greater distinctness, but is founded in
the facts themselves, and the effect which God intended the
plagues to produce, as we may gather from these circumstances — \
that the Egyptian magicians, who had imitated the first plagues,
were put to shame with their arts by the third, and were com-
pelled to see in it the finger of God (viii. 19), — that they were
smitten themselves by the sixth, and were unable to stand before
Moses (ix. 11), — and that after the ninth, Pharaoh broke off
all further negotiation with Moses and Aaron (x. 28, 29). The
last plague, commonly known as the tfnt.h f which Moses also
announced to the king before his departure (xi. 4 sqq.), differe d
from the nine former ones both , in purpose and for m. It was the
first beginning of the judgment that was coming upon the hard-
ened king, and was inflicted directly by God Himself, for Jehovah
u went out through the midst of Egypt, and smote the first-born of
the Egyptians both of man and beast " (xi. 4, xii. 29) ; whereas
seven of the previous plagues were brought by Moses and Aaron,
and of the two that are not expressly said to have been brought
by them, one, that of the dog-flies, was simply sent by Jeho-
vah (viii. 21, 24), and the other, the murrain of beasts, simply
came from His hand (ix. 3, 6). The last blow (WJ xi. 1), which
PENT. — VOL. I. 8 H
Digitized by VjOOQlC
/ 474 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
brought about the release of Israel, was also distinguished from
the nine plagues, as the direct judgment of God, by the fact that
it was not effected through the medium of any natural occur
rence, as was the case with all the others, which were based upon
the natural phenomena of Egypt, and became signs and wonders
through their vast excess above the natural measure of such
natural occurrences and their supernatural accumulation, blow
after blow following one another in less than a year, and also
through the peculiar circumstances under which they were
brought about. In this respect also the triple division is unmis-
takeable. The first three plagues covered the whole land, and
fell upon the Israelites as well as the Egyptians; with the fourth
the separation commenced between Egyptians and Israelites, so
that only the Egyptians suffered from the last six, the Israelites
in Goshen being entirely exempted. The last three, again, were
distinguished from the others by the fact, that they were far more
dreadful than any of the previous ones, and bore visible marks
of being the forerunners of the judgment which would inevit-
ably fall upon Pharaoh, if he continued his opposition to the will
of the Almighty God.
In this graduated series of plagues, the judgment of harden
ing was inflicted upon Pharaoh in the manner explained above.
In the first three plagues God showed him, that He, the God of
Israel, was Jehovah (vii. 17), i.e. that He ruled as Lord and
King over the occurrences and powers of nature, which the
Egyptians for the most part honoured as divine; and before
His power the magicians of Egypt with their secret arts were
put to shame. These three wonders made no impression upon
the king. The plague of frogs, indeed, became so troublesome
to him, that he begged Moses and Aaron to intercede with then-
God to deliver him from them, and promised to let the people
go (viii. 8). But as soon as they were taken away, he hardened
his heart, and would not listen to the messengers of God. Of
the three following plagues, the first (t.e. the fourth in the entire
series), viz. the plague of swarming creatures or dog-flies, with
which the distinction between the Egyptians and Israelites com-
menced, proving to Pharaoh that the God of Israel was Jehovah
in the midst of the land (viii. 22), made such an impression
upon the hardened king, that he promised to allow the Israelites
to sacrifice to their God, first of all in the land, and when Moses
Digitized by VjOOQlC
chap, vil »-ia 475
refused this condition, even outside the land, if they would not
go far away, and Moses and Aaron would pray to God for him,
that this plague might be taken away by God from him and
from his people (viii. 25 sqq.). But this concession was only
forced out of him by suffering ; so that as soon as the plague
ceased he withdrew it again, and his hard heart was not changed
by the two following plagues. Hence still heavier plagues were
sent, and he had to learn from the last three that there was no
god in the whole earth like Jehovah, the God of the Hebrews
(ix. 14). The terrible character of these last plagues so affected
the proud heart of Pharaoh, that twice he acknowledged he had
sinned (ix. 27, x. 16), and gave a promise that he would let the
Israelites go, restricting his promise first of all to the men, and
then including their families also (x. 11, 24). But when this
plague was withdrawn, he resumed his old sinful defiance once
more (ix. 34, 35, x. 20), and finally was altogether hardened,
and so enraged at Moses persisting in his demand that they
should take their flocks as well, that he drove away the messen-
gers of Jehovah and broke off all further negotiations, with the
threat that he would kill them if ever they came into his pre-
sence again (x. 28, 29).
Chap. vii. 8-13. Attestation of the divine mission
of Moses and Aabon. — By Jehovah's directions Moses and
Aaron went to Pharaoh, and proved by a miracle (ncto chap. iv.
21) that they were the messengers of the God of the Hebrews.
Aaron threw down his staff before Pharaoh, and it became a ser-
pent. Aaron's staff was no other than the wondrous staff of
Moses (chap. iv. 2-4). This is perfectly obvious from a compa-
rison of vers. 15 and 17 with vers. 19 and 20. If Moses was
directed, according to vers. 15 sqq., to go before Pharaoh with
his rod which had been turned into a serpent, and to announce
to him that he would smite the water of the Nile with the staff
in his hand and turn it into blood, and then, according to vers.
19 sqq., this miracle was carried out by Aaron taking his staff
and stretching out his hand over the waters of Egypt, the staff
which Aaron held over the water cannot have been any other
than the staff of Moses which had been turned into a serpent.
Consequently we must also understand by the staff of Aaron,
which was thrown down before Pharaoh and became a serpent,
Digitized by VjOOQlC
476 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
the same wondrous staff of Moses, and attribute the expression
" thy (i.e. Aaron's) staff" to the brevity of the account, Le. to
the fact that the writer restricted himself to the leading facts,
and passed over such subordinate incidents as that Moses gave
his staff to Aaron for him to work the miracle. For the same
reason he has not even mentioned that Moses spoke to Pharaoh
by Aaron, or what he said, although in ver. 13 he states that
Pharaoh did not hearken unto them, i.e. to their message or
their words. The serpent, into which the staff was changed,
is not called BTu here, as in ver. 15 and chap. iv. 3, but r??
(LXX. ipoKcov, dragon), a general term for snake-like animals.
This difference does not show that there were two distinct records,
but may be explained on the ground that the miracle performed
before Pharaoh had a different signification from that which
attested the divine mission of Moses in the presence of his people.
The miraculous sign mentioned here is distinctly related to the
art of snake-charming, which was carried to such an extent by
the Psylli in ancient Egypt (cf. Bocliart, and Hengstenberg,
Egypt and Moses, pp. 98 sqq. transl.). It is probable that the
Israelites in Egypt gave the name P3n (Eng. ver. dragon), which
occurs in Deut. xxxii. 33 and Ps. xci. 13 as a parallel to jna
(Eng. ver. asp), to the snake with which the Egyptian charmers
generally performed their tricks, the Hayek of the Arabs. What
the magi and conjurers of Egypt boasted that they could perform
by their secret or magical arts, Moses was to effect in reality in
Pharaoh's presence, and thus manifest himself to the king as
Ulohim (ver. 1), i.e. as endowed with divine authority and power.
All that is related of the Psyjli of m odern times is^that they
understand the art of turning snakes into sticks, or of compelling
them to become rigid and apparently dead (for examples see
Hengstenberg) ; but who~can telT wliaT the ancient Psylli may
have been able to effect, or may have pretended to effect, at a
time when the demoniacal power of heathenism existed in its
unbroken force f The magicians summoned by Pharaoh also
turned their sticks into snakes (ver. 12) ; a fact which naturally
excites the suspicion that the sticks themselves were only rigid
snakes, though, with our very limited acquaintance with the dark
domain of heathen conjuring, the possibility of their working
" lying wonders after the working of t Satan," i.e. supernatural
things (2 Thess. ii. 9), cannot be absolutely denied. The words,
Digitized by VjOOQ.lC
CHAP. VII. 14-VIIL 15 (19). 477
" They also, the chartummim of Egypt, did in like manner with
their enchantments," are undoubtedly based upon the assump-
tion, that the conjurers of Egypt not only pretended to possess
the art of turning snakes into sticks, but of turning sticks into
snakes as well, so that in the persons of the conjurers Pharaoh
summoned the might of the gods of Egypt to oppose the might
of Jehovah, the God of the Hebrews. For t hese m agicians,
wh om the Apostle Paul calls Jannes and Jambres, ac cording "to
the Jewi sh tradition (2 Tim, iii. 8). were not common jugglers,
but ti*9?3 " wise men," men educated in human and divine wis-
dom, and D'Qtrin, Upoypa/ifiarei^, belonging to the priestly caste
(Gen. xli. 8) ; so that the power of their gods was manifested in
their secret arts (Con? from tan? to conceal, to act secretly, like Dw
in ver. 22 from &6), and in the defeat of their enchantments
by Moses the gods of Egypt were overcome by Jehovah (chap,
xii. 12). The supremacy of Jehovah over the demoniacal powers
of Egypt manifested itself in the very first miraculous sign, in
the fact that Aaron's staff swallowed those of the magicians ;
though this miracle made no impression upon Pharaoh (ver. 13).
THE FIRST THREE PLAGUES. — CHAP. VII. 14- VIII. 15 (19).
When Pharaoh hardened his heart against the first sign, not-
withstanding the fact that it displayed the supremacy of the
messengers of Jehovah over the might of the Egyptian conjurers
and their gods, and refused to let the people of Israel go ; Moses
and Aaron were empowered by God to force the release of Israel
from the obdurate king by a series of penal miracles. These
D'riDb were not purely supernatural wonders, or altogether un-
known to the Egyptians, but were land-plagues with which
Egypt was occasionally visited, and were raised into miraculous
deeds of the Almighty God, by the fact that they burst upon
the land one after another at an unusual time of the year, in
unwonted force, and in close succession. These plagues were
selected by God as miraculous signs, because He intended to
prove thereby to the king and his servants, that He, Jehovah,
was the Lord in the land, and ruled over the powers of nature
with unrestricted freedom and omnipotence. For this reason
God not only caused them to burst suddenly upon the land
according to His word, and then as suddenly to disappear accord-
Digitized by VjOOQlC
478 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
ing to His omnipotent will, but caused them to be produced by
Moses and Aaron and disappear again at their word and prayer,
that Pharaoh might learn that these men were appointed by Him
as His messengers, and were endowed by Him with divine power
for the accomplishment of His will.
Chap. vii. 14-25. — The water of the Nile turned
into BLOOD. — In the morning, when Pharaoh went to the Nile,
Moses took his staff at the command of God ; went up to him on
the bank of the river, with the demand of Jehovah that he would
let His people Israel go ; and because hitherto (nb"iy) he had not
obeyed, announced this first plague, which Aaron immediately
brought to pass. Both time and place are of significance here.
Pharaoh went out in the morning to the Nile (ver. 15, chap,
viii. 20), not merely to take a refreshing walk, or to bathe in the
river, or to see how high the water had risen, but without doubt
to present his daily worship to the Nile, which was honoured by
the Egyptians as their supreme deity (yid. chap. ii. 5). At this
very moment the will of God with regard to Israel was declared
to him ; and for his refusal to comply with the will of the Lord
as thus revealed to him, the smiting of the Nile with the staff
made known to him the fact, that the God of the Hebrews was
the true God, and possessed the power to turn the fertilizing
water of this object of their highest worship into blood. The
changing of the water into blood is to be interpreted in the same
sense as in Joel iii. 4, where the moon is said to be turned into
blood ; that is to say, not as a chemical change into real blood,
^ . but as a change in the colour, which caused it to assume the
appearance of blood (2 Kings iii. 22). According t o the state-
ments of many travellers, the Nile «"»+*"• "k3Pg"« ''»g^ oIour when
the water is lowest, assumes first of all a greenish hue and is
almost undrinka u l e , uud th eri7 whfteiTis rising, becomes us Ted
as ochre, when it islnore' wholesome again." ^He~ causel[of_tBis
change Have not been sufficiently investigated. Th e reddenin g
of. the water is attribute d by many to the red earth, which the
river brings down from Sennaar (cf. Hengstenberg, Egypt and the
Books of Moses, pp. 104 sqq. transl. ; Ldborde, comment, p. 28) ;
butEkrenh&rg came to the conclusion^ after microsco pical exam i-
nations, that it was caused Jby^cryptogamTc plants andjnfusojia.
This natural phenomenon was here ihTerisined into a miracle, not
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. VIL 14-25. 479
only by the fact that the change took place immediately in all the i
branches of the river at Moses' word and through the smiting
of the Nile, bnt even more by a chemical change in the water,
which caused the fishes to die, the stream to stink, and, what
seems to indicate putrefaction, the water to become undrinkable ;
whereas, according to the accounts of travellers, which certainly]
do not quite agree with one another, and are not entirely trust-
worthy, the Nile water becomes more drinkable as soon as the
natural reddening begins. The change in the water extended to
" the streams" or different arms of the Nile ; " the rivers," or
Nile canals ; " the ponds," or large standing lakes formed by the
Nile ; and all " the pools of water," lit. every collection of their
waters, i.e. all the other standing lakes and ponds, left by the
overflowings of the Nile, with the water of which those who lived
at a distance from the river had to content themselves. " So
that there was blood in all the land of Egypt, both in the wood
and in the stone ;" i.e. in the vessels of wood and stone, in
which the water taken from the Nile and its branches was kept
for daily use. The reference is not merely to the earthen vessels
used for filtering and cleansing the water, but to every vessel
into which water had been put. The " stone " vessels were the
stone reservoirs built up at the corners of the streets and in
other places, where fresh water was kept for the poor (cf. Oed-
mann's verm. Samml. p. 133). The meaning of this supple-
mentary clause is not that even the water which was in these
vessels previous to the smiting of the river was turned into
blood, in which Kurtz perceives " the most miraculous part of the
whole miracle f for in that case the " wood and stone " would
have been mentioned immediately after the "gatherings of the
waters ;" but simply that there was no more water to put into
these vessels that was not changed into blood. The death of the
fishes was a sign, that the smiting had taken away from the river
its life-sustaining power, and that its red hue was intended to
depict before the eyes of the Egyptians all the terrors of death ;
but we are not to suppose that there was any reference to the
innocent blood which the Egyptians had poured into the river
through the drowning of the Hebrew boys, or to their own guilty
blood which was afterwards to be shed. — Ver. 22. This miracle
was also imitated by the magicians. The question, where they
got any water that was still unchanged, is not answered in the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
480 THE SECOND BOOK OF HOSES.
biblical text. Kurtz is of opinion that they took spring water
for the purpose ; but he has overlooked the fact, that if spring
water was still to be had, there would be no necessity for the
Egyptians to dig wells for the purpose of finding drinkable water.
The supposition that the magicians did not try their arts till the
miracle wrought by Aaron had passed away, is hardly reconcil-
able with the text, which places the return of Pharaoh to his
house after the work of the magicians. For it can neither be
assumed, that the miracle wrought by the messengers of Jehovah
lasted only a few hours, so that Pharaoh was able to wait by the
Nile till it was over, since in that case the Egyptians would not
have thought it necessary to dig wells ; nor can it be regarded
as probable, that after the miracle was over, and the plague had
ceased, the magicians began to imitate it for the purpose of showing
the king that they could do the same, and that it was after this
that the king went to his house without paying any heed to the
miracle. We must therefore follow the analogy of chap. ix.
25 as compared with chap. x. 5, and not press the expression,
" ergrj^collection of water " (ver. 19), so as to infer that there
was no Nile water at all, not even what had been taken away
before the smiting of the river, that was not changed, but rather
.conclude that the magicians tried their arts upon water that
was already drawn, for the purpose of neutralizing the effect
of the plague as soon as it had been produced. The fact that
the clause, "Pharaoh's heart was hardened," is linked with
the previous clause, " the magicians did so, etc.," by a vav
consecutive, unquestionably implies that the imitation of the
miracle by the magicians contributed to the hardening of
Pharaoh's heart. The expression, "to this also" in ver. 23,
points back to the first miraculous sign in vers. 10 sqq. This
plague was keenly felt by the Egyptians ; for the Nile contains
the only good drinking water, and its excellence is unanimously
attested by both ancient and modern writers (Hengstenberg ut
sup. pp. 108, 109, transl.). As they could not drink of the
water of the river from their loathing at its stench (ver. 18),
they were obliged to dig round about the river for water to drink
(ver. 24). From this it is evident that the plague lasted a con-
siderable time ; according to ver. 25, apparently seven days.
At least this is the most natural interpretation of the words, " and
seven days were fulfilled after that Jehovah had smitten the river?
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. VIII t-15. 481
It is true, there is still the possibility that this verse may be con-
nected with the following one, "when seven days were fulfilled . . .
Jehovah said to Moses." But this is not probable ; for the time
which intervened between the plagues is not stated anywhere else,
nor is the expression, " Jehovah said," with which the plagues
are introduced, connected in any other instance with what
precedes. The narrative leaves it quite undecided how rapidly
the plagues succeeded one another. On the supposit ion that /7\
the changing of the Nile water took place at the time when the ', * £ ,
river began to rise, and when the reddening generally occurs, ^C^
m any exp ositors fix upon the "month of June~or July tor the A* * y
commencement of the plague ; in which case all the plagues >£•«>«_/
down to the death of the first-horn, which occurred iifthe night
of the 14th Abib, i.e. about the middle of April, would T>e con-
fined to the space of about nine months. But this conjecture is
a veryTincertain one, and all that is tolerably sure is, that the
seventh plague (the hail) occurred in February (vid. chap. ix.
31, 32), and there were (not three weeks, but) eight weeks
therefore, or about two months, between the seventh and tenth
plagues ; so that between each of the last three there would be
an interval of fourteen or twenty days. And if we suppose that
there was a similar interval in the case of all the others, the first
plague would take place in September or October, — that is to
say, after the yearly overflow of the Nile,, which lasts from June
to September.
Chap. viii. 1-15. The plague of frogs, or the second plague,
also proceeded from the Nile, and haa" its natural origin in the
putridity of the slimy Nile water, whereby the "marsh waters
es p^daHy'bec amiriilled with thousands of frogs. JTT]?¥ is the
small .Nile frog, the Dofda of the Egyptians, called rana Mosaica
or NiloHca by Seetzen, which appears in large numbers as soon
as the waters recede. These frogs (?T]DJrn in chap. viii. 6, used
collectively) became a penal miracle from the fact that they
came out of the water in unparalleled numbers, in consequence
of the stretching out of Aaron's staff over the waters of the
Nile, as had been foretold to the king, and that they not only
penetrated into the houses and inner rooms (" bed-chamber"),
and crept into the domestic utensils, the beds (row?), the ovens,
and the kneading-troughs (not the " dough " as Luther renders
it\ but even got upon the men themselves. — Ver. 7. This
Digitized by VjOOQlC
482 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
miracle was also imitated by the Egyptian augurs with their
secret arts, and frogs were brought upon the land by them.
But if they were able to bring the plague, they could not take it
away. The latter is not expressly stated, it is true ; but it is evi-
dent from the fact that Pharaoh was obliged to send for Moses
and Aaron to intercede with Jehovah to take them away. The
king would never have applied to Moses and Aaron for help if
his charmers could have charmed the plague away. Moreover
the fact that Pharaoh entreated them to intercede with Jehovah
to take away the frogs, and promised to let the people go, that
they might sacrifice to Jehovah (ver. 8), was a sign that he re-
garded the God of Israel as the author of the plague. To
strengthen the impression made upon the king by this plague
with reference to the might of Jehovah, Moses said to him (ver.
I 9), " Glorify thyself over me, when I shall entreat for thee" i.e.
-Arfake the glory upon thyself of determining the time when I
| shall remove the plague through my intercession. The expres-
sion is elliptical, and "foN? (saying) is to be supplied, as in Judg.
vii. 2. To give Jehovah the glory, Moses placed himself below
Pharaoh, and left him to fix the time for the frogs to be removed
through his intercession. — Ver. 10. The king appointed the fol-
lowing day, probably because he hardly thought it possible for
so great a Work to be performed at once. Moses promised that
it should be so: "According to thy word (sc. let it be), that thou
tnayest know that there is not (a God) like Jehovah our God"
He then went out and cried, i.e. called aloud and earnestly, to
Jehovah concerning the matter ("OT ?J?) of the frogs, which he
had set, i.e. prepared, for Pharaoh (oife> as in Gen. xlv. 7). In
consequence of his intercession God took the plague away. The
frogs died off (p THD, to die away out of, from), out of the houses,
and palaces, and fields, and were gathered together by bushels
(D'TOn from ipn, the omer, the largest measure used by the He-
brews), so that the land stank with the odour of their putrefac-
tion. Though Jehovah had thus manifested Himself as the
Almighty God and Lord of the creation, Pharaoh did not keep
his promise; but when he saw that there was breathing-time
(nnr», owtyrt/jft?, relief from an overpowering pressure), lite-
rally, as soon as he " got air" he hardened his heart, so that he
did not hearken to Moses and Aaron (*»?jW^ inf. abs. as in Gen.
xli. 43).
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. Vin. 18-19. 483
Chap. viii. 16-19. T he cbtats , or the third plague. — The DM,
or 0*1? (also M3, probably an old singular form, Ewald, § 163/),
were not " lice" but aicvfye;, sciniphes, a species of gnats, so
smallj|s_to_b_e_JbardJyvisible to the eye, but with a sting which,
according to Pliilo andjCjngggi causes a m ost painful ir ritation
of the skm! They even creepinto the eyes and nosejTand after
the harvest they rise In great s warm s, from the inundated rice -
fields. 'This plague was caused by the fact that Aaron smote
tKellust of the ground with his staff, and all the dust through-
out the land of Egypt turned into gnats, which were upon man
and beast (ver. 17). "Just as the fertilizing water of Egypt
had twice become a plague, so through the power of Jehovah
the soil so richly blessed became a plague to the king and his
people." — Ver. 18. "The magicians did so with their enchant-
ments (i.e. smote the dust with rods), to bring forth gnats, but
could not." The cause of this inability is hardly to be sought
for, as Knobel supposes, in the fact that " the thing to be done
in this instance, was to call creatures into existence, and not
merely to call forth and change creatures and things in existence
already, as in the case of the staff, the water, and the frogs."
For after this, they could neither call out the dog-flies, nor pro-
tect their own bodies from the boils ; to say nothing of the fact,
that as gnats proceed from the eggs laid in the dust or earth by
the previous generation, their production is not to be regarded
as a direct act of creation any more than that of the frogs. The
miracle in both plagues was just the same, and consisted not in
a direct creation, but simply in a sudden creative generation and
supernatural multiplication, not of the gnats only, but also of
the frogs, in accordance with a previous prediction. The reason
why the arts of the Egyptian magicians were put to shame in
this case, we have to seek in the omnipotence of God, restraining
the demoniacal powers which the magicians had made subser-
vient to their purposes before, in order that their inability to
bring out these, the smallest of all creatures, which seemed to
arise as it were from the dust itself, might display in the sight
of every one the impotence of their secret arts by the side of the
almighty creative power of the true God. This omnipotence
the magicians were compelled to admit : they were compelled to
acknowledge, " This is the finger of God." " But they did not
make this acknowledgment for the purpose of giving glory to
Digitized by VjOOQlC
484 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
God Himself, but simply to protect their own honour, that
Moses and Aaron might not be thought to be superior to them
in virtue or knowledge. It was equivalent to saying, it is not
by Moses and Aaron that we are restrained, but by a divine
power, which is greater than either" (Bochart). The word Elo-
him is decisive in support of this view. If they had meant to
refer to the God of Israel, they would have used the name
Jehovah. The " finger of God " denotes creative omnipotence
(Ps. viii. 3 ; Luke xi. 20, cf. Ex. xxxi. 18). Consequently this
miracle also made no impression upon Pharaoh.
THE THREE FOLLOWING PLAGUES. — CHAP. VIII. 20-IX. 12.
As the Egyptian magicians saw nothing more than the
finger of God in the miracle which they could not imitate,
that is to say, the work of some deity, possibly one of the
gods of the Egyptians, and not the hand of Jehovah the God
of the Hebrews, who had demanded the release of Israel, a dis-
tinction was made in the plagues which followed between the
Israelites and the Egyptians, and the former were exempted
from the plagues : a fact which was sufficient to prove to any
one that they came from the God of Israel. To make this the
more obvious, the fourth and fifth plagues were merely an-
nounced by Moses to the king. They were not brought on
through the mediation of either himself or Aaron, but were sent
by Jehovah at the appointed time ; no doubt for the simple
purpose of precluding the king and his wise men from the ex-
cuse which unbelief might still suggest, viz. that they were pro-
duced by the powerful incantations of Moses and Aaron.
Chap. viii. 20-32. The fourth plague, the coming of which
Moses foretold to Pharaoh, like the first, in the morning, and
by the water (on the bank of the Nile), consisted in the sending
of " heavy ver min" probably dog-flies. 3*W, literally a mix-
ture, is rendered KwofixHd (dug-fly) by the LXX., Trd/ifivia
(all-fly), a mixture of all kinds of flies, by Symmachus. These
insects are described by Philo and many travellers as a very
severe scourge (oid. liengstenberg ut sup. p. 113). They are
mush jnore nu mero us and annoying; than the gn ats ; and when
enraged, theylasteiTthe mselves upon the human body, especially
upon the edges ot tlie eyelids, and become a dreadiurpTague.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. VIII 20-82. 485
133 : a heavy multitude, as in chap. x. 14, Gen. 1. 9, etc. Thesp
swarms were to fill u Hie houses of the Egyptians, and even the
land vpon which they (the Egyptians) were" i.e. that part of the
land which was not occupied by houses ; whilst the land of
Goshen, where the Israelites dwelt, would be entirely spared.
roan (to separate, to distinguish in a miraculous way) is con-
jugated with an accusative, as in Ps. iv. 4. It is generally fol-
lowed by T? (chap. ix. 4, xi. 7), to distinguish between. "IDV :
to stand upon a land, i.e. to inhabit, possess it ; not to exist, or
live (chap. xxi. 21). — Ver. 23. u And I will put a deliverance
between My people and thy people." JlVlB does not mean Bta-
0T0X17, divisio (LXX., Vulg.), but redemption, deliverance.
Exemption from this plague was essentially a deliverance for
Israel, which manifested the distinction conferred upon Israel
above the Egyptians. By this plague, in which a separation
and deliverance was established between the people of God and
the Egyptians, Pharaoh was to be taught that the God who sent
this plague was not some deity of Egypt, but " Jehovah in the
midst of the land" (of Egypt) ; i.e. as Knobel correctly interprets
it, (a) that Israel's God was the author of the plague ; (b) that
He had also authority over Egypt ; and (c) that He possessed
supreme authority : or, to express it still more concisely, that
Israel's God was the Absolute God, who ruled both in and over
Egypt with free and boundless omnipotence. — Vers. 24 sqq. This
plague, by which the land was destroyed (fintSfn), or desolated,
inasmuch as the flies not only tortured, " devoured" (Ps. lxxviii.
45) the men, and disfigured them by the swellings produced by
their sting, but also killed the plants in which they deposited
their eggs, so alarmed Pharaoh that he sent for Moses and
Aaron, and gave them permission to sacrifice to their God " in
the land." But Moses could not consent to this restriction. " It
is not appointed so to do" (faj does not mean aptum, conveniens,
but statutum, rectum), for two reasons : (l^because sacrificing
in the land would be an abomination to the Egyptians, and
would provoke them most bitterly (ver. 26) ; and (2), because
they could only sacrifice to Jehovah their God as He had
directed them (ver. 27). The abomination referred to did not
consist in their sacrificing animals which the Egyptians regarded
as holy. For the word najrtn (abomination) would not be appli-
cable to the sacred animals. Moreover, the cow was the only
Digitized by VjOOQlC
486 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
animal offered in sacrifice by the Israelites, which the Egyptian
regarded as sacred. The abomination would rather be this, that
the Israelites would not carry out the rigid regulations observed
by the Egyptians with regard to the cleanness of the sacrificial
animals (yid. Hengstenberg, p. 114), and in fact would not observe
the sacrificial rites of the Egyptians at all. The Egyptians
would be very likely to look upon this as an insult to their reli-
gion and their gods ; " the violation of the recognised mode of
sacrificing would be regarded as a manifestation of contempt for
themselves and their gods" (Calvin), and this would so enrage
them that they would stone the Israelites. The ft before nan in
ver. 26 is the interjection lo I but it stands before a conditional
clause, introduced without a conditional particle, in the sense of
if, which it has retained in the Chaldee, and in which it is used
here and there in the Hebrew (e.g. Lev. xxv. 20). — Vers. 28-32.
These reasons commended themselves to the heathen king from
his own religious standpoint. He promised, therefore, to let the
people go into the wilderness and sacrifice, provided they did not
go far away, if Moses and Aaron would release him and his
people from this plague through their intercession. Moses pro-
mised that the swarms should be removed the following day, but
told the king not to deceive them again as he had done before
(ver. 8). But Pharaoh hardened his heart as soon as the plague
was taken away, just as he had done after the second plague
(ver. 15), to which the word "also" refers (ver. 32).
Chap. ix. 1-7. The fifth plague consisted of a severe muk-
baw, which carried off the cattle (fJPP, the living property) of
the Egyptians, that were in the field. To show how Pharaoh
was accumulating guilt by his obstinate resistance, in the an-
nouncement of this plague the expression, " If thou refuse to let
them go" (cf. viii. 2), is followed by the words, " and unit hold
them (the Israelites) still" (ity still further, even after Jehovah
has so emphatically declared His will). — Ver. 3. " The hand of
Jehovah trill be ( n ^ n , which only occurs here, as the participle
of njn, generally takes its form from nw, Neh. vi. 6 ; Eccl. ii. 22)
against thy cattle . . as a very severe plague pyj that which
sweeps away, a plague), i.e. will smite them with a severe plague.
A distinction was again made between the Israelites and the
Egyptians. " Of all (the cattle) belonging to the children of
Israel, not one pOT ver. 4,=*inK ver. 6) shall die." A definite
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. IX. 8-12. 487
time was also fixed for the coming of the plague, as in the case
of the previous one (viii. 23), in order that, whereas murrains
occasionally occur in Egypt, Pharaoh might discern in his one
the judgment of Jehovah. — Ver. 6. In the words " all the cattle
of the Egyptians died" all is not to be taken in an absolute sense,
but, according to popular usage, as denoting such a quantity, that
what remained was nothing in comparison ; and, according to
ver. 3, it must be entirely restricted to the cattle in the field.
For, according to vers. 9 and 19, much of the cattle of the
Egyptians still remained even after this murrain, though it ex-
tended to all kinds of cattle, horses, asses, camels, oxen, and
sheep, and differed in this respect from natural murrains. —
Ver. 7. But Pharaoh's heart still continued hardened, though he
convinced himself by direct inquiry that the cattle of the Israel-
ites had been spared.
Vers. 8-12. The sixth plague smote man and beast with
woTTBjvRy.Afrr^ft -rn uTH iw bt-tstb hh. — W& (a common disease
in Egypt, Deut. xxviii. 27) from the unusual word jnB> (m-
caluit) signifies inflammation, then an abscess or boil (Lev. xiii.
18 sqq. ; 2 Kings xx. 7). nJajQK, from JR3, to spring up, swell
up, signifies blisters, <f>XuKrl8es (LXX), pustulce. The natural
substratum of this plague is discovered by most commentators
in the s o-called Nile-blister s, which come out in innum erable
little pimples upon the scarlet-colonrea SKiiL- and oh aage~ina
s hort spac e ot tune into small, round, and thickly-crowded blis-
ters! This is called by the E gyptians tlamm el Nil, or the heat
o ^the inu ndati on. According to "Dt Btlfuii £, It Is u iai4i, which
occurs in summer, chiefly towards the close at the time of the
overflowing of the Nile, and produces a burning and pricking
sensation upon the skin ; or, in Seetzen's words, " it consists of
small, red, and slightly rounded elevations in the skin, which
give strong twitches and slight stinging sensations, resembling
those of scarlet fever" (p. 209). The cause of this eruption,
which occurs only in men and not in animals, has not been deter-
mined ; some attributing it to the water, and others to the heat.
Leyrer, in Herzorfs Cyclopaedia, speaks of the " Anthrax which
stood in a causal relation to the fifth plague ; a black, burning
abscess, which frequently occurs after a murrain, especially the
cattle distemper, and which might be called to mind by the name
at/Opal-, coal, and the symbolical sprinkling of the soot of the
Digitized by VjOOQlC
488 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
furnace." In any case, the manner in which this plague was
produced was significant, though it cannot he explained with
positive certainty, especially as we are unable to decide exactly
what was the natural disease which lay at the foundation of the
plague. At the command of God, Moses and Aaron took
" handful* of soot, and sprinkled it towards tlie Jteaven, so that it
became dust over all the land of Egypt" i.e. flew like dust over
the land, and became boils on man and beast. !t503n itb : soot
or ashes of the smelting-furnace or lime-kiln. \&33 is not an
oven or cooking stove, but, as Kimchi supposes, a smelting-fur-
nace or lime-kiln ; not so called, however, a metallis domandis,
but from BOS in its primary signification to press together, hence
(a) to soften, or melt, (b) to tread down. Burders view seems
inadmissible ; namely, that this symbolical act of Moses had some
relation to the expiatory rites of the ancient Egyptians, in which
the ashes of sacrifices, particularly human sacrifices, were scat-
tered about. For it rests upon the supposition that Moses took
the ashes from a fire appropriated to the burning of sacrifices —
a supposition to which neither JBO? nor n ,fi is appropriate. For
the former does not signify a fire-place, still less one set apart
for the burning of sacrifices, and the ashes taken from the sacri
fices for purifying purposes were called *iBK, and not rPB (Num.
xix. 10). Moreover, such an interpretation as this, namely, that
the ashes set apart for purifying purposes produced impurity in
the hands of Moses, as a symbolical representation of the thought,
that " the religious purification promised in the sacrificial worship
of Egypt was really a defilement," does not answer at all to the
effect produced. The ashes scattered in the air by Moses did
not produce defilement, but boils or blisters; and we have no
ground for supposing that they were regarded by the Egyptians
as a religious defilement. And, lastly, there was not one of the
plagues in which the object was to pronounce condemnation
upon the Egyptian worship or sacrifices ; since Pharaoh did not
wish to force the Egyptian idolatry upon the Israelites, but
simply to prevent them from leaving the country.
The ashes or soot of the smelting-furnace or lime-kiln bore,
no doubt, the same relation to the plague arising therefrom, as
the water of the Nile and the dust of the ground to the three
plagues which proceeded from them. As Pharaoh and his people
owed their prosperity, wealth, and abundance of earthly goods
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. IX. 18-XI. 10. 489
to the fertilizing waters of the Nile and the fruitful soil, so it
was from the lime-kilns, so to speak, that those splendid cities
and pyramids proceeded, by which the early Pharaohs endea-
voured to immortalize the power and glory of their reigns. And
whilst in the first three plagues the natural sources of the land
were changed by Jehovah, through His servants Moses and
Aaron, into sources of evil, the sixth plague proved to the proud
king that Jehovah also possessed the power to bring ruin upon
him from the workshops of those splendid edifices, for the erec-
tion of which he had made use of the strength of the Israelites,
and oppressed them so grievously with burdensome toil as to
cause Egypt to become like a furnace for smelting iron (Deut.
iv. 20), and that He could make the soot or ashes of the lime-
kiln, the residuum of that fiery heat and emblem of the furnace
in which Israel groaned, into a seed which, when carried through
the air at His command, would produce burning boils on man
and beast throughout all the land of Egypt. These boils were
the first plague which attacked and endangered the lives of men ;
and in this respect it was the first foreboding of the death which
Pharaoh would bring upon himself by his continued resistance.
The priests were so far from being able to shelter the king from
this plague by their secret arts, that they were attacked by them
themselves, were unable to stand before Moses, and were obliged
to give up all further resistance. But Pharaoh did not take
this plague to heart, and was given up to the divine sentence of
hardening.
THE LAST THREE PLAGUE8.-— CHAP. IX. 13-XI. 10.
As the plagues had thus far entirely failed to bend the un-
yielding heart of Pharaoh under the will of the Almighty God,
the terrors of that judgment, which would infallibly come upon
him, were set before him in three more plagues, which were far
more terrible than any that had preceded them. That these
were to be preparatory to the last decisive blow, is proved by the
great solemnity with which they were announced to the hardened
king (vers. 13-16). This time Jehovah was about to " send all
His strokes at the heart of Pharaoh, and against hit servants and
his people" (ver. 14). I^TTK does not signify " against thy per-
son," for 3? is not used for efea, and even the latter is not a
text. — vol.. I. 2 1
Digitized by VjOOQlC
490 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
periphrasis for "person;" but the strokes were to go to the
king's heart. " It announces that they will be plagues that will
not only strike the head and arms, but penetrate the very heart,
and inflict a mortal wound" (Calvin). From the plural " strokes"
it is evident that this threat referred not only to the seventh
plague, viz. the hail, but to all the other plagues, through which
Jehovah was about to make known to the king that " there was
none like Him in all the earth ;" i.e. that not one of the gods whom
the heathen worshipped was like Him, the only true God. For,
in order to show this, Jehovah had not smitten Pharaoh and his
people at once with pestilence and cut them off from the earth,
but had set him up to make him see, i.e. discern or feel His
power, and to glorify His name in all the earth (vers. 15, 16).
In ver. 15 'W 'Hiw (I have stretched out, etc.) is to be taken as
the conditional clause : u If I had now stretched out My hand and
smitten thee . . . thou wouldest have been cut off." V J ! r '?>?£ forms
the antithesis to 1^3*}, and means to cause to stand or continue,
as in 1 Kings xv. 4, 2 Chron. ix. 8 (SterripqOris LXX.). Caus-
ing to stand presupposes setting up. In this first sense the
Apostle Paul has rendered it ijtfyeipa in Bom. ix. 17, in accord-
ance with the purport of his argument, because " God thereby
appeared still more decidedly as absolutely determining all that
was done by Pharaoh" (Philippi on Bom. ix. 17). The reason
why God had not destroyed Pharaoh at once was twofold : (1)
that Pharaoh himself might experience (nton to cause to see, i.e.
'to experience) the might of Jehovah, by which he was compelled
more than once to give glory to Jehovah (ver. 27, chap. x. 16, 17,
xii. 31) ; and (2) that the name of Jehovah might be declared
throughout all the earth. As both the rebellion of the natural
man against the word and will of God, and the hostility of the
world-power to the Lord and His people, were concentrated in
Pharaoh, so there were manifested in the judgments suspended
over him the patience and grace of the living God, quite as much
as His holiness, justice, and omnipotence, as a warning to im-
penitent sinners, and a support to the faith of the godly, in a
manner that should be typical for all times and circumstances of
the kingdom of God in conflict with the ungodly world. The
report of this glorious manifestation of Jehovah spread at once
among all the surrounding nations (cf . xv. 14 sqq.), and travelled
not only to the Arabians, but to the Greeks and Bomans also,
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. IX 17-85. 491
and eventually with the Gospel of Christ to all the nations of
the earth (yid. Tholuck on Rom. ix. 17).
Chap. ix. 17-35. The seventh plague. — To break down Pha-
raoh's opposition, Jehovah determined to send such a hail as
had not been heard of since the founding of Egypt, accompanied
by thunder and masses of fire, and to destroy every man and
beast that should be in the field. TTinpo ITij? : " thou still dam-
mest thyself up against My people? ^non : to set one's self as
a dam, i.e. to oppose ; from <vD, to heap up earth as a dam or
rampart. " To-morrow about this time" to give Pharaoh time
for reflection. Instead of " from the day that Egypt was founded
until now," we find in ver. 24 " since it became a nation," since
its existence as a kingdom or nation. — Ver. 19. The good advice
to be given by Moses to the king, to secure the men and cattle
that were in the field, i.e. to put them under shelter, which was
followed by the God-fearing Egyptians (ver. 21), was a sign of
divine mercy, which would still rescue the hardened man and
save him from destruction. Even in Pharaoh's case the possibi-
lity still existed of submission to the will of God ; the hardening
was not yet complete. But as he paid no heed to tbe word of
the Lord, the predicted judgment was fulfilled (vers. 22-26).
" Jehovah gave voices" (r6f>) ; called " voices of God" in ver 28.
This term is applied to the thunder (cf. xix. 16, xx. 18 ; Ps.
xxix. 3-9), as being the mightiest manifestation of the omnipo-
tence of God, which speaks therein to men (Rev. x. 3, 4), and
warns tbem of the terrors of judgment. These terrors were
heightened by masses of fire, which came down from the sky
along with the hail that smote man and beast in the field, de-
stroyed the vegetables, and shattered the trees. " And fire ran
along upon the ground :" *pfW is a Kal, though it sounds like Hith-
pael, and signifies grassari, as in Ps. lxxiii. 9. — Ver. 24. "Fire
mingled;" lit. collected together, i.e. formed into balls (cf. Ezek.
i. 4). " The lightning took the form of balls of fire, which
came down like burning torches." — Ver. 25. The expressions,
" every herb" and " every tree," are not to be taken absolutely,
just as in ver. 6, as we may see from chap. x. 5. S torms are
not common in Lower or Middle Egypt, but they occur most
fre quently between th e months of December and April; and
h ail som etimes accompaniesTEem, thouglnibt with gFSaTSeverity.
TrTthemselves, therefore, thunder, lightning, and hail wei» not
Digitized by VjOOQlC
492 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
unheard of. They also came at the time of year when they
usually occur, namely, when the cattle were in the field, i.e.
between January and April, the only period in which cattle are
turned out for pasture (for proofs, see Hengstenberg, Egypt and
the Books of Moses). The supernatural character of this plague
was manifested, not only in its being predicted by Moses, and in
the exemption of the land of Goshen, but more especially in the
terrible fury of the hail-storm, which made a stronger impression
upon Pharaoh than all the previous plagues. For he sent for
Moses and Aaron, and confessed to them, " I have sinned this
time : Jehovah is righteous ; land my people are the sinners" (vers.
27 sqq.). But the very limitation " this time" showed that his
repentance did not go very deep, and that his confession was far
more the effect of terror caused by the majesty of God, which
was manifested in the fearful thunder and lightning, than a
genuine acknowledgment of his guilt. This is apparent also
from the words which follow : " Pray to Jehovah for me, and let
it be enough (3"l satis, as in Gen. xlv. 28) of the being (n'TO) of
the voices of God and of the hail ;" i.e. there has been enough
thunder and hail, they may cease now. — Ver. 29. Moses promised
that his request should be granted, that he might know " that the
land belonged to Jehovah," i.e. that Jehovah ruled as Lord over
Egypt (cf. viii. 18) ; at the same time he told him that the fear
manifested by himself and his servants was no true fear of God.
'" 'JBD kv denotes the true fear of God, which includes a volun-
tary subjection to the divine will. Observe the expression, Jeho-
vah, Elohim : Jehovah, who is Elohim, the Being to be honoured
as supreme, the true God.
The account of the loss caused by the hail is introduced very
appropriately in vers. 31 and 32, to show how much had been
lost, and how much there was still to lose through continued
refusal. " The flax and the barley were smitten, for the barley
was ear, and the flax was 7B3& (blossom) ; i.e. they were neither
of them quite ripe, but they were already in ear and blossom, so
i that they were broken and destroyed by the hail. " The wheat,"
on the other hand, " and the spelt were not broken down, because
they were tender, or late" (TO'BK) ; i.e. they had no ears as yet,
and therefore could not be broken by the hail. These accounts
\are in har mony with the natural history of Eg ypt. According
to Pliny, the barley is reaped in the sixth month after the sow-
Digitized by CjOOQI^
CHAP. X. 1-20. 493
ing^time, thewheat in t he seventh. The barley is ripe about
the^end of February or beginning of March ; the wheat, at tne
end oFMaTCh-or beginning of April! The flaS Is In flower at
the end ^if J a nuary. In the neighbourhood of Alexandria, and
therefore quite in the north of Egypt, the spelt is ripe at the end
of April, and farther south it is probably somewhat earlier ; for,
according to other accounts, the wheat and spelt ripen at the same
time (yid. Hengstenberg, p. 119). Consequently the plague of
hail occurred at the end of January, or at the latest in the first
half of February ; so that there were at least eight weeks between
the seventh and tenth plagues. The hail must have smitten the
half, therefore, of the most important field-produce, viz. the
barley, which was a valuable article of food both for men, espe-
cially the poorer classes, and for cattle, and the flax, which was
also a very important part of the produce of Egypt ; whereas
the spelt, of which the Egyptians preferred to make their bread
(Herod. 2, 36, 77), and the wheat were still spared. — Vers. 33-
35. But even this plague did not lead Pharaoh to alter his mind.
As soon as it had ceased on the intercession of Moses, he and
his servants continued sinning and hardening their hearts.
Chap. x. 1-20. The eighth plague; the locusts. — Vers.
1-6. As Pharaoh's pride still refused to bend to the will of God,
Moses was directed to announce another, and in some respects
a more fearful, plague. At the same time God strengthened
Moses' faith, by telling him that the hardening of Pharaoh and
his servants was decreed by Him, that these signs might be done
among them, and that Israel might perceive by this to all gene-
rations that He was Jehovah (cf. vii. 3-5). We may learn from
Ps. lxxviii. and cv. in what manner the Israelites narrated these
signs to their children and children's children, nhk JVC*, to set
or prepare signs (ver. 1), is interchanged with BW (ver. 2) in the
same sense (vid. chap. viii. 12). The suffix in tanj?3 (ver. 1) refers
to Egypt as a country ; and that in D3 (ver. 2) to the Egyptians.
In the expression, "thou may est tell" Moses is addressed as the
representative of the nation, ^ynn : to have to do with a per-
son, generally in a bad sense, to do him harm (1 Sam. xxxi. 4).
" How I have put forth My might" (De Wette).—Ver. 3. As
Pharaoh had acknowledged, when the previous plague was sent,
that Jehovah was righteous (ix. 27), his crime was placed still
more strongly before him : " How long wilt thou refute to humble
Digitized by VjOOQlC
494 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
thyself before Mel" (n5$ for rtyrb, as in chap, xxxiv. 24).—
Vers. 4 sqq. To punish this obstinate refusal, Jehovah would
bring locusts in such dreadful swarms as Egypt had never known
before, which would eat up all the plants left by the hail, and
even fill the houses. " They will cover the eye of the earth."
This expression, which is peculiar to the Pentateuch, and only
I occurs again in ver. 15 and Num. xxii. 5, 11, is based upon the
\ a ncient and truly poetic idea, that the earth, with its covering of
'—" fplants, looks up to man. To substitute the rendering " surface"
' for the " eye," is to destroy the real meaning of the figure ;
" face" is better. It was in the swarms that actually hid the
ground that the fearful character of the plague consisted, as the
swarms of locusts consume everything green. " The residue of
the escape" is still further explained as " that which remaineth
unto you from the hail," viz. the spelt and wheat, and all the
vegetables that were left (vers. 12 and 15). For " all the trees
that sprout" (ver. 5), we find in ver. 15, "all the tree-fruits and
everything green upon the trees."
Vers. 7-11. The announcement of such a plague of locusts,
as their forefathers had never seen before since their existence
upon earth, i.e. since the creation of man (ver. 6), put the ser-
vants of Pharaoh in such fear, that they tried to persuade the
king to let the Israelites go. " How long shall this (Moses) be a
snare to us? . . . Seest thou not yet, that Egypt is destroyed ?"
tPpto, a snare or trap for catching animals, is a figurative expres-
sion for destruction. D^JKn (ver. 7) does not mean the men,
but the people. The servants wished all the people to be allowed
to go as Moses had desired ; but Pharaoh would only consent to
the departure of the men (D^aan, ver. 11). — Ver. 8. As Moses
had left Pharaoh after announcing the plague, he was fetched
back again along with Aaron, in consequence of the appeal made
to the king by his servants, and asked by the king, how many
wanted to go to the feast. HpJ ,, p, " who and who still further
are the going ones ;" i.e. those who wish to go ? Moses required
the whole nation to depart, without regard to age or sex, along
with all their flocks and herds. He mentioned u young and old,
sons and daughters ;" the wives as belonging to the men being
included in the " we" Although he assigned a reason for this
demand, viz. that they were to hold a feast to Jehovah, Pharaoh
was so indignant, that he answered scornfully at first : "Be it so;
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. X. 12-18. 495
Jehovah be with you when I let you and your Utile o»es go ;" i.e. may
Jehovah help you in the same way in which I let yon and your
little ones go. This indicated contempt not only for Moses and
Aaron, but also for Jehovah, who had nevertheless proved Him-
self, by His manifestations of mighty power, to be a God who
would not suffer Himself to be trifled with. After this utterance
of his ill-will, Pharaoh told the messengers of God that he could
see through their intention. "Evil is be/ore your face;" i.e. you
have evil in view. He called their purpose an evil one, because
they wanted to withdraw the people from his service. "Not so,"
i.e. let it not be as you desire. " Go then, you men, and serve
Jehovah." But even this concession was not seriously meant.
This is evident from the expression, " Go then" in which the
irony is unmistakeable ; and still more so from the fact, that with
these words he broke off all negotiation with Moses and Aaron,
and drove them from his presence. Bn£} : " one drove them
forth ;" the subject is not expressed, because it is clear enough
that the royal servants who were present were the persons who
drove them away. " For this are ye seeking :" "Wit relates simply
to the words " serve Jehovah," by which the king understood
the sacrificial festival, for which in his opinion only the men
could be wanted ; not that " he supposed the people for whom
Moses had asked permission to go, to mean only the men"
(Knobel). The restriction of the permission to depart to the
men alone was pure caprice ; for even the Egyptians, according
to Herodotus (2, 60), held religious festivals at which the women
were in the habit of accompanying the men.
Vers. 12—15. After His messengers had been thus scornfully
treated, Jehovah directed Moses to bring the threatened plague
upon the land. " Stretch out thy hand over the land of Egypt
with locusts ;" i.e. so that the locusts may come. n?y, to go up :
the word used for a hostile invasion. The locusts are repre-
sented as an army, as in Joel i. 6. Locusts were not an un-
known scourge in Egypt ; and in the case before us they were
brought, as usual, by the wind. The marvellous character of
the phenomenon was, that when Moses stretched out his hand
over Egypt with the staff, Jehovah caused an east wind to blow
over the land, which blew a day and a night, and the next
morning brought the locusts ("brought:" inasmuch as the swarms
of locusts are really brought by the wind). — Ver. 13. "An east
Digitized by VjOOQlC
496 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
wind : not i>oro? (LXX.), the south wind, as Bochart supposed,
i Although the swarms of locusts are generally brought into Egypt
from Libya or Ethiopia, and therefore by a south or south-west
wind, they are sometimes brought by the east wind from Arabia,
as Denon and others have observed (Hgstb. p. 120). The fact
that the wind blew a day and a night before bringing the locusts,
showed that they came from a great distance, and therefore
proved to the Egyptians that the omnipotence of Jehovah reached
far beyond the borders of Egypt, and ruled over every land.
Another miraculous feature in this plague was its unparalleled
extent, viz. over the whole of the land of Egypt, whereas ordi-
nary swarms are confined to particular districts. In this respect
the judgment had no equal either before or afterwards (ver. 14).
The words, " Before them there were no such locusts as they, neither
after them shall be such" must not be diluted into " a hyper-
bolical and proverbial saying, implying that there was no recol-
lection of such noxious locusts," as it is by RosenmUller. This
passage is not at variance with Joel ii. 2, for the former relates
to Egypt, the latter to the land of Israel ; and Joel's description
unquestionably refers to the account before us, the meaning
being, that quite as terrible a judgment would fall upon Judah
and Israel as had formerly been inflicted upon Egypt and the
obdurate Pharaoh. In its dreadful character, this Egyptian
plague is a type of the plagues which will precede the last judg-
ment, and forms the groundwork for the description in Rev. ix.
3-10 ; just as Joel discerned in the plagues which burst upon
Judah in his own day a presage of the day of the Lord (Joel i.
15, ii. 1), i.e. of the great day of judgment, which is advancing
step by step in all the great judgments of history or rather of
the conflict between the kingdom of God and the powers of this
world, and will be finally accomplished in the last general judg-
ment. — Ver. 15. The darkening of the land, and the eating up
of all the green plants by swarms of locusts, have been described
by many eye-witnesses of such plagues. " Locustarum plerumque
tanta conspicitur in Africa frequentia, ut volantes instar nebulae
soils radios operiant" {Leo Afric.). " Solemque obumbranl"
(Pliny, h. n. ii. 29).
Vers. 16-20. This plague, which even Pliny calls Deorum
ira pestis, so terrified Pharaoh, that he sent for Moses and
Aaron in haste, confessed his sin against Jehovah and them,
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. X. 21-». 497
and entreated them bat this once more to procure, through their
intercession with Jehovah their God, the forgiveness of his sin
and the removal of u this death." He called the locusts death, as
bringing death and destruction, and ruining the country. Mors
eliam agrorum est et herbarum atque arborum, as Bochart observes
with references to Gen. xlvii. 19 ; Job xiv. 8 ; Ps. xlviii. 47. —
Vers. 18, 19. To show the hardened king the greatness of the
divine long-suffering, Moses prayed to the Lord, and the Lord
cast the locusts into the Red Sea by a strong west wind. The
expression "Jehovah turned a very strong west wind" is a con-
cise form, for "Jehovah turned the wind into a very strong
west wind." The fact that locusts do perish in the sea is at-
tested by many authorities. Gregatim sublatm vento in maria
aut stagna decidunt (Pliny) ; many others are given by Bochart
and Volney. 'fTJfljrw : He thrust them, i.e. drove them with irre-
sistible force, into the Red Sea. The Red Sea is called *PD D»,
according to the ordinary supposition, on account of the quantity
of sea-weed which floats upon the water and lies upon the shore;
but Knobel traces the name to a town which formerly stood at
the head of the gulf, and derived its name from the weed, and
supports his opinion by the omission of the article before Suph,
though without being able to prove that any such town really
existed in the earlier times of the Pharaohs.
Vers. 21-29. Ninth plague: the darkness. — As Pha-
raoh's defiant spirit was not broken yet, a continuous darkness
came over all the land of Egypt, with the exception of Goshen,
without any previous announcement, and came in such force
that the darkness could be felt, ^n KW : u and one shall feel,
grasp darkness." Con : as in Ps. cxv. 7, Judg. xvi. 26, ifrj\a<f>7)-
rbv oveoTOf (LXX.) ; not " feel in the dark," for tTO has this
meaning only in the Piel with 3 (Deut. xxviii. 29). WBK *|Bfa :
darkness of obscurity, i.e. the deepest darkness. The combina-
tion of two words or synonyms gives the greatest intensity to the
thought. The darkness was so great that they could not see
one another, and no one rose up from his place. The Israelites
alone " had light in their dwelling-places." The reference here
is not to the houses ; so that we must not infer that the Egyp-
tians were unable to kindle any lights even in their houses. The
cause of this darkness is not given in the text ; but the analogy
of the other plagues, which had all of them a natural basis,
Digitized by VjOOQlC
498 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
warrants us in assuming, as most commentators have done, that
there was the same here — that it was in fact the Chamsin, to
which the LXX. evidently allude in their rendering : avroTo?
km ryvotfxK teal dveWa. This wind ? w hich gene rally blows in
E^ ypt before and a fter the vernal equinox and lasts two or
three days, usually rises very suddenly, "and" rills the air ^ith
such a quantity oTTmeTTust and coarse sand, that the sun loses
' its brightness^ the sk~y is covered with a dense veil, and it be-
comes so dark that " the obscurity caused by the_thickest_fog in
our autumn and winter days is nothing in comparison" (Schiir-
bert). Both men and animals hide themselves from this storm ;
and the inhabitants of the towns and villages shut themselves up
in the innermost rooms and cellars of their houses till it is over,
for the dust penetrates even through well-closed windows. For
fuller accounts taken from travels, see Hengstenberg (pp. 120
sqq.) and Robinson's Palestine i. pp. 287-289. Seetzen attri-
butes the rising of the dust to a quantity of electrical fluid con-
tained in the air. — The fact that in this case the darkness alone
is mentioned, may have arisen from its symbolical importance.
"The darkness which covered the Egyptians, and the light
which shone upon the Israelites, were types of the wrath and
grace of God" (Hengstenberg). This occurrence, in which,
according to Arabian chroniclers of the middle ages, the nations
discerned a foreboding of the day of judgment or of the resur-
rection, filled the king with such alarm that he sent for Moses,
and told him he would let the people and their children go, but
the cattle must be left behind. MP : sistatur, let it be placed,
deposited in certain places under the guard of Egyptians, as a
pledge of your return. Maneat in pignus, quod reversuri sitis, as
Chaskuni correctly paraphrases it. But Moses insisted upon the
cattle being taken for the sake of their sacrifices and burnt-
offerings. " Not a hoof shall be left behind." This was a pro-
verbial expression for "not the smallest fraction." Bochart
gives instances of a similar introduction of the "hoof" into
proverbial sayings by both Arabians and Romans (Hieroz. i. p.
490). This firmness on the part of Moses he defended by say-
ing, " We know not with what we shall serve the Lord, till we
come thither;" i.e. we know not yet what kind of animals or how
many we shall require for the sacrifices ; our God will not make
this known to ns till we arrive at the place of sacrifice. 13^ •
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XI. 1-& 499
with a double accusative as in Gen. xxx. 29 ; to serve any one
with a thing. — Vers. 27 sqq. At this demand, Pharaoh, with the
hardness suspended over him by God, fell into such wrath, that
he sent Moses away, and threatened him with death, if he ever
appeared in his presence again. "See my face" as in Gen. xliii.
3. Moses answered, " Thou host spoken rightly." For as God
had already told him that the last blow would be followed by
the immediate release of the people, there was no further neces-
sity for him to appear before Pharaoh.
Chap. xi. Proclamation op the tenth plague; ob
the decisive blow. — Vers. 1—3. The announcement made by
Jehovah to Moses, which is recorded here, occurred before the
last interview between Moses and Pharaoh (x. 24—29) ; but it
is introduced by the historian in this place, as serving to explain
the confidence with which Moses answered Pharaoh (x. 29).
This is evident from vers. 4-8, where Moses is said to have fore-
told to the king, before leaving his presence, the last plague and
all its consequences. "iDita therefore, in ver. 1, is to be taken in
a pluperfect sense: "had said;" and may be grammatically
accounted for from the old Semitic style of historical writing
referred to at p. 87, as vers. 1 and 2 contain the foundation for
the announcement in vers. 4-8. So far as the facts are con-
cerned, vers. 1-3 point back to chap. iii. 19-22. One stroke
more (JU3) would Jehovah bring upon Pharaoh and Egypt, and
then the king would let the Israelites go, or rather drive them
out. «"v3 W3, " when he lets you go altogether (<"It3 adverbial
as in Gen. xviii. 21), lie will even drive you away." — Vers. 2, 3
In this way Jehovah would overcome the resistance of Pharaoh;
and even more than that, for Moses was to tell the people to ask
the Egyptians for articles of silver and gold, for Jehovah would
make them willing to give. The renown acquired by Moses
through his miracles in Egypt would also contribute to this.
(For the discussion of this subject, see chap. iii. 21, 22.) The
communication of these instructions to the people is not expressly
mentioned ; but it is referred to in chap. xii. 35, 36, as having
taken place.
Vers. 4-8. Moses' address to Pharaoh forms the continuation
of his brief answer in chap. x. 29. At midnight Jehovah would
go out through the midst of Egypt. This midnight could not
Digitized by VjOOQlC
500 THE SECOND BOOK OF HOSES.
be " the one following the day on which Moses was summoned
to Pharaoh after the darkness," as Baumgarten supposes ; for it
was not till after this conversation with the king that Moses re-
ceived the divine directions as to the Passover, and they must
have been communicated to the people at least four days be-
fore the feast of the 1'assover and tneir departure from Egypt
(chap. xii. 3). What midnight is meant, cannot be determined.
So much is certain, however, that the last decisive blow did not
take place in the night following the cessation of the ninth
plague; but the institution of the Passover, the directions of
Moses to the people respecting the things which they were to
ask for from the Egyptians, and the preparations for the feast of
the Passover and the exodus, all came between. The u going
out" of Jehovah from His heavenly seat denotes His direct
interposition in, and judicial action upon, the world of men.
The last blow upon Pharaoh was to be carried out by Jehovah
Himself, whereas the other plagues had been brought by Moses
and Aaron. DT1V? tf n ? " *» (through) tlie midst of Egypt :" the
judgment of God would pass from the centre of the kingdom,
the king's throne, over the whole land. " Every first-born shall
die, from Hie first-born of Pharaoh, that sitteth upon his throne,
even unto the first-born of the maid tliat is behind the mill," i.e. the
meanest slave (cf. chap. xii. 29, where the captive in the dungeon
is substituted for the maid, prisoners being often employed in
this hard labour, Judg. xvi. 21; Isa. xlvii. 2), "and all the
firstborn of cattle." This stroke was to fall upon both man and
beast as a punishment for Pharaoh's conduct in detaining the
Israelites and their cattle ; but only upon the first-born, for God
did not wish to destroy the Egyptians and their cattle altogether,
but simply to show them that He had the power to do this. The
first-born represented the whole race, of which it was the strength
and bloom (Gen. xlix. 3). But against the whole of the people
of Israel "not a dog shall point its tongue" (ver. 7). The dog
points its tongue to growl and bite. The thought expressed in
this proverb, which occurs again in Josh. x. 21 and Judith xi.
19, was that Israel would not suffer the slightest injury, either
in the case of " man or beast." By this complete preservation,
whilst Egypt was given up to death, Israel would discover that
Jehovah had completed the separation between them and the
Egyptians. The effect of this stroke upon the Egyptians would
Digitized by VjOOQlC
CHAP. XL 9, 10. 501
be " a great cry" having no parallel before or after (cf . x. 14) ;
and the consequence of this cry would be, that the servants of
Pharaoh would come to Moses and entreat them to go out with
all the people. " At thy feet" i.e. in thy train (yid. Dent. xi. 6 ;
Judg. viii. 5). With this announcement Moses departed from
Pharaoh in great wrath. Moses* wrath was occasioned by the
king's threat (chap. x. 28), and pointed to the wrath of Jeho-
vah, which Pharaoh would soon experience. As the more than
human patience which Moses had displayed towards Pharaoh
manifested to him the long-suffering and patience of his God,
in whose name and by whose authority he acted, so the wrath of
the departing servant of God was to show to the hardened king,
that the time of grace was at an end, and the wrath of God was
about to burst upon him.
In vers. 9 and 10 the account of Moses' negotiations with
Pharaoh, which commenced at chap. vii. 8, is brought to a close.
What God predicted to His messengers immediately before
sending them to Pharaoh (chap. vii. 3), and to Moses before
his call (iv. 21), had now come to pass. And this was the
pledge that the still further announcement of Jehovah in chap,
vii. 4 and iv. 23, which had already been made known to the
hardened king (vers. 4 sqq.), would be carried out. As these
verses have a terminal character, the vav consecutive in ">Bt£i de-
notes the order of thought and not of time, and the two verses
are to be rendered thus : " As Jehovah had said to Moses, Pha-
raoh will not hearken unto yon, that My wonders may be mul-
tiplied in the land of Egypt, Moses and Aaron did all these
wonders before Pharaoh; and Jehovah hardened Pharaoh's
heart, so that he did not let the children of Israel go out of his
land."
Bjpy^X&viffi,
\V
T.
V UNION
i
THEOLOGICAL
Digitized by VjOOQlC
Digitized by
Google
T. and T. Clark's Publications.
HISTORY OF THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.
By PHILIP SCHAFF, D.D., LL.D.
APOSTOLIC CHRISTIANITY, AD. 1-100. In Two Divisions. Ex. demy 8vo, price 21s.
ANTB-NICENE CHRISTIANITY, A.D. 100-326. In Two Divisions. Ex. demy 8vo,
price 21s.
NICENE and POST-NICENE CHRISTIANITY, A.D. S2ft-«00. In Two Divisions. Ex.
demy 8vo, price 21s.
MEDLBVAL CHRISTIANITY, A.D. 090-1073. In Two Divisions. Ex. demy 8vo,
price 21s.
'No student, and indeed no critic, can with fairness overlook a work like the present,
written with such evident candour, and, at the same time, with so thorough a knowledge
of the sources of early Christian history.' — Scottman.
' I trust that this very instructive volume will find its way to the library table of every
minister who cares to Investigate thoroughly the foundations of Christianity. I cannot
refrain from congratulating you on having carried through the press this noble contri-
bution to historical literature. I think that there is no other work whioh equals it in
many important excellences.'— Eev. Prof. Fishxb, D.D.
'In no other work of its kind with which I am acquainted will students and general
readers find so much to instruct and interest them.' — Eev. Prof. Hitchcock, D.D.
In demy 4to, Third Edition, price 25s.,
BIBLICO-THEOLOGICAL LEXICON OF NEW
TESTAMENT GREEK.
By HERMANN CREMER, DJX,
FBOFESSOK OF THXOLOGT IN THE UNIVKBSrrT OF QRKIFSWALD.
TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN OF THE 8ECOND EDITION
(WITH ADDITIONAL MATTER AND CORRECTIONS BY THE AUTROR)
Bt WILLIAM URWICK, M.A.
' Dr. Cromer's work is highly and deservedly esteemed in Germany. It gives with
oare and thoroughness a complete history, as far as it goes, of each word and phrase
that it deals with. . . . Dr. Cromer's explanations are most lucidly set out' — Guardian.
' It is hardly possible to exaggerate the value of this work to the student of the Greek
Testament. . . . The translation is accurate and idiomatic, and the additions to the
later edition are considerable and important' — Church Bell*.
' We cannot find an important word in our Greek New Testament which is not
discussed with a fulness and discrimination which leaves nothing to be desired.' —
Notuxmformut.
' This noble edition in quarto of Cromer's Biblioo-Theologioal Lexicon quite super-
sedes the translation of the first edition of the work. Many of the most important
articles have been re- written and re-arranged.' — Britith Quarterly Review.
In demy 8vo, price 9s.,
GREEK AND ENGLISH LEXICON OF THE
NEW TESTAMENT.
By Prof. EDWARD ROBINSON, DJD.
Revised by Profs. NEGRI8 and DUNCAN.
'We regard this Lexicon as a valuable addition to philological science, and, on the
whole, the but Lexicon upon the New Testament which a student could purchase.' —
Baptist Magazine.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
T. and T. Clark's Publications.
Just published, in Three Volumes, 8vo, price 81s. 6d.,
THE LIFE OF CHRIST.
BY DR. BERNHARD WEISS,
PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY, BBKLUI.
'The authority of John's Gospel is vindicated -with great fulness and success.
Altogether the book seems destined to hold a very distinguished, if not absolutely
unique, place in the criticism of the New Testament Its fearless search after truth,
its independence of spirit, its extent of research, its thoughtful and discriminating tone,
must secure for it a very high reputation.'— CongregationalitU
' If the work in its completeness fulfil the promise of this instalment, it will be an
exposition of the divine character and mission of our Lord more thorough and pene-
trating and conclusive than any that we yet possess.' — British Quarterly Review.
'Able and learned volumes. ... A careful perusal of these books will amply repay
the reader. They are replete with original matter, and are evidently the result of
painstaking conscientiousness on the part of the author.' — Rock.
'A valuable treatise. ... A thoroughly exhaustive work; a work in which learning
of the most severe type, combined with a perfect knowledge of the languages drawn
upon for the elucidation of his purpose, is apparent in every page.' — Bell's Weekly
Messenger.
' From the thoroughness of the discussion and clearness of the writer, we anticipate a
very valuable addition to the Great Biography.'— Freeman.
By the same Author.
In Two Volumes, 8vo, price 21s.,
BIBLICAL THEOLOGY OF THE NEW
TESTAMENT.
'We can bear grateful testimony to the vigour, freshness, and richly suggestive
power.' — Baptist Magazine,
' Further references to this work, so far from diminishing the high estimate we have
previously expressed, have induced us to value it still more. The issue of the second
and concluding volume gives aid to this enhanced appreciation.' — Theological Quarterly.
' Written throughout with freshness, vigour, and perfect command of the material. . . .
This is a fleH which Weiss has made his own. His work far excels the numerous works
of his predecessors in thoroughness and completeness.' — Methodist Recorder.
'The work which this volume completes is one of no ordinary strength nnd acumen.
It is an exposition of the books of the New Testament arranged scientifically, thut is,
according to the authorship and development It is the ripe fruit of many years of New
Testament exegesis and theological study. . . . The book is in every way a notable
one.' — British Quarterly Review.
'A work so thorough as this, and which so fully recognises the historical character of
the science of Biblical Theology, was well worth translating.' — Academy.
' Able contributions to theological literature.' — Scotsman.
Just published, in post 8vo, price 7s. 6d.,
BIBLICAL STUDY:
ITS PRINCIPLES, METHODS, AND HISTORY.
By Professor C. A. BRIGGS, D.D.,
With Introduction by Professor A. B. Bruce, D.D., Glasgow.
' A book fitted at once to meet the requirements of professional students of Scripture,
and to serve ss an available guide for educated laymen who, while using the Bible
chiefly for edification, desire to have the advantago of the light which scholarship can
throw on the sacred page, ought to meet with wide acceptance and to be in many ways
useful. Such a book is the one now published. Dr. Briggs is exceptionally well
qualified to prepare a work of this kind.' — Prof. Bruce.
' We are sure that no student will regret sending for this book.' — Academy.
' Dr. Briggs' book is a model of masterly condensation and conciseness. He knows
how to be brief without becoming obscure.' — Freeman.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
' Thli series la one of great importance to the biblical scholar, and as regards
Its general execution, It leaves little or nothing to be desired.'— Edinburgh Review.
KEIL AND DELITZSCH'S
COMMENTARIES ON AND INTRODUCTION
TO THE OLD TESTAMENT.
INTRODUCTION, 2 Vols. .
PENTATEUCH, 3 Vous.
JOSHUA, JUDGEd, akd RUTH,
1 Vol.
SAMUEL, 1 Vol. .
KINGS, 1 Vol., and CHRONI-
CLES, 1 Vol.
EZRA, NEHEMIAH, aud
ESTHER, 1 Vol. . . (KeU).
JOB, 2 Vols. . . . (Delitach).
m.
(Keifi.
(.KeU).
PSALMS, 8 Vols. . . (DelitucK).
PROVERBS, 2 Vols. . (Delituch).
ECCLES1ASTES ahd SONG
OP SOLOMON,
ISAIAH, 2 Vols. .
JEREMIAH and LAMENTA-
TIONS, 2 Vols. .
EZEKIEL, 2 Vols. .
DANIEL, 1 Vol. . . .
MINOR PROPHETS, 2 Vols.
(Delitztch).
(DeKtztch).
THE above series (published in Clark's Foreign Theological Library) is now
completed in 27 Volumes, and Messrs. Clark will supply it at the Sub*
scription price, in complete sets (only), of £7, 2s.
Separate volumes may be had at the non-subscription price of 10s. 6d. each.
So complete a Critical and Exegetical Apparatus on the Old Testament is
not elsewhere to be found in the English language, and at the present time,
when the Btudy of the Old Testament is more widely extended than perhaps
ever before, it is believed this offer will be duly appreciated.
'Very high merit, for thorough Hebrew scholarship, and for keen critical sagacity,
belongs to these Old Testament Commentaries. No scholar will willingly dispense
with them.' — Britith Quarterly Review.
In One Volume, 8vo. price 12a,
A SYSTEM OF BIBLICAL PSYCHOLOGY.
Br P. DELITZSCH, D.D.
By the same Author.
In Two Volumes, 8vo, price 21s.,
COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE
TO THE HEBREWS.
By the same Author.
In crown 8vo, price 4s. 6d.,
OLD TESTAMENT HISTORY
REDEMPTION.
Translated from Manuscript Notes bt Professor S. I. CURTISS.
OF
1 Few who will take the trouble to look into it will not readily acknowledge that it is
men, if any, besdes the Leipiig professor could
ompared with it as a handbook for students.' —
not only a masterly work, such as few men, if any, besdes the Leipii;
give, but that there is nothing to be
Library World.
In crown 8vo, price 5s.,
THE LEVITICAL PRIESTS.
A Contribution to the Criticism of the Pentateuch.
By Professor S. J. CURTISS.
'We can strongly recommend Dr. Cnrtiss' book as a real contribution to the criticism
of the Pentateuch.' — Literary Churchman.
Digitized by
Google
T. and T. Clark's Publications.
In demy 8vo, price 8*. 6<L,
SYNTAX OF THE HEBREW LANGUAGE
OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.
Br HEINRICH EWALD.
TRANSLATED FROM THE EIGHTH GERMAN EDITION
By JAMES KENNEDY, B.D.
' The work stands unique as regards a patient investigation of facta, written with a
profound analysis of the laws of thought, of which language is the reflection. Another
striking feature of the work is the regularly progressive order which pervades the
whole. The Author proceeds by a natural gradation from the simplest elements to the
most complex forms.' — British Quarterly Review.
'It is well known that Ewald was the first to exhibit the Hebrew Syntax in a
philosophical form, and his Grammar is the most important of his numerous works.'—
AtAenmum.
Recently published, in demy 8»o, Seventh Edition, price Is. 6d.,
AN INTRODUCTORY HEBREW GRAMMAR;
WITH PROGRESSIVE EXERCISES IN READING AND WRITING.
Br A. B. DAVIDSON, M.A., LL.D.,
Professor of Hebrew, etc., in the New College, Edinburgh.
In One large Svo Volume, Ninth English Edition, price lbs.,
A TREATISE ON THE
GRAMMAR OF NEW TESTAMENT GREEK,
REGARDED AS THE BASIS OF NEW TESTAMENT EXEGESIS.
Translated from toe German of Dr. G. B. WINER.
With large additions and full Indices. Third Edition. Edited by Rev. W.
F. Moulton, D.D., one of the New Testament Translatiou Revisers.
In One Volume 8vo, price 9s.,
THE TRUTH OF SCRIPTURE,
IN CONNECTION WITH REVELATION, INSPIRATION, AND THE
CANON.
Br JOHN JAMES GIVEN, Ph.D.
In One Volume 8vo, price 10s. 6rf.,
THE DOCTRINE OF THE APOCALYPSE,
AND ITS RELATION TO THE DOCTRINE OF THE GOSPEL AND
EPISTLES OF ST. JOHN.
Br Pastor HERMANN GEBHARDT.
In Two Volumes 8vo, price 21*.,
THE CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE OF SIN.
Br Dr. JULIUS MULLER.
TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN OF THE FIFTH EDITION
By Rev. WM. URWICK, M.A..
Digitized by VjOOQlC
T. and T. Clark 's Publications.
NEW SERIES
OF THE
FOREIGN THEOLOGICAL. Library.
The First Issue for 1885 includes —
RABIOER'S ENCYCLOPEDIA OF THEOLOGY. VoL II. (completion).
OBELUS OLD TESTAMENT PROPHECY BEOABDINO THE CONSUMMATION
OF THE KINGDOM OF GOD.
1880.— OODETS COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE OF ST. PAUL TO THE
ROMANS. VoL I.
HAOENBACH'S HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. Vols. I. and U.
DORNER'S SYSTEM OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE. VoL L
1&M.-OODBT8 COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE OF ST. PAUL TO THE
ROMANS. VoL II.
DORNER'S SYSTEM OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE. Vol. LT.
MARTENSEN'S CHRISTIAN ETHICS. (Individual Ethics.)
HAOENBACH'S HISTORY OF DOCTRINES. VoL IIL (completion).
1881.— DORNER'S SYSTEM OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE. Vols. IIL and IV.
(completion).
WETBS'B BIBLICAL THEOLOGY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. Vol. I.
MARTENSEN'S CHRISTIAN ETHICS. (Social Ethics.)
1883.— WEISS ON THE LIFE OF CHRIST. Vols. L and II.
WEISS ON BIBLICAL THEOLOGY OF NEW TESTAMENT VoL U. (com-
pletion).
GOEBEL ON THE PARABLES. One VoL
1884.—WKUB ON THE LIFE OF CHRIST. VoL m. (completion).
SARTORIUS ON THE DOCTRINE OF DIVINE LOVE One Vol.
RABIOER'S ENCYCLOPEDIA OF THEOLOGY. VoL I.
EWALD'S REVELATION : ITS NATURE AND RECORD.
The Foreign Theological Library was commenced in 1846, and
from that time to this Four Volumes yearly (or about 164 in all) have
appeared with the utmost regularity.
The Publishers decided to begin a New Series with 1880, and
so give an opportunity to many to subscribe who are possibly deterred
by the extent of the former Series.
The Publishers are sanguine enough to believe that a Series containing
the works of writers so eminent, upon the most important subjects,
cannot fail to secure support
The Binding of the Series is modernized, so as to distinguish it from
the former Series.
The Subscription Price will remain as formerly, 21s. annually for
Four Volumes, payable in advance.
A Selection of Twenty Volumes
FOR FIVE GUINEAS
(OR MORE AT SAME RATIO)
May be had from the Volumes Issued previously to New Series, vi*. •<—
Works mentioned on three succeeding pages.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
FOREIGN THEOLOGICAL LIBRARY.
ANNUAL SUBSCRIPTION : One Guinea for Four Volumes, Demy 8m
iV.B. — Any two Years in this Series can be bad at Subscription Price. A tingle Tear't
Bookt (except in tbe case of tbe current Tear) cannot Be implied separately. Non-
subscribers, price 10s. 6d. each volume, with exceptions marked.
18 6 4— Lange on tbe Acts of the Apostles. Two Volumes.
Keil and Delitzsch on the Pentateuch. Vols. I. and II.
18 6 5 — Sell and Delitzsch on the Pentateuch. Vol III.
Hengstenberg on the Gospel of John. Two Volumes.
Keil and Delitzsch on Joshua, Judges, and Ruth. One Volume.
18 6 6 — KeU ""I Delitzsch on Samuel. One Volume.
Keil and Delitzsch on Job. Two Volumes.
Martensen's System of Christian Doctrine. One Volume.
18 6 7 — Delitzsch on Isaiah. Two Volumes.
Delitzsch on Biblical Psychology. (12s.) One Volume.
Auberlen on Divine Revelation. One Volume.
18 6 8 — foil's Commentary on the Minor Prophets. Two Volumes.
Delitzsch' s Commentary on Epistle to the Hebrews. Vol. I.
Harless' System of Christian Ethics. One Volume.
18 6 9 — Hengstenberg on EzekieL One Volume.
Stier on the Words of the Apostles. One Volume.
Keil's Introduction to the Old Testament. Vol. I.
Bleek'u Introduction to the New Testament Vol. I.
18 7 0— Keil's Introduction to the Old Testament. Vol. II.
Bleek's Introduction to the New Testament. Vol. II.
Schmid's New Testament Theology. One Volume.
Delitzsch's Commentary on Epistle to the Hebrews. Vol. II.
18 7 1 — Delitzsch's Commentary on the Psalms. Three Volumes.
Hengstenberg' s Kingdom of God under the Old Testament. VoL I.
18 7 2 — Keil's Commentary on the Books of Kings. One Volume.
Keil's Commentary on the Book of Daniel. One Volume.
Keil's Commentary on the Books of Chronicles. One Volume.
Hengstenberg' s History of the Kingdom of God. VoL II.
18 7 S — Keil's Commentary on Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther. One Volume.
Winer's Collection of the Confessions of Christendom. One Volume.
Keil's Commentary on Jeremiah. Vol. I.
Martensen on Christian Ethics.
18 7 4— Ohristlieb's Modern Doubt and Christian Belief. One VoL
Keil's Commentary on Jeremiah. Vol. II.
Delitzsch's Commentary on Proverbs. Vol. I.
Oehler's Biblical Theology of the Old Testament VoL I.
18 7 5 — Godet's Commentary on St. Luke's Gospel. Two Volumes.
Oehler's Biblical Theology of the Old Testament Vol. II.
Delitzsch's Commentary on Proverbs. Vol. II.
18 7 6 — Keil's Commentary on EzekieL Two Volumes.
Luthardt's Commentary on St. John's Gospel. Vol. I.
Godet's Commentary on St John's Gospel. Vol. I.
18 7 7 — Delitzsch's Commentary on Song of Solomon and Eoclesiastes.
Godet's Commentary on St. John's Gospel. Vols. II. and III.
Luthardt's Commentary on St. John's Gospel. VoL II.
18 7 8 — Gebhardt's Doctrine of the Apocalypse.
Luthardt's Commentary on St John's Gospel. Vol. III.
Philippi's Commentary on the Romans. Vol. I.
Hagenbach's History of the Reformation. Vol. I.
18 7 9— Philippi's Commentary on the Romans. Vol. II.
Hagenbach's History of the Reformation. Vol. II.
Steinmeyer's History of the Passion and Resurrection of our Lord,
Haupt's Commentary on the First Epistle of St John. One Volume.
•»• For New Serial commencing with 1880, tee previous page.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
T. and T. Claris Publications.
MESSES. CLARK allow a 8ELEOTION of Twknty Volumbs (or more at the tame
ratio) trow the Volumes Issued previously to New (series (tee below).
At the Subscription Price of Five Guineas.
NON-SUBSCRIPTION PRICES WITHIN BRACKETS.
Dr. Hengstenberg. — Commentary on the Psalms. By E. W. Hengstenberg, D.D.,
Professor of Theology in Berlin. In Three Vole. 8vo. (88s.)
Or. Gieseler. — Compendium of Ecclesiastical History. By J. C. L. Gieseler,
D.D., Professor of Theology in Gottingen. Four Vols. 8vo. (£2, 2s.)
Dr. Olshausen. — Biblical Commentary on the Gospels and Acts. Adapted especially
for Preachers and Students. By Hermann Olshausen, D.D., Professor of
Theology in the University of Erlangen. In Four Vols. 8vo. (£2, 2s.) — Com-
mentary on the Romans. In One Vol. 8vo. (10s. 6<L)— Commentary on St.
Paul's First and Second Epistles to the Corinthians. In One Vol. 8vo. (9s.)
— Commentary on St. Paul's Epistles to the Philippians, to Titus, and the
First to Timothy. In continuation of the Work of Olshausen. By Lio.
August Wiesinoer. In One Vol. 8vo. (10s. 6d.)
Or. Neander.— General History of the Christian Religion and Church. By
Augustus Nkasdkb, D.D. Nine Vols. 8vo. (£3, 7s. 6d.)
Prof. H. A. Ch. Havernick. — Genera] Introduction to the Old Testament By
Professor Havkknick. One Vol. 8vo. (10s. 6d.)
Or. Muller. — The Christian Doctrine of Sin. By Dr. Julius Muller. Two
Vols. Rvo. (21s.) New Edition.
Dr. Hengstenberg. — Christology of the Old Testament, and a Commentary on the
Messianic Predictions. By E. W. Hengstenberg, D. D. Four Vols. (£2, 2s.)
Dr. M. Banmgarten. — The Acts of the Apostles ; or, The History of the Church
in the Apostolic Age. By M. Baumgarten, Ph.D. Three Vols. (£1, 7s.)
Dr. Stier. — The Words of the Lord Jesus. By Rudolph Stier, D.D., Chief
Pastor and Superiutendeut of Solikeuditz. In Eight Vols. 8vo. (£4, 4s.)
Dr. Carl Ullmann. — Reformers before the Reformation, principally in Germany
and the Netherlands. Two Vols. 8vo. (£1, Is.)
Professor Kurtz. — History of the Old Covenant ; or, Old Testament Dispensation.
By Pn.feesor Kurtz of Dorpat In Three Vols. (£1, Us. 6d.)
Dr. Stier. — The Words of the Risen Saviour, and Commentary on the Epistle of
8t James. By Rudolph Stier, D.D. One Vol. (10s. 6d.)
Professor Tholuok. — Commentary on the Gospel of St. John. One Vol. (9s.)
Professor Tholuck. — Commentary on the Sermon on the Monnt. One Vol (10s. 6d.)
Dr. Hengstenberg. — On the Book of Eocleeiastes. To which are appended : Treatises
on the Sougoi Solomon ; the Book of Job ; the Prophet Isaiah ; the Sacrifices of Holy
Scripture ; and on the J«wo and the Christian Church. In One Vol. 8vo. (9s.)
Dr. Kbrard. — Commentary on the Epistles of St. John. By Dr. John H. A.
Ebraro, Professor of Theology. In One Vol (10s. 6d.)
Dr. Lange. — Theological and Homiletical Commentary on the Gospels of St
Matthew and Mark. By J. P. Lange, D.D. Three Vols. (10s. 6d. each.)
Dr. Dorner. — History of the Development of the Doctrine of the Person of Christ.
By Dr. J. A. Dornkr, Professor of Theology in the University of Berlin.
Five Vols. (£2. 12o. fid.)
Lange and Dr. J. J. Van Oosterzee. — Theological and Homiletical Commentary on
the Gospel of St Lake. Two Vols. (18s.)
Dr. Ebrard. — The Gospel History: A Compendium of Critical Investigations in
support of the Historical Character of the Four Gospels. One Vol. (10s. 6d.)
Dr. Hengstenberg. — Commentary on the Gospel of St John. Two Vols. (21s.)
Professor KeiL — Biblical Commentary on the Pentateuch. Three Vols. (81s. 6d.)
Dr. F. L. Steinmeyer.— The Miracles of our Lord in relation to Modern Criticism.
One VoL (7s. 6d.)
Dr. Dflllinger. — Hippolytus and Oa'Jistns; or, The Church of Rome in the First
Half of the Third Century. One Vol. (9s. )
Digitized by VjOOQlC
T. and T. Clark's Publications.
OLABK'8 FOREIGN THEOLOGICAL LIBRARY— Continued.
Professor KeiL — Commentary on Joshua, Judges, and Ruth. One Vol. (10s. 6d. )
Professor Delitzsch.— A System of Biblical Psychology. One Vol. (12s.)
Dr. 0. A. Anberlen.— The Divine Revelation. 8vo. (10s. 6d.)
Professor Delitzsch. — Commentary on the Prophecies of Isaiah. Two Vols. (21s. )
Professor KeiL — Commentary on the Books of Samuel. One Vol. (10s. 6d.)
Professor Delitzsch. — Commentary on the Book of Job. Two Vols. (21s.)
Bishop Martensen. — Christian Dogmatics. A Compendium of the Dootrinea of
Christianity. One Vol. (10s. 6d.)
Dr. J. P. Lange. — Commentary on the Gospel of St John. Two Vols. (21s.)
Professor KeiL — Commentary on the Minor Prophets. Two Vols. (21s.)
Professor Delitzsch. — Commentary on Epistle to the Hebrews. Two Vols. (21s.)
Dr. Harless.— A System of Christian Ethics. One Vol. (10s. 6d.)
Dr. Hengstenberg. — Commentary on EzekieL One Vol. (10s. (td.)
Dr. 8tier.— The Words of the Apostles Expounded. One Vol. (10s. 6d.)
Professor KeiL— Introduction to the Old Testament. Two Vols. (21s. )
Professor Bleek. — Introduction to the New Testament. Two Vols. (21s.)
Professor Schmid.— New Testament Theology. One Vol. (10s. 6d.)
Professor Delitzsch. — Commentary on the Psalms. Three Vols. (Sis. 6d.)
Dr. Hengstenberg. — The Kingdom of God under the Old Covenant. Two Vols. (21s. )
Professor Keil.— Commentary on the Books of Kings. One Volume. (10s. 6<L)
Professor KeiL — Commentary on the Book of Daniel. One Volume. (10s. 6d.)
Professor Keil. — Commentary on the Books of Chronicles. One Volume. (10s. 6d.)
Professor Keil. — Commentary on Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther. One VoL (10s. 6d.)
Professor Keil. — Commentary on Jeremiah. Two Vols. (21s.)
Winer (Dr. G.B.)— Collection of the Confessions of Christendom. One Vol. (10s.6d.)
Bishop Martensen. — Christian Ethics. One Volume. (10s. 6d.)
Professor Delitzsch Commentary on the Proverbs of Solomon. Two Vols. (21s.)
Professor Oehler.— Biblical Theology of the Old Testament. Two Vols. (21s.)
Professor Christlieb. — Modern Doubt and Christian Belief. One VoL (10s. 6<L)
Professor Godet. — Commentary on St. Luke's Gospel. Two Vols. (21s.)
Professor Luthardt. — Commentary on St. John's Gospel. Three Vols. (Sis. 6d.)
Professor Godet.— Commentary on St. John's Gospel. Three Vols. (31s. 6d.)
Professor Keil. — Commentary on EzekieL Two Vols. (21s.)
Professor Delitzsch. — Commentary on Song of Solomon and Eccleaiaateg. One
Vol. (10s. 6d.)
Gebhardt (H.) — Doctrine of the Apocalypse. One Vol. (10s. 6d.)
Steinmeyer (Dr. F. L. ) — History of the Passion and Resurrection of our Lord.
One Vol. (10s. 6d.)
Haupt (E.)— Commentary on the First Epistle of St. John. One VoL (10s. 6d.)
Hagenbach (Dr. K. R.)— HiBtory of the Reformation. Two Vols. (21s.)
Philippi (Dr. F. A.)— Commentary on Romans. Two Vols. (21s.)
And, in connection with the Series —
Murphy's Commentary on the Book of Psalms. To count at Two Volumes. (12s.)
Alexander's Commentary on Isaiah. Two Volumes. (17s.)
Hitter's (Carl; Comparative Geography of Palestine. Four Volumes. (82s.)
Shedd's History of Christian Doctrine. Two Volumes. (21s.)
Macdonald's Introduction to the Pentateuch. Two Volumes. (21s.)
Gerlach's Commentary on the Pentateuch. 8vo. (10s. 6d.)
Dr. Hengstenberg. — Dissertations on the Genuineness of Daniel, etc. One Vol. (12s.)
The series, in 162 Volumes (including 1884), price £42, 10s. 6d., forms an Apparatus
without which it may be truly said no Theological Library can be complete; and the
Publishers take the liberty of suggesting that no more appropriate gift oould be
presented to a Clergyman than the Series, in whole or in part.
".* No duplicates can be included in the Selection of Twenty Volumes ; and it will mm
trouble and correspondence if it be distinctly understood that ho less number
than Twenty can be supplied, unless at non-subscription price.
Subscribers' Names received by all Retail Booksellers.
London : (For Works at Non-subscription price only) Hamilton, Adams, & Co.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
T. and T. Clark 's Publications.
LANGE'S COMMENTARIES.
(Subscription price, nett), 15s. each.
THEOLOGICAL AND HOMILETICAL COMMENTARY
x ON THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS.
Specially designed and adapted for the use of Ministers and Students. By
Prof. John Peter Lange, D.D., in connection with a number of eminent
European Divines. Translated, enlarged, and revised under the general
editorship of Rev. Dr. Philip Schaff, assisted by leading Divines of the various
Evangelical Denominations.
OLD TESTAMENT-14 VOLUMES.
L GENESIS. With a General Introduction to the Old Testament. By Prof. J. P. Labor, D.l).
Translated from the Ge rman , with Additions, by Prof. Tayler Lkwis, LL.D., and A. Gorman, D.D.
— H. EXODUS and LEVITICUS. By J. P. Labor, D.D. With Orneral Introduction bv Rev. Dr.
Osooon— ILL NUMBERS. By Prof. J P. Lahob, D.D. DEUTERONOMY. By W. J. Schrokdbb.
—IT. JOSHUA. By Rev. F. R. Fat. JUDGES and RUTH. By Prof. Pacmb Cassill. D.D.— V.
SAMUEL. Bv Professor Erdbarm, D.D. -VI. KINGS. By Earl Chb. W. F Barb, D.D— TH.
CHRONICLES. By OttoZoceleb. EZRA. By Fa. W.Schplti NEHEMIAH. By Kev. Howard
Crosbi, D.D.. LL.D. ESTHER, By Fa. W. Scholtz.— TUX JOB. With an Introduction and
Annotations by Prof. Tatlkb Lawia, LL.D. A Commentary by Dr. Otto Zocklrr, together wltb
an Introductory Essay on Hehi-Fw Poetry bv Prof. Philip Schaff. D.D.— IX. THE PSALMS. By
C. B. Moll, D.D.— X PROVERBS, EC0LESIASTE8, and THE SONG OF SOLOMON. Bv Prof.
0. Zoceler, D.D.-XL ISAIAH. By C. W. E. Narohusbich.— XTI. JEREMIAH and LAMENTA-
TIONS. ByC. WE. Narorlsbach. D.D— XITI. EZEKIEL. By F. W. Schbodkr, D.D. DANIEL.
By Professor Zociler, D.D —XIV. THE MINOR PROPHET8. HOSEA. JOEL, and AMOS. By
Otto Schmollib. Ph.D. OBADIAH, MICAH, JONAH, NAHUM, HABAKKUK, and ZEPHANIAH.
By Rev. Pacl Klukrrt. HAGGAI. By Rev. James E. H'Cubdi. ZECHARIAH By T.W. Cham-
bers, D.D. MALAGHL By JoaarB Pacxabs, D.D.
THE APOCRYPHA. By £. 0. Bissrxl. D.D. One Volume.
NEW TESTAMENT— 10 VOLUMES.
L MATTHEW. With a General Introduction to the New Testament. By J. P. Labor, D.D.
Translated, with Additions, hv Philip Schaff. D.D— II. MARX By J. P. Lakqe, D.D. LUKE.
«y J. J. Vah Oixterzee— m. JOHN. By .1. P. Laugh. D.D.— IT. ACTS. By G. V. Lechlbr,
D.D., and W ev Charles Ueroe.— T. ROMANS. By J. P. Lamor, D.D., and Rev. V. R. Far.— TL
CORINTHIANS. By Christian F. Kliko.— VLL GALATIANS. By Otto Schmoller, Ph.D.
EPHE8IANS, OOLOSSIANS, and PHTLLPPIANS. By Kakl Hraobr, D.D —Tin. THBS8A-
LONIANS. By Drs Acberleh and Riqgebbacb. TTMOTHT, TITOS, and PHILEMON. By J.
J. Van Oosteezer, D.D. HEBREWS. Bv Karl B. Moll. D.D —IX JAMES. By J. P. Lamok,
D.D., and J. J. Vaa Oostbbzeb, D.D. PETER and JUDE. By G. F. C. FbobmOlleb, Ph.D.
JOHN. By Karl Bracbe, D.D.— X. THE REVELATION OF JOHN. By Dr. J. P. Lahok.
Together with doable Alphabetical Index to ail the Ten Volumes on the New Testament, by Jobs
H. Woon*.
PROFESSOR EADIE'S COMMENTARIES.
MESSRS. CLARE, with the concurrence of the Trustees of the late Professor
Kadib, beg to announce the issue, in Four Volumes 8vo, of the following Com-
mentaries : —
GALATIANS. EPHESIANS. PHTLIPPIANS. COLOSSIANS.
The Four Volumes will be supplied by Subscription at the price of
TWENTY-FOUR SHILLINGS,
or, in separate Volumes, at Ten Shillings and Sixpence each.
They haTe been carefully Edited by
The Rev. WILLIAM YOUNG, M.A., Glasgow.
The valun of these Commentaries is well known. They occupy a first and distinctive
place in N,ew Testament exegetical literature.
Throe of these Volumes have been out of print for a considerable time, and all of them
are much in demand.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
T. and T. Clark's Publications.
In Twenty Handsome Svo Volumes, Subscription Price £5, 5s.,
MEYER'S
Commentary on the New Testament.
' Mayer has been long and well known to scholars aa one of the very ablest of the German
expositors of the Hew Testament. We are not sure whether we ought not to say that he la
unrivalled as an Interpreter of the grammatical and historical meaning of the sacred
writers. The Publishers have now rendered another seasonable and Important service to
English students In produdng this translation.'— Guardian.
Each Volume will be told separately at 10s. 6d. to Non-Subscriben.
CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL
COMMENTARY ON THE NEW TESTAMENT.
By Dr. H. A. W. MEYER,
Obkrconsistorialrath, Hannover.
The portion contributed by Dr. Meter baa been placed under the editorial
care of Rev. Dr. Dickson, Professor of Divinity in the University of Glasgow ;
Rev. Dr. Crombie, Professor of Biblical Criticism, St. Mary's College, St.
Andrews; and Rev. Dr. Stewart, Professor of Biblical Criticism, University
of Glasgow.
1st Year — Romans, Two Volumes.
Qalatians, One Volume.
St John's Gospel, Vol. I.
2d Year— St. John's Gospel, Vol. II.
Philippiana and Golossians, One Volume.
Acts of the Apostles, Vol. I.
Corinthians, Vol. I.
3d Year— Acts of the Apostles, Vol. II.
St Matthew's Gospel, Two Volumes.
Corinthians, Vol. II.
4th Year — Mark and Luke, Two Volumes.
Ephesians and Philemon, One Volume.
Thessalonians. (Dr. LUnemann.)
Bth Year— Timothy and Titus. (Dr. Ituther.)
Peter and Jude. (Dr. HuOter.)
Hebrews. (Dr. Liinemann.)
James and John. (Dr. Hutlier.)
The series, as written by Meyer himself, is completed by the publication of Ephesiavt
with Philemon in one volume. But to this the Publishers have thought it right to add
Thessalonians and Hebrews, by Dr. LUnemann, and the Pastoral and Catholic Epistle;
by Dr. Buther. So few, however, of the Subscribers have expressed a desire to have Dr.
Dusterdieck't Commentary on Revelation included, that it has been resolved in the mean-
time not to undertake it.
' I need hardly add that the last edition of the accurate, perspicuous, and learned con -
meotary of Dr. Meyer has been most carefully consulted throughout ; and I must agaii ,
as in the preface to the Galatians, avow my great obligations to the acumen and scholar-
ship of the learned editor.' — Bishop Ellicott in Preface tokis' Commentary on Epkesiam. '
' The ablest grammatical exegete of the age.' — Philip Kchapf, D.D.
4 In accuracy of scholarship and freedom from prejudice, he is equalled by few.' —
Literary Churchman.
' We have only to repeat that it remains, of its own kind, the very beet Commentary
of the New Testament which we possess.' — Church Bells.
' No exegetical work Is on the whole more valuable, or stands in higher public esteem.
As a critic be is candid and cautious ; exact to minuteness in philology ; a master of tbe
grammatical and historical method of interpretation.' — Princeton Renew.
Digitized by VjOOQlC
Digitized by
Google
Date Loaned
C OCT 1 T
•"1951*6
N8&6
1/*M
ti$M°
) /V\A-»
ywpyA?.
1 \A ,
$S. N «&&
/ /i*W
X
NOV 1 4 1373
/
TO JAN 1 4
1974
i
JM3177
NOV 3
01889
<§)
Digitized by
Google
V
- i4- ; ! --
50343 055
/
IM
Keil, C.F. and Delitzsck, F.
Biblical Commentary on the DKL8
O.t. K27
(1)
D18638
The Library
Union Theological Seminary
Broadway at 120th Street
New York 27, N. Y.
Digitized by
Google
TWF9
WSsMSBEA
jSTJsNisra'j'
fill
131*2 sis
Be&59
$S
This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project
to make the world's books discoverable online.
It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.
Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the
publisher to a library and finally to you.
Usage guidelines
Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:
+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.
+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.
+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.
+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.
About Google Book Search
Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web
at |http : //books . qooqle . com/
M
t»»iij;;';F
*p-'t>:;-S>
.'•' : ^5-
^H
H
rJW"*
-
J|
i>;'t?:r
sjif;
^m
m ■
Si
S^£Mmffl
? fp v- ■
■
BBS
^H
■
■
l-u^X
M
Google
Digitized by
Google
V
Digitized by
Google
BIBLICAL COMMENTARY
ON
THE OLD TESTAMENT.
BY
C. 4. KEIL, D.D., and F. DELITZSCE D.D.,
PROPESSOES OP THEOLOGY.
VOLUME II.
THE PENTATEUCH.
TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN
BY THE
REV. JAMES MARTIN, B.A.,
NOTTINGHAM.
EDINBURGH:
T. AND T. CLARK, 38, GEORGE STREET.
LONDON : HAMILTON, ADAMS, & CO. DUBLIN : JOHN ROBERTSON & CO.
MDCCCLXIV.
Digitized by
Google
MURRAY AXI) GIBB, PRINTERS, EDINBURGH.
Digitized by
Google
3 K ft
J48S39
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES (EXODUS).
F:ige
Consecration of Israel as the Covenant Nation. Deliverance from
Egypt (Chap, xu.-xiii. 16), ..... 9
Journey from Succoth, and Passage through the Red Sea (Chap.
xiii. 17-xiv. 31), ...... 38
Moses' Song at the Red Sea (Chap. xv. 1-21), . . .49
Israel conducted from the Red Sea to the Mountain of God (Chap.
xv. 22.-xvii. 7), ' . . . . . .57
Conflict with Amalek (Chap. xvii. 8-16), . . . .77
Jethro the Midianite in the Camp of Israel (Chap, xviii.), . . 83
Arrival at Sinai, and Preparation for the Covenant (Chap, xix.), . 88
The Ten Words of Jehovah (Chap. xx. 1-21), . . .105
The Leading Features in the Covenant Constitution (Chap. xx. 22-
xxiv. 2), ....... 126
Conclusion of the Covenant (Chap. xxiv. 3-18), . . .156
Directions concerning the Sanctuary and Priesthood (Chap, xxv.-
xxxi.), ........ 161
The Covenant Broken and Renewed (Chap, xxxii.-xxxiv.), . 220
Erection of the Tabernacle, and Preparation of the Apparatus of
Worship (Chap, xxxv.-xxxix.), .... 245
Erection and Consecration of the Tabernacle, (Chap. A), . . 255
Digitized by
Google
O TABLE OF CONTENTS.
THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES (LEVITICUS).
» Introduction.
Pag.
Contents and Plan of Leviticus, ..... 261
317
333
357
372
394
Exposition.
I. Laws and Ordinances determining the Covenant Fellowship
between the Lord and Israel (Chap, i.-xvi.) : —
The Laws of Sacrifice (Chap, i.-vii.), .... 264
1. General Rules for the Sacrifices (Chap. i.-T.), . . 271
2. Special Instructions concerning the Sacrifices for the
Priests (Chap. vi. and vii.), .
Induction of Aaron and his Sons into the Priestly Office (Chap.
viii.-x.), ......
Laws relating to Clean and Unclean Animals (Chap, xi.)
(Cf. Deut. xiv. 3-20), ....
Laws of Purification (Chap, xii.-xv.), .
The Day of Atonement (Chap, xvi.),
II. Laws for the Sanctification of Israel in the Covenant Fellowship
of its God (Chap, xvii.-xxv.): —
Holiness of Conduct on the part of the Israelites (Chap, xvii.-
xx.), .407
Holiness of the Priests, of the Holy Gifts, and of Sacrifices
(Chap. xxi. and xxii.), ..... 428
Sanctification of the Sabbath and the Feasts of Jehovah
(Chap, xxiii.), ...... 437
Preparation of the Holy Lamps and Shew-Bread. Punishment
of a Blasphemer (Chap, xxiv.), .... 451
Sanctification of the Possession of Land by the Sabbatical and
Jubilee Years (Chap, xxv.), . . . 455
Promises and Threats (Chap, xxvi.), . . . . 467
Of Vows (Chap, xxvii.), . . . . . .479
Digitized by
Google
THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
(EXODUS.)
CONSECRATION OF ISRAEL AS THE COVENANT NATION.
DELIVERANCE FROM EGYPT. — CHAP. XII.— XIII. 16.
JIHAP. xii. 1-28. Institution of the Passover. —
The deliverance of Israel from the bondage of
Egypt was at hand ; also their adoption as the nation
of Jehovah (chap. vi. 6, 7). But for this a divine
consecration was necessary, that their outward severance from
the land of Egypt might be accompanied by an inward sever-
ance from everything of an Egyptian or heathen nature. This
consecration was to be imparted by the Passover — a festival
which was to lay the foundation for Israel's birth (Hos. ii. 5)
into the new life of grace and fellowship with God, and 'to
renew it perpetually in time to come. This festival was there-
fore instituted and commemorated before the exodus from
Egypt. Vers. 1-28 contain the directions for the Passover :
viz. vers. 1—14 for the keeping of the feast of the Passover
before the departure from Egypt, and vers. 15-20 for the seven
days' feast of unleavened bread. In vers. 21-27 Moses com-
municates to the elders of the nation the leading instructions as
to the former feast, and the carrying out of those instructions
is mentioned in ver. 28.
Vers. 1 and 2. By the words, " in th.% land of Egypt" the
law of the Passover which follows is brought into connection
with the giving of the law at Sinai and in the fields of Moab,
and is distinguished in relation to the former as the first or foun-
dation law for the congregation of Jehovah. The creation of
Digitized by
Google
10 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
Israel as the people of Jehovah (Isa. xliii. 15) commenced with
the institution of the Passover. As a proof of this, it was pre-
ceded hy the appointment of a new era, fixing the commence-
ment of the congregation of Jehovah. u This month" (i.e. the
present in which ye stand) " be to you the head (»',«. the be-
ginning) of the months, the first let it be to you for the months of
the year;" i.e. let the numbering of the months, and therefore
the year also, begin with it. Consequently the Israelites had
hitherto had a different beginning to their year, probably only a
civil year, commencing with the sowing, and ending with the
termination of the harvest (cf. xxiii. 16) ; whereas the Egyptians
most likely commenced their year with the overflowing of the
Nile at the summer solstice (cf. Lepsius, Chron. 1, pp. 148 sqq.).
The month which was henceforth to be the first of the year, and
is frequently so designated (chap. xl. 2, 17 ; Lev. xxiii. 5, etc.),
is called Abib (the ear-month) in chap. xiii. 4, xxiii. 15, xxxiv.
18, Deut. xvi. 1, because the corn was then in ear ; after the
captivity it was called Nisan (Neh. ii. 1 ; E3th. hi. 7). It cor-
responds very nearly to our April.
Vers. 3-14. Arrangements for the Passover. — " All tlie con-
gregation of Israel" was the nation represented by its elders
(cf . ver. 21, and my bibl. Arch. ii. p. 221). " On the tenth of this
(i.e. the first) month, let every one take to himself fife' (a lamb,
lit. a young one, either sheep or goats ; ver. 5, and Deut. xiv. 4),
according to fathers' houses" (vid. vi. 14), i.e. according to the
natural distribution of the people into families, so that only the
members of one family or family circle should unite, and not an
indiscriminate company. In ver. 21 mishpachoth is used instead.
" A lamb for the house," JV3, i.e. the family forming a house-
hold. — Ver. 4. But if " the house be too small for a lamb" (lit.
" small from the existence of a lamb," P? comparative : n|>a nVn
is an existence which receives its purpose from the lamb, which
answers to that purpose, viz. the consumption of the lamb, i.e. if
a family is not numerous enough to consume a lamb), " let him
(the house-father) and his nearest neighbour against his house
take (sc. a lamb) according to the calculation of the persons."
npaa computatio (Lev. xxvii. 23), from Dps computare; and D3D,
the calculated amount or number (Num. xxxi. 28): it only
occurs in the Pentateuch. " Every one according to the measure
of his eating shall ye reckon for the lamb:" i.e. in deciding whether
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XII. 6. 11
several families had to unite, in order to consume one lamb,
they were to estimate how much each person would be likely to
eat. Consequently more than two families might unite for this
purpose, when they consisted simply of the father and mother
and little children. A later custom fixed ten as the number of
persons to each paschal lamb ; and Jonathan has interpolated
this number into the text of his Targum. — Ver. 5. The kind of
lamb : WOR integer, uninjured, without bodily fault, like all the
sacrifices (Lev. xxii. 19, 20) ; a male like the burnt-offerings
(Lev. i. 3, 11) ; '"ije> ja one year old (hitaiatoi, LXX). This
does not mean " standing in the first year, viz. from the eighth
day of its life to the termination of the first year" (Rabb. Cler.,
etc.), a rule which applied to the other sacrifices only (chap,
xxii. 29 ; Lev. xxii. 27). The opinion expressed by Ewald and
others, that oxen were also admitted at a later period, is quite
erroneous, and cannot be proved from Deut. xvi. 2, or 2 Chron.
xxx. 24 and xxxv. 7 sqq. As the lamb was intended as a sacri-
fice (ver. 27), the characteristics were significant. Freedom
from blemish and injury not only befitted the sacredness of the
purpose to which they were devoted, but was a symbol of the
moral integrity of the person represented by the sacrifice. It
was to be a male, as taking the place of the male first-born of
Israel ; and a year old, because it was not till then that it reached
the full, fresh vigour of its life. " Ye shall take it out from the
sheep or from' the goats :" i.e., as Theodoret explains it, " He who
has a sheep, let him slay it ; and he who has no sheep, let him
take a goat." Later custom restricted the choice to tire lamb
alone ; though even in the time of Josiah kids were still used
as well (2 Chron. xxxv. 7).
Ver. 6. " And it shall he to you for preservation (ye shall
keep it) until the fourteenth day, and then . . . slay it at sunset"
Among the reasons commonly assigned for the instruction to
choose the lamb on the 10th, and keep it till the 14th, which
Jonathan and Rashi supposed to refer to the Passover in Egypt
alone, there is an element of truth in the one given most fully
by Fagius, " that the sight of the lamb might furnish an occa-
sion for conversation respecting their deliverance from Egypt,
. . . and the mercy of God, who had so graciously looked upon
them ;" but this hardly serves to explain the interval of exactly
four days. Hofmann supposes it to refer to the four doroth
Digitized by
Google
12 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
(Gen. xv. 16), which had elapsed since Israel was brought to
Egypt, to grow into a nation. The probability of such an allu-
sion, however, depends upon just what Hofmann denies without
sufficient reason, viz. upon the lamb being regarded as a sacri-
fice, in which Israel consecrated itself to its God. It was to be
slain by " the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel:" not
by the whole assembled people, as though they gathered to-
gether for this purpose, for the slaughtering took place in every
house (ver. 7) ; the meaning is simply, that the entire congrega-
tion, without any exception, was to slay it at the same time, viz.
" between the two evenings" (Num. ix. 3, 5, 11), or " in the
evening at sunset" (Deut. xvi. 6). Different opinions have pre-
vailed among the Jews from a very early date as to the precise
time intended. Aben Ezra agrees with the Caraites and Sama-
ritans in taking the first evening to be the time when the sun
sinks below the horizon, and the second the time of total dark-
ness ; in which case, " between the two evenings" would be from
6 o'clock to 7.20. Kimchi and Rashi, on the other hand, regard
the moment of sunset as the boundary between the two evenings,
and Hitzig has lately adopted their opinion. According to the
rabbinical idea, the time when the sun began to descend, viz.
from 3 to 5 o'clock, was the first evening, and sunset the second ;
so that " between the two evenings" was from 3 to 6 o'clock.
Modern expositors have very properly decided in favour of the
view held by A ben Ezra and the custom adopted by the Caraites
and Samaritans, from which the explanation given by Kimchi
and Rashi does not materially differ. It is true that this argu-
ment has been adduced in favour of the rabbinical practice,
viz. that " only by supposing the afternoon to have been in-
cluded, can we understand why the day of Passover is always
called the 14th (Lev. xxiii. 5 ; Num. ix. 3, etc.);" and also, that
" if the slaughtering took place after sunset, it fell on the 15th
Nisan, and not the 14th." But both arguments are based upon
an untenable assumption. For it is obvious from Lev. xxiii. 32,
where the fast prescribed for the day of atonement, which fell
upon the 10th of the 7th month, is ordered to commence on the
evening of the 9th day, " from even to even," that although
the Israelites reckoned the day of 24 hours from the evening
sunset to sunset, in numbering the days they followed .the
natural day, and numbered each day according to the period
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XII. 7. 13
between sunrise and sunset. Nevertheless there is no formal
disagreement between the law and the rabbinical custom. The
expression in Deut. xvi. 6, " at (towards) sunset," is sufficient
to show that the boundary line between the two evenings is not
to be fixed precisely at the moment of sunset, but only some-
where about that time. The daily evening sacrifice and the
incense offering were also to be presented " between the two
evenings" (chap. xxix. 39, 41, xxx. 8 ; Num. xxviii. 4). Now
as this was not to take place exactly at the same time, but to
precede it, they could not both occur at the time of sunset, but
the former must have been offered before that. Moreover, in
later times, when the paschal lamb was slain and offered at the
sanctuary, it must have been slain and offered before sunset, if
only to give sufficient time to prepare the paschal meal, which
was to be over before, midnight. It was from these circum-
stances that the rabbinical custom grew up in the course of
time, and the lax use of the word evening, in Hebrew as well
as in every other language, left space enough for this. For just
as we do not confine the term morning to the time before sun-
set, but apply it generally to the early hours of the day, so the
term evening is not restricted to the period after sunset. If the
sacrifice prescribed for the morning could be offered after sun-
rise, the one appointed for the evening might in the same
manner be offered before sunset.
Ver. 7. Some of the blood was to be put (jna as in Lev. iv.
18, where |*)? is distinguished from njn, to sprinkle, in ver. 17)
upon the two posts and the lintel of the door of the house in
which the lamb was eaten. This blood was to be to them a
sign (ver. 13) ; for when Jehovah passed through Egypt to smite
the first-born, He would see the blood, and would spare these
houses, and not permit the destroyer to enter them (vers. 13, 23).
The two posts with the lintel represented the door (ver. 23),
which they surrounded; and the doorway through which the
house was entered stood for the house itself, as we may see from
the frequent expression "in thy gates," for in thy towns (chap. xx.
10 ; Deut. v. 14, xii. 17, etc.). The threshold, which belonged
to the door quite as much as the lintel, was not to be smeared
with blood, in order that the blood might not be trodden under
foot. By the smearing of the door-posts and lintel with blood,
the house was expiated and consecrated on an altar. That the
Digitized by
Google
14 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
smearing with blood was to be regarded as an act of expiation, is
evident from the simple fact, that a hyssop-bosh was used for
the purpose (ver. 22) ; for sprinkling with hyssop is never pre-
scribed in the law, except in connection with purification in the
sense of expiation (Lev. xiv. 49 sqq. ; Num. xix. 18, 19). In
Egypt the Israelites had no common altar ; and for this reason,
the houses in which they assembled for the Passover were con-
secrated as altars, and the persons found in them were thereby
removed from the stroke of the destroyer. In this way the
smearing of the door-posts and lintel became a sign to Israel of
their deliverance from the destroyer. Jehovah made it so by
His promise, that He would see the blood, and pass over the
houses that were smeared with it. Through faith in this pro-
mise, Israel acquired in the sign a firm pledge of its deliverance.
The smearing of the doox*way was relinquished, after Moses (not
Josiah, as Vaihinger supposes, cf. Deut. xvi. 5, 6) had transferred
the slaying of the lambs to the court of the sanctuary, and the
blood had been ordered to be sprinkled upon the altar there.
Vers. 8, 9. With regard to the preparation of the lamb for
the meal, the following directions were given : " They shall eat
the lamb in that night " (i.e. the night following the 14th), and
none of it JO (" underdone" or raw), or ?t^3 (" boiled" — lit. done,
viz. D)B3 fyfoD, done in water, i.e. boiled, as ??>3 does not mean
to be boiled, but to become ripe or done, Joel iii. 13) ; " but
roasted with fire, even its head on (along with) its thighs and en-
trails ;" i.e., as Rashi correctly explains it, " undivided or whole,
so that neither head nor thighs were cut off, and not a bone was
broken (ver. 46), and the viscera were roasted in the belly along
with the entrails," the latter, of course, being first of all cleansed.
On D'jn? and aig see Lev. i. 9. These regulations are all to be
regarded from one point of view. The first two, neither under-
done nor boiled, were connected with the roasting of the animal
whole. As the roasting no doubt took place on a spit, since the
Israelites while in Egypt can hardly have possessed such ovens
of then.' own, as are prescribed in the Talmud and. are met
with in Persia, the lamb would be very likely to be roasted im-
perfectly, or underdone, especially in the hurry that must have
preceded the exodus (ver. 11). By boiling, again, the integrity
of the animal woidd have been destroyed, partly through the fact
that it could never have been got into a pot whole, as the Israel-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XII. 8, 9. 15
ites had no pots or kettles sufficiently large, and still more
through the fact that, in boiling, the substance of the flesh is
more or less dissolved. For it is very certain that the command
to roast was not founded upon the hurry of the whole procedure,
as a whole animal could be quite as quickly boiled as roasted, if
not even more quickly, and the Israelites must have possessed
the requisite cooking utensils. It was to be roasted, in order
that it might be placed upon the table undivided and essentially
unchanged. "Through the unity and integrity of the lamb
given them to eat, the participants were to be joined into an
undivided unity and fellowship with the Lord, who had provided
them with the meal" (cf. 1 Cor. x. 17). 1 They were to eat it
with niJtO (afw/to, azymi panes; LXX., Vulg.), i.e. (not sweet, or
parched, but) pure loaves, not fermented with leaven ; for leaven,
which sets' the dough in fermentation, and so produces impurity,
was a natural symbol of moral corruption, and was excluded
from the sacrifices therefore as defiling (Lev. ii. 11). " Over
(upon) bitter herbs they shall eat it." D^O, iriKplSes (LXX.),
lactucce agrestes (Vulg.), probably refers to various kinds of
bitter herbs. Ilucpk, according to Aristot. IRst. an. 9, 6, and
Plin. h. n. 8, 41, is the same as lactuca silvestris, or wild lettuce ;
but in Dioscor. 2, 160; it is referred to as the wild (repi? or
Kiywpiov, i.e. wild endive, the intubus or intubum of the Romans.
As lettuce and endive are indigenous in Egypt, and endive is
also met with in Syria from the beginning of the winter months
to the end of March, and lettuce in April and May, it is to these
herbs of bitter flavor that the term merorim chiefly applies;
1 See my ArchSologie i. p. 386. Baehr (Syinb. 2, 685) has given the
true explanation : " By avoiding the breaking of the bones, the animal was
preserved in complete integrity, undisturbed and entire (Ps. xxxiv. 20).
The sacrificial lamb to be eaten was to be thoroughly and perfectly whole,
and at the time of eating was to appear as a perfect whole, and therefore as
one ; for it is not what is dissected, divided, broken in pieces, but only what
is whole, that is eo ipso one. There was no other reason for this, than that
all who took part in this one whole animal, i.e. all who ate of it, should look
upon themselves as one whole, one community, like those who eat the New
Testament Passover, the body of Christ (1 Cor. v. 7), of whom the apostle
says (1 Cor. x. 17), " There is one bread, and so we, being many, are one
body : for we are all partakers of one body." The preservation of Christ,
so that not a bone was broken, had the same signification ; and God ordained
this that He might appear as the true paschal lamb, that was slain for the
, sins of the world."
Digitized by
Google
16 THE SECOKD BOOK OF MOSES.
though others may also be included, as the Arabs apply the same
term to Scorzonera orient., Picris scabra, Sonclus oler., Hieracium
unijlor., and others (Forsk. flor. cxviii. and 143) ; and in the
Mishnah, Pes. 2, 6, five different varieties of bitter herbs are
reckoned as merorim, though it is difficult to determine what
they are (cf. Bochart, Hieroz. 1, pp. 691 sqq., and Cels. Hierobot.
ii. p. 727). By ?? (upon) the bitter herbs are represented, both
here and in Num. is. 11, not as an accompaniment to the meat,
but as the basis of the meal. 7V does not signify along with, or
indicate accompaniment, not even in chap. xxxv. 22 ; but in this
and other similar passages it still retains its primary significa-
tion, upon or over. It is only used to signify accompaniment in
cases where the ideas of protection, meditation, or addition are
prominent. If, then, the bitter herbs are represented in this
passage as the basis of the meal, and the unleavened bread also
in Num. ix. 11, it is evident that the bitter herbs were not in-
tended to be regarded as a savoury accompaniment, by which
more flavour was imparted to the sweeter foodj but had a more
profound signification. The bitter herbs were to call to mind
the bitterness of life experienced by Israel in Egypt (i. 14), and
this bitterness was to be overpowered by the sweet flesh of the
lamb. In the same way the unleavened loaves are regarded as
forming part of the substance of the meal in Num. ix. 11, in
accordance with their significance in relation to it (vid. ver. 15).
There is no discrepancy between this and Deut. xvi. 3, where
the mazzoth are spoken of as an accompaniment to the flesh of
the sacrifice ; for the allusion there is not to the eating of the
paschal lamb, but to sacrificial meals held during the seven days'
festival.
Ver. 10. The lamb was to be all eaten wherever this was
possible ; but if any was left, it was to be burned with fire the
following day,— a rule afterwards laid down for all the sacrificial
meals, with one solitary exception (vid. Lev. vii. 15). They were
to eat it P'Brra, " in anxious flight" (from Tan trepidare, Ps.
xxxi. 23 ; to flee in terror, Deut. xx. 3, 2 Kings vii. 15) ; in
travelling costume therefore, — with " the loins girded," that they
might not be impeded in their walking by the long flowing dress
(2 Kings iv. 29), — with " shoes (sandals) on their feet," that they
might be ready to walk on hard, rough roads, instead of bare-
footed, as they generally went (cf. Josh. ix. 5, 13; Bynceus de
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XII. 10, 11. 17
calceis ii. 1, 7 ; and Bochart, Hieroz. i. pp. 686 sqq.), and " staff
in hand" (Gen. xxxii. 11). The directions in ver. 11 had
reference to the paschal meal in Egypt only, and had no other
signification than to prepare the Israelites for their approaching
departure. But though " this preparation was intended to give
the paschal meal the appearance of a support for the journey,
which the Israelites were about to take," this by no means ex-
hausts its signification. The divine instructions close with the
words, " it is nDB to Jehovah ;" i<e. what is prescribed is a pesach
appointed by Jehovah, and to be kept for Him (cf. chap.
.xx. 10, " Sabbath to Jehovah ;" xxxii. 5, " feast to Jehovah").
The word HDB, Aram. NHDB, Gr. traaya^ is derived from nps,
lit. to leap or hop, from which these two meanings arise : (1) to
limp (1 Kings xviii. 21 ; 2 Sam. iv. 4, etc.) ; and (2) to pass
over, transire (hence Tiphsah, a passage over, 1 Kings iv. 24).
It is for the most part used figuratively for wrepftalveiv, to pass
by or spare ; as in this case, where the destroying angel passed
by the doors and houses of the Israelites that were smeared with
blood. From this, pesach (vjrep/9a<n?, Aquil. in ver. 11 ; virep-
{Saala, Joseph. Ant. ii. 14, 6) came afterwards to be used for
the lamb, through which, according to divine appointment, the
passing by or sparing had been effected (vers. 21, 27 ; 2 Chron.
xxxv. 1, 13, etc.) ; then for the preparation of the lamb for a
meal, in accordance with the divine instructions, or for the cele-
bration of this meal (thus here, ver. 11 ; Lev. xxiii. 5; Num.
ix. 7, etc.) ; and then, lastly, it was transferred to the whole
seven days' observance of the feast of unleavened bread, which
began with this meal (Deut. xvi. 1), and also to the sacrifices
which were to be offered at that feast (Deut. xvi. 2 ; 2 Chron.
xxxv. 1, 7, etc.). The killing of the lamb appointed for the
pesach was a rat, i.e. a skin-offering, as Moses calls it when
making known the command of God to the elders (ver. 27) ;
consequently the eating of it was a sacrificial feast (" the sacri-
fice of the feast of the Passover," chap, xxxiv. 25). For rat is
never applied to slaying alone, as Bnts> is. Even in Prov.
xvii. 1 and 1 Sam. xxviii. 24, which Hofmann adduces in sup-
port of this meaning, it signifies " to sacrifice" only in a figu-
rative or transferred sense. ' At the first Passover in Egypt, it
is true, there was no presentation (a^pn), because Israel had no
altar there. But the presentation took place at the very first
PENT. — VOL. II. B
Digitized by
Google
18 THE SECOKD BOOK OF MOSES.
repetition of the festival at Sinai (Num. ix. 7). The omission
of this in Egypt, on account of the circumstances in which they
were placed, constituted no essential difference between the first
" sacrifice of the Passover" and the repetitions of it ; for the
choice of the lamb four days before it was slain, was a substi-
tute for the presentation, and the sprinkling of the blood, which
was essential to every sacrifice, was effected in the smearing of
the door-posts and lintel. The other difference upon which
Hofmann lays stress, viz. that at all subsequent Passovers the
fat of the animal was burned upon the altar, is very question-
able. For this custom cannot be proved from the Old Testa-
ment, though it is prescribed in the Mishnak. 1 But even if the
burning of the fat of the paschal lamb had taken place shortly
after the giving of the law, on the ground of the general com-
mand in Lev. iii. 17, vii. 23 sqq. (for this is not taken for
granted in Ex. xxiii. 18, as we shall afterwards show), this
difference could also be accounted for from the want of an altar
in Egypt, and would not warrant us in refusing to admit the
sacrificial character of the first Passover. For the appointment
of the paschal meal by God does not preclude the idea that it
was a religious service, nor the want of an altar the idea of
sacrifice, as Hofmann supposes. All the sacrifices of the Jewish
nation were minutely prescribed by God, so that the presenta-
tion of them was the consequence of divine instructions. And
even though the Israelites, when holding the first Passover
according to the command of God ? merely gave expression to
their desire to participate in the deliverance from destruction
and the redemption from Egypt, and also to their faith in the
word and promise of God, we must neither measure the signifi-
cation of this divine institution by that fact, nor restrict it to
1 In the elaborate account of the Passover under Josiah, in 2 Chron.
xxxv., we have, it is true, an allusion to the presentation of the burnt-
offering and fat (ver. 14) ; but the boiling of the offerings in pots, cal-
drons, and pans is also mentioned, along with the roasting of the Passover
(ver. 13) ; from which it is very obvious, that in this account the offering
of burnt and slain-offerings is associated with the preparation of the paschal
lamb, and the paschal meal is not specially separated from the sacrificial
meals of the seven days' feast ; just as we find that the king and the princes
give the priests and Levites not 6nly lambs and kids, but oxen also, for the
sacrifices and sacrificial meals of this festival. (See my Archaologie,
§81,8).
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XII. 12-14. 19
this alone, inasmuch as it is expressly described as a sacrificial
meal.
In vers. 12 and 13 the name pesach is explained. In that
night Jehovah would pass through Egypt, smite all the first-born
of man and beast, execute judgment upon all the gods of Egypt,
and pass over ( n ?S) ftie Israelites. In what the judgment upon
all the gods of Egypt consisted, it is hard to determine. The
meaning of these words is not exhausted by Calvin's remark :
" God declared that He would be a judge against the false gods,
because it was most apparent then, how little help was to be
found in them, and how vain and fallacious was their worship."
The gods of Egypt were spiritual authorities and powers, &m-
fwvia, which governed the life and spirit of the Egyptians.
Hence the judgment upon them could not consist of the destruc-
tion of idols, as Ps. Jonathans paraphrase supposes : idola fusa
colliquescent, lapidea concidentur, testacea confringentur, lignea in
cinerem redigentur. For there is nothing said about this ; but
in ver. 29 the death of the first-born of men and cattle alone is
mentioned as the execution of the divine threat ; and in Num.
xxxiii. 4 also the judgment upon the gods is connected with the
burial of the first-born, without special reference to anything
besides. From this it seems to follow pretty certainly, that the
judgments upon the gods of Egypt consisted in the slaying of
the first-born of man and beast. But the slaying of the first-
born was a judgment upon the gods, not only because the impo-
tence and worthlessness of the fancied gods were displayed in
the consternation produced by this stroke, but still more directly
in the fact, that in the slaying of the king's son and many of the
first-born animals, the gods of Egypt, which were worshipped
both in their kings and also in certain sacred animals, such as
the bull Apis and the goat Nendes, were actually smitten them-
selves.— Ver. 13. To the Israelites, on the other hand, the blood
upon the houses in which they were assembled would be a sign
and pledge that Jehovah would spare them, and no plague
should fall upon them to destroy (cf. Ezek. xxi. 36 ; not " for
the destroyer," for there is no article with JVntPDp). — Ver. 14.
That day (the evening of the 14th) Israel was to keep "for a
commemoration as a feast to Jehovah" consecrated for all time,
as an " eternal ordinance," BSWfH? " in your generations," i.e. for
all ages, iff* denoting the succession of future generations (yid.
Digitized by
Google
20 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
ver. 24). As the divine act of Israel's redemption was of eter-
nal significance, so the commemoration of that act was to be an
eternal ordinance, and to be upheld as long as Israel should exist
as the redeemed people of the Lord, i.e. to all eternity, just as
the new life of the redeemed was to endure for ever. For the.
Passover, the remembrance of which was to be revived by the
constant repetition of the feast, was the celebration of their
birth into the new life of fellowship with the Lord. The pre-
servation from the stroke of the destroyer, from which the feast
received its name, was the commencement of their redemption
from the bondage of Egypt, and their elevation into the nation
of Jehovah. The blood of the paschal lamb was atoning blood ;
for the Passover was a sacrifice, which combined in itself the
signification of the future sin-offerings and peace-offerings ; in
other words, which shadowed forth both expiation and quicken-
ing fellowship with God. The smearing of the houses of the
Israelites with the atoning blood of the sacrifice set forth the
reconciliation of Israel and its God, through the forgiveness
and expiation of its sins ; and in the sacrificial meal which fol-
lowed, their communion with the- Lord, i.e. their adoption as
children of God, was typically completed. In the meal the
8acrificium became a sacramentum, the flesh of the sacrifice a
means of grace, by which the Lord adopted His spared and
redeemed people into the fellowship of His house, and gave them
food for the refreshing of their souls.
Vers. 15-20. Judging from the words " / brought out" in
ver. 17, Moses did not receive instructions respecting the seven
days' feast of Mazzoth till after the exodus from Egypt ; but
on account of its internal and substantial connection with the
Passover, it is placed here in immediate association with the
institution of the paschal meal. " Seven days shall ye eat un-
leavened bread, only (*|K) on the first day (i.e. not later than the
first day) ye shall cause to cease (i.e. put away) leaven out of your
houses." The first day was the 15th of the month (cf. Lev.
xxiii. 6 ; Num. xxviii. 17). On the other hand, when tfE'K'ia is
thus defined in ver. 18, " on the 14th day of the month at
even," this may be accounted for from the close connection
between the feast of Mazzoth and the feast of Passover, inas-
much as unleavened bread was to be eaten with the paschal
lamb, so that the leaven had to be cleared away before this meal.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIL 15-20. 21
The significance of this feast was in the eating of the mazzoth,
i.e. of pure unleavened bread (see ver. 8). As bread, which is
the principal means of preserving life, might easily be regarded
as the symbol of life itself, so far as the latter is set forth in the
means employed for its own maintenance and invigoration, so
the mazzoth, or unleavened loaves, were symbolical of the new
life, as cleansed from the leaven of a sinful nature. But if the
eating of mazzoth was to shadow forth the new life into which
Israel was transferred, any one who ate leavened bread at the
feast would renounce this new life, and was therefore to be cut off
from Israel, i.e. " from the congregation of Israel" (ver. 19). —
Ver. 16. On the first and seventh days, a holy meeting was to
be held, and labour to be suspended. t^f r ^p? is not indictio
sancti, prochmatio sanctitatis (Vitringd), but a holy assembly,
i.e. a meeting of the people for the worship of Jehovah (Ezek.
xlvi. 3, 9). K"}P*?, from tOiJ to call, is that which is called, i.e.
the assembly (Isa. iv. 5 ; Neh. viii. 8). No work was to be done
upon these days, except what was necessary for the preparation
of food ; on the Sabbath, even this was prohibited (chap. xxxv.
2, 3). Hence in Lev. xxiii. 7, the " work" is called " servile
work," ordinary handicraft.— Ver. 17. " Observe the Mazzoth"
(i.e. the directions given in vers. 15 and 16 respecting the feast
of Mazzoth), " for on this very day I have brought your armies
out of the land of Egypt." This was effected in the night of the
14th-15th, or rather at midnight, and therefore in the early
morning of the 15th Abib. Because Jehovah had brought
Israel out of Egypt on the 15th Abib, therefore Israel was to
keep Mazzoth for seven days. Of course it was not merely a
commemoration of this event, but the exodus formed the ground-
work of the seven days' feast, because it was by this that Israel
had been introduced into a new vital element. For this reason
the Israelites were to put away all the leaven of their Egyptian
nature, the leaven of malice and wickedness (1 Cor. v. 8), and
by eating pure and holy bread, and meeting for the worship of
God, to show that they were walking in newness of life. This
aspect of the feast will serve to explain the repeated emphasis
laid upon the instructions given concerning it, and the repeated
threat of extermination against either native or foreigner, in
case the law should be disobeyed (vers. 18-20). To eat leavened
bread at this feast, would have been a denial of the divine act,
Digitized by
Google
22 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
by -which Israel was introduced into the new life of fellowship
with Jehovah. ">3, a stranger, was a non-Israelite who lived for
a time, or possibly for his whole life, in the midst of the Israel-
itish nation, but without being incorporated into it by circumci-
sion. rjKn rnitt, a tree that grows upon the soil in which it was
planted ; hence indigena, the native of a country. This term
was applied to the Israelites, " because they had sprung from
Isaac and Jacob, who were born in the land of Canaan, and
had received it from God as a permanent settlement" (Clericus).
The feast of Mazzoth, the commemoration of Israel's creation
as the people of Jehovah (Isa. xliii. 15-17), was fixed for seven
days, to stamp upon it in the number seven the seal of the cove-
nant relationship. This heptad of days was made holy through
the sanctification of the first and last days by the holding of a
holy assembly, and the entire suspension of work. The begin-
ning and the end comprehended the whole. In the eating of
unleavened bread Israel laboured for meat for the new life
(John vi. 27), whilst the seal of worship was impressed upon
this new life in the holy convocation, and the suspension of
labour was the symbol of rest in the Lord.
Vers. 21-28. Of the directions given by Moses to the elders
of the nation, the leading points only are mentioned here, viz.
the slaying of the lamb and the application of the blood (vers.
21, 22). The reason for this is then explained in ver. 23, and
the rule laid down in vers. 24-27 for its observance in the
future. — Ver. 21. u Withdraw and take:" W& is intransitive
here, to draw away, withdraw, as in Judg. iv. 6, v. 14, xx. 37.
afts rttJS : a bunch or bundle of hyssop : according to Maimo-
nides, " quantum quis comprehendit tnanu sua." 3itN (vootsotto?)
was probably not the plant which we call hyssop, the hyssopus
officinalis, for it is uncertain whether this is to be found in Syria
and Arabia, but a species of origanum resembling hyssop, the
Arabian zdter, either wild marjoram or a kind of thyme,
Thymus serpyllum, mentioned in Forsk. flora Aeg. p. 107,
which is very common in Syria and Arabia, and is called zdter,
or zatureya, the pepper or bean plant. " That is in the bason;"
viz. the bason in which the blood had been caught when the
animal was killed. Dnyani, " and let it reach to, i.e. strike, the
lintel ;" in ordinary purifications the blood was sprinkled with
the bunch of hyssop (Lev. xiv. 51 ; Num. xix. 18). The reason
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XII. 29-38. 23
for the command not to go ou/of the door of the house was,
that in this night of judgment there would be no safety any-
where except behind the blood-stained door. — Ver. 23 (cf. ver. 13).
" He vrill not suffer (JW) the destroyer to come into your houses .*"
Jehovah effected the destruction of the first-born through wrotei,
the destroyer, or destroying angel, 6 oXodpevav (Heb. xi. 28),
Le. not a fallen angel, but the angel of Jehovah, in whom
Jehovah revealed Himself to the patriarchs and Moses. This
is not at variance with Ps. lxxviii. 49 ; for the writer of this
psalm regards not only the slaying of the first-born, but also the
pestilence (Ex. ix. 1-7), as effected through the medium of
angels of evil : though, according to the analogy of 1 Sam. xiii.
17, JVnBfon might certainly be understood collectively as applying
to a company of angels. Ver. 24. " This word," i.e. the instruc-
tions respecting the Passover, they were to regard as an institu-
tion for themselves and their children for ever (DTfony in the
same sense as ofM, Gen. xvii. 7, 13) ; and when dwelling in the
promised land, they were to explain the meaning of this service
to their sons. The ceremony is called rrnnjf, " service," inasmuch
as it was the fulfilment of a divine command, a performance
demanded by God, though it promoted the good of Israel. —
Ver. 27. After hearing the divine instructions, the people,
represented by their elders, bowed and worshipped ; not only to
show their faith, but also to manifest their gratitude for the
deliverance which they were to receive in the Passover. — Ver. 28.
They then proceeded to execute the command, that through the
obedience of faith they might appropriate the blessing of this
" service."
Vers. 29-36. Death of the Fibst-bobn, and release
of Israel. — The last blow announced to Pharaoh took place in
" the half of the night," i.e. at midnight, when all Egypt was
lying in deep sleep (Matt. xxv. 5, 6), to startle the king and his
people out of their sleep of sin. As all the previous plagues
rested upon a natural basis, it might seem a probable supposition
that this was also the case here, whilst the analogy of 2 Sam.
xxiv. 15, 16 might lead us to think of a pestilence as the means
employed by the destroying angel. In that case we should find
the heightening of the natural occurrence into a miracle in the
fact, that the first-born both of man and beast, and they alone,
Digitized by
Google
24 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
were all suddenly slain, whilst the Israelites remained uninjured
in their houses. This view would he favoured, too, by the cir-
cumstance, that not only are pestilences of frequent occurrence
in Egypt,' but they are most fatal in the spring months. On a
closer examination, however, the circumstances mentioned tell
against rather than in favour of such a supposition. In 2 Sam.
xxiv. 15, the pestilence is expressly alluded to; here it is not.
The previous plagues were nearly all brought upon Egypt by
Moses* staff, and with most of them the natural sources are dis-
tinctly mentioned ; but the last plague came direct from Jehovah
without the intervention of Moses, certainly for no other reason
than to make it apparent that it was a purely supernatural pun-
ishment inflicted by His own omnipotence. The words, " There
was not a house where there was not one dead" are to be taken
literally, and not merely " as a general expression;" though, of
course, they are to be limited, according to the context, to all
the houses in which there were first-born of man or beast. The
term u first-born" is not to be extended so far, however, as to
include even heads of families who had children of their own, in
which case there might be houses, as Lapide and others suppose,
where the grandfather, the father, the son, and the wives were
all lying dead, provided all of them were first-born. The words,
" From the son of Pharaoh, who will sit upon his throne, to the son
of the prisoners in the prison" (ver. 29 compared with chap. xiii.
15), point unquestionably to those first-born sons alone who were
not yet fathers themselves. But even with this limitation the
blow was so terrible, that the effect produced upon Pharaoh and
his people is perfectly intelligible.
Ver. 30. The very same night Pharaoh sent for Moses and
Aaron, and gave them permission to depart with their people,
their children, and their cattle. The statement that Pharaoh
sent for Moses and Aaron is not at variance with chap. x. 28,
29 ; and there is no necessity to resort to Calvin's explanation,
" Pharaoh himself is said to have sent for those whom he urged
to depart through the medium of messengers from the palace."
The command never to appear in his sight again did not pre-
clude his sending for them under totally different circum-
stances. The permission to depart was given unconditionally,
i.e. without involving an obligation to return. This is evident
from the words, " Get you forth from among my people," com-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XII. 83. 25
pared with chap. x. 8, 24, " Go ye, serve Jehovah," and viii. 25,
" Go ye, sacrifice to your God in the land." If in addition to
this we hear in mind, that although at first, and even after the
fourth plague (chap. viii. 27), Moses only asked for a three days'
journey to hold a festival, yet Pharaoh suspected that they
would depart altogether, and even gave utterance to this suspi-
cion, without being contradicted by Moses (chap. viii. 28, and x.
10) ; the words " Get you forth from among my people" can-
not mean anything else than " depart altogether." Moreover,
in chap. xi. 1 it was foretold to Moses that the result of the last
blow would be, that Pharaoh would let them go, or rather drive
them away ; so that the effect of this blow, as here described,
cannot be understood in any other way. And this is really im-
plied in Pharaoh's last words, " Go, and bless me also;" whereas
on former occasions he had only asked them to intercede for the
removal of the plagues (chap. viii. 8, 28, ix. 28, x. 17). ^3, to
bless, indicates a final leave-taking, and was equivalent to a re-
quest that on their departure they would secure or leave behind
the blessing of their God, in order that henceforth no such
plague might ever befall him and his people. This view of the
words of the king is not at variance either with the expression
" as ye have said" in ver. 31, which refers to the words " serve
the Lord," or with the same words in ver. 32, for there they
refer to the flock and herds, or lastly, with the circumstance that
Pharaoh pursued the Israelites after they had gone, with the evi-
dent intention of bringing them back by force (chap. xiv. 5 sqq.),
because this resolution is expressly described as a change of
mind consequent upon renewed hardening (chap. xiv. 4, 5).
Ver. 33. " And Egypt urged the people strongly (?V P]H to
press hard, Kare^td^ovro, LXX.) to make haste, to send them out
of the land;" i.e. the Egyptians urged the Israelites to accelerate
their departure, "for they said (sc. to themselves), We are all
dead" i.e. exposed to death. So great was their alarm at the death
of the first-born. — Ver. 34. This urgency of the Egyptians com-
pelled the Israelites to take the dough, which they were probably
about to bake for their journey, before it was leavened, and also
their kneading-troughs bound up in their clothes (cloths) upon
their shoulders. "$?> Ipdnovy was a large square piece of stuff
or cloth, worn above the under-clothes, and could be easily used
for tying up different things together. The Israelites had in-
Digitized by
Google
26 THE SECOHD BOOK OF MOSE3.
tended to leaven the dough, therefore, as the command to «at
unleavened bread for seven days had not been given to them
yet. But under the pressure of necessity they were obliged to
content themselves with unleavened bread, or, as it is called in
Deut. xvi. 3, " the bread of affliction," during the first days of
their journey. But as the troubles connected with their de-
parture from Egypt were merely the introduction to the new life
of liberty and grace, so according to the counsel of God the
bread of affliction was to become a holy food to Israel ; the days
of their exodus being exalted by the Lord into a seven days'
feast, in which the people of Jehovah were to commemorate to
all ages their deliverance from the oppression of Egypt. The
long-continued eating of unleavened bread, on account of the
pressure of circumstances, formed the historical preparation for
the seven days' feast of Mazzoth, which was instituted afterwards.
Hence this circumstance is mentioned both here and in ver. 39.
On vers. 35 and 36, see chap. iii. 21, 22.
Vers. 37—42. Departure of the children of Israel out of Egypt.
— The starting-point was Eaimses, from which they proceeded to
Succoth (ver. 37), thence to Etliam at the end of the desert (chap,
xiii. 20), and from that by a curve to Hachiroth, opposite to the
Bed Sea, from which point they passed through the sea (chap. xiv.
2, 21 sqq.). Now, if we take these words simply as they stand,
Israel touched the border of the desert of Arabia by the second
day, and on the third day reached the plain of Suez and the
Bed Sea. But they could not possibly have gone so far, if
Raemses stood upon the site of the modern Belbeis. For though
the distance from Belbeis to Suez by the direct road past Rejum
el Khail is only a little more than 15 geographical miles, and a
caravan with camels could make the journey in two days, this
would be quite impossible for a whole nation travelling with
wives, children, cattle, and baggage. Such a procession could
never have reached Etham, on the border of the desert, on their
second day's march, and then on the third day, by a circuitous
course u of about a day's march in extent," have arrived at the
plain of Suez between Ajiriid and the sea. This is admitted by
Kurtz, who therefore follows v. Haurner in making a distinction
between a stage and a day's journey, on the ground that VDO
signifies the station or place of encampment, and not a day's
journey. But the word neither means station nor place of en-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XII. 87-42. 27
campment. It is derived from PM to tear out (*c. the pegs of
the tent), hence to take down the tent ; and denotes removal
from the place of encampment, and the subsequent march (cf.
Num. xxxiii. 1). Such a march might indeed embrace more than
a day's journey; but whenever the Israelites travelled more than a
day before pitching their tents, it is expressly mentioned (cf.Num.
x. 33, and xxxiii. 8, with Ex. xv. 22). These passages show
very clearly that the stages from Kaemses to Succoth, thence to
Etham, and then again to Hachiroth, were a day's march each.
The only question is, whether they only rested for one night at
each of these places. The circumstances under which the Is-
raelites took their departure favour the supposition, that they
would get out of the Egyptian territory as quickly as possible,
and rest no longer than was absolutely necessary; but the
gathering of the whole nation, which was not collected together
in one spot, as in a camp, at the time of their departure, and
still more the confusion, and interruptions of various kinds, that
would inevitably attend the migration of a whole nation, render
it probable that they rested longer than one night at each of the
places named. This would explain most simply, how Pharaoh
was able to overtake them with his army at Hachiroth. But
whatever our views on this point may be, so much is certain, that
Israel could not have reached the plain of Suez in a three days'
march from Belbeis with the circuitous route by Etham, and
therefore that their starting-point cannot have been Belbeis, but
must have been in the neighbourhood of Heroopolis ; and there
are other things that favour this conclusion. There is, first, the
circumstance that Pharaoh sent for Moses the very same night
after the slaying of the first-born, and told him to depart.
Now the Pentateuch does not mention Pharaoh's place of abode,
but according to Ps. lxxviii. 12 it was Zoan, i.e. Tanis, on the
eastern bank of the Tanitic arm of the Nile. Abu Keishib (or
Heroopolis) is only half as far from Tanis as Belbeis, and the
possibility of Moses appearing before* the king and returning to
his own people between midnight and the morning is perfectly
conceivable, on the supposition that Moses was not in Heroopolis
itself, but was staying in a more northerly place, with the expec-
tation that Pharaoh would send a message to him, or send for
him, after the final blow. Again, Abu Keishib was on the way
to Gaza ; so that the Israelites might take the road towards the
Digitized by
Google
28 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
country of the Philistines, and then, as this was not the road
they were to take, turn round at God's command by the road to
the desert (chap. xiii. 17, 18). Lastly, Etham could be reached
in two days from the starting-point named. 1 On the situation
of Succolh and Etham, see chap. xiii. 20.
The Israelites departed, " about 600,000 on foot that were
men." yjn (as in Num. xi. 21, the infantry of an army) is added,
because they went out as an army (ver. 41), and none are num-
bered but those who could bear arms, from 20 years old and
upwards ; and D*"}^ because of 'IBO TO?, " beside the little ones,"
which follows. IB is used here in its broader sense, as in Gen.
xlvii. 12, Num. xxxii. 16, 24, and applies to the entire family,
including the wife and children, who did not travel on foot, but
on beasts of burden and in carriages (Gen. xxxi. 17). The
number given is an approximative one. The numbering at
Sinai gave 603,550 males of 20 years old and upwards (Num.
i. 46), and 22,000 male Levites of a month old and upwards
(Num. in. 39). Now if we add the wives and children, the total
number of the people may have been about two million souls.
The multiplication of the seventy souls, who went down with
Jacob to Egypt, into this vast multitude, is not so dispropor-
tionate to the 430 years of their sojourn there, as to render it at
all necessary to assume that the numbers given included not
only the descendants of the seventy souls who went down with
Jacob, but also those of " several thousand man-servants and
maid-servants" who accompanied them. For, apart from the
fact, that we are not warranted in concluding, that because
Abraham had 318 fighting servants, the twelve sons of Jacob
had several thousand, and took them with them into Egypt ;
even if the servants had been received into the religious fellow-
ship of Israel by circumcision, they cannot have reckoned
among the 600,000 who went out, for the simple reason that
they are not included in the seventy souls who went down to
Egypt ; and in chap. i. 5 the number of those who came out is
placed in unmistakeable connection with the number of those
who went in. If we deduct from the 70 souls the patriarch
Jacob, his 12 sons, Dinah, Asher's daughter Zerah, the three
1 The different views aa to the march of the Israelites from Baemses to
their passage through the sea, are to be found in the Studien und Kritiken,
1850, pp. 328 sqq., and in Kurtz, ii. pp. 361 sqq.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XII. 37-42. 29
sons of Levi, the four, grandsons of Judah and Benjamin, and
those grandsons of Jacoh who probably died without leaving
any male posterity, since their descendants are not mentioned
among the families of Israel (cf. i. 372), there remain 41 grand-
sons of Jacob who founded families, in addition to the Levites.
Now, if we follow 1 Ohron. vii. 20 sqq., where ten or eleven
generations are mentioned between Ephraim and Joshua, and
reckon 40 years as a generation, the tenth generation of the 41
grandsons of Jacob would he born about the year 400 of the
sojourn in Egypt, and therefore be over 20 years of age at the
time of the exodus. Let us assume, that on an average there
were three sons and three daughters to every married couple in
the first six of these generations, two sons and two daughters in
the last four, and we shall find, that in the tenth generation
there would be 478,224 sons about the 400th year of the sojourn
in Egypt, who would therefore be above 20 years of age at the
time of the exodus, whilst 125,326 men of the ninth generation
would be still living, so that there would be 478,224 + 125,326,
or 603,550 men coming out of Egypt, who were more than 20
years old. But though our calculation is based upon no more
than the ordinary number of births, a special blessing from God
is to be discerned not only in this fruitfulness, which we suppose
to have been nninterrupted, but still more in the fact, that the
presumed number of children continued alive, and begot the
same number of children themselves ; and the divine grace was
peculiarly manifest in the fact, that neither pestilence nor other
evils, nor even the measures adopted by the Pharaohs for the
suppression of Israel, could diminish their numbers or restrain
their increase. If the question be asked, how the land of
Goshen could sustain so large a number, especially as the
Israelites were not the only inhabitants, but lived along with
Egyptians there, it is a sufficient reply, that according to both
ancient and modern testimony (cf. Robinson, Pal. i. p. 78), this
is the most fertile province in all Egypt, and that we are not so
well acquainted with the extent of the territory inhabited by the
Israelites, as to be able to estimate the amount of its produce.
Ver. 38. In typical fulfilment of the promise in Gen. xii. 3,
and no doubt induced by the signs and wonders of the Lord in
Egypt to seek their good among the Israelites, a great crowd of
mixed people (3T 3}?) attached themselves to them, whom Israel,
Digitized by
Google
30 THE SECOND BOOK GF MOSES.
could not shake off, although they afterwards became a snare to
them (Num. xi. 4). 3W: lit. a mixture, hrlfiucro? sc. Xaos
(LXX.), a swarm of foreigners ; called IMDN in Num. xi. 4, a
medley, or crowd of people of different nations. According to
Deut. xxix. 10, they seem to have occupied a very low position
among the Israelites, and to have furnished the nation of God
with hewers of wood and drawers of water. — On ver. 39, see
ver. 34. — Vers. 40, 41. The sojourn of the Israelites in Egypt
had lasted 430 years. This number is not critically doubtful,
nor are the 430 years to be reduced to 215 by an arbitrary
interpolation, such as we find in the LXX., f) 8^ /caroi/c^c-i? tw
viS>v 'IapaijX, fjv KarmKijaav (Cod. Alex, aiirol kcu oi irarepei;
avT&v) iv 7j7 Atrfinrrtp kcu, iv ryjj Xavaav, *.t.\. This chrono-
logical statement, the genuineness of which is placed beyond all
doubt by Onkelos, the Syriac, Vulgate, and other versions, is not
only in harmony with the prediction in Gen. xv. 13, where the
round number 400 is employed in prophetic style, but may be
reconciled with the different genealogical lists, if we only bear
in mind that the genealogies do not always contain a complete
enumeration of all the separate links, but very frequently inter-
mediate links of little historical importance are omitted, as we
have already seen in the genealogy of Moses and Aaron (chap. vi.
18-20). For example, the fact that there were more than the
four generations mentioned in chap. vi. 16 sqq. between Levi
and Moses, is placed beyond all doubt, not only by what has
been adduced at chap. vi. 18-20, but by a comparison with other
genealogies also. Thus, in Num. xxvi. 29 sqq., xxvii. 1, Josh,
xvii. 3, we find six generations from Joseph to Zelophehad ; in
Ruth iv. 18 sqq., 1 Chron. ii. 5, 6, there are also six from
Judah to Nahshon, the tribe prince in the time of Moses ; in
1 Chron. ii. 18 there are seven from Judah to Bezaleel, the
builder of the tabernacle ; and in 1 Chron. vii. 20 sqq., nine or
ten are given from Joseph to Joshua. This last genealogy
shows most clearly the impossibility of the view founded upon
the Alexandrian version, that the sojourn of the Israelites in
Egypt lasted only 215 years ; for ten generations, reckoned at
40 years each, harmonize very well with 430 years, but certainly
not with 215. 1 The statement in ver. 41, " the self-same day,"
1 The Alexandrian translators have arbitrarily altered the text to suit
the genealogy of Moses in chap. vi. 16 sqq., just as in the genealogies of
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. Xn. 43-60. 31
is not to be understood as relating to the first day after the lapse
of the 430 years, as though the writer supposed that it was on
the 14th Abib that Jacob entered Egypt 430 years before, but
points back to the day of the exodus, mentioned in ver. 14, as
compared with vers. 11 sqq., i.e. the 15th Abib (cf. ver. 51 and
chap. xiii. 4). On " the hosts of, Jehovah," see chap. vii. 4. —
Ver. 42. This day therefore was Dnse* 77, u a preservation-night
of the Lord, to bring them out of the land of Egypt." The apax
legomenon Dnrae* does not mean " celebration, from IDS' to
observe, to honour" (KnobeT), but " preservation," from lot? to
keep, to preserve ; and niiV? is the same as in ver. 27. " This
same night is (consecrated) to the Lord as a preservation for all
children of Israel in their families." Because Jehovah had pre-
served the children of Israel that night from the destroyer, it
was to be holy to them, i.e. to be kept by them in all future ages
to the glory of the Lord, as a preservation.
Vers. 43-50. Regulations concerning the Partici-
pants in the Passover. — These regulations, which were
supplementary to the law of the Passover in vers. 3-11, were
not communicated before the exodus ; because it was only by
the fact that a crowd of foreigners attached themselves to the
Israelites, that Israel was brought into a connection with foreign-
ers, which needed to be clearly defined, especially so far as
the Passover was concerned, the festival of Israel's birth as
the people of God. If the Passover was still to retain this sig-
nification, of course no foreigner could participate in it. This is
the first regulation. But as it was by virtue of a divine call, and
not through natural descent, that Israel had become the people
of Jehovah, and as it was destined in that capacity to be a
blessing to all nations, the attitude assumed towards foreigners
was not to be an altogether repelling one. Hence the further
directions in ver. 44: purchased servants, who had been politi-
cally incorporated as Israel's property, were to be entirely in-
corporated by circumcision, so as even to take part in the
the patriarchs in Gen. v. and xi. The view held by the Seventy became
traditional in the synagogue, and the Apostle Paul followed it in Gal. iii. 17,
where he reckoned the interval between the promise to Abraham and the
giving of the law as 430 years, the question of chronological exactness
having no bearing upon his subject at the time.
THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY.
32 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
Passover. But settlers, and servants working for wages, were
not to eat of it, for they stood in a purely external relation,
which might be any day dissolved. 3 ?3K, lit. to eat at anything,
to take part in the eating (Lev. xxii. 11). The deeper ground
for this was, that in this meal Israel was to preserve and celebrate
its unity and fellowship with Jehovah. This was the meaning
of the regulations, which were repeated in vers. 46 and 47 from
vers. 4, 9, and 10, where they had been already explained. If,
therefore, a foreigner living among the Israelites wished to keep
the Passover, he was first of all to be spiritually incorporated
into the nation of Jehovah by circumcision (ver. 48). DB nfe'jn :
" And he has made (i.e. made ready) a passover to Jehovah, let
evert/ male be circumcised to him (i.e. he . himself, and the male
members of his house), and then he may draw near (sc. to Jeho-
vah) to keep it." The first fiEW denotes the wish or intention to
do it, the second, the actual execution of the wish. The words
133"ia, 13, 3E^Pi, and l^b, are all indicative of non-Israelites.
"Ojrja was applied quite generally to any foreigner springing
from another nation ; 13 was a foreigner living for a shorter or
longer time in the midst of the Israelites ; 3t5fai, lit. a dweller,
settler, was one who settled permanently among the Israelites,
without being received into their religious fellowship ; "• , 3B» was
the non-Israelite, who worked for an Israelite for wages. — Ver.
49. There was one law with reference to the Passover which
was applicable both to the native and the foreigner : no uncir-
cumcised man was to be allowed to eat of it. — Ver. 50 closes
the instructions concerning the Passover with the statement that
the Israelites carried them out, viz. in after times (e.g. Num. ix.
5) ; and in ver. 51 the account of the exodus from Egypt is also
brought to a close. All that Jehovah promised to Moses in
chap. vi. 6 and 26 had now been fulfilled. But although ver.
51 is a concluding formula, and so belongs to the account just
closed, Abenezra was so far right in wishing to connect this verse
' with the commencement of the following chapter, that such con-
cluding formulae generally serve to link together the different
incidents, and therefore not only wind up what goes before, but
introduce what has yet to come.
Chap. xiii. 1-16. Sanctification of the First-born, and
Promulgation of the Law for the Feast of Mazzoth.
Digitized by
Google
chap. xra. 1-16. 33
— Vers. 1, 2. The sanctification of the first-horn was closely-
connected with the Passover. By this the deliverance of the
Israelitish first-born was effected, and the object of this deliver-
ance was their sanctification. Because Jehovah had delivered
the first-born of Israel, they were to be sanctified to Him. If
the Israelites completed their communion with Jehovah in the
Passover, and celebrated the commencement of their divine
standing in the feast of unleavened bread, they gave uninter-
rupted effect to their divine sonship in the sanctification of the
first-born. For this reason, probably, the sanctification of the
first-born was commanded by Jehovah at Succoth, immediately
after the exodus, and contemporaneously with the institution of
the seven days' feast of Mazzoth (cf. chap. ii. 15), so that the
place assigned it in the historical record is the correct one; whereas
the divine appointment of the feast of Mazzoth had been men-
tioned before (chap. xii. 15 sqq.), and the communication of that
appointment to the people was all that remained to be mentioned
here. — Ver. 2. Every first-born of man and beast was to be
sanctified to Jehovah, i.e. given up to Him for His service. As
the expression, "all the first-born," applied to both man and
beast, the explanation is added, " everything that opens the womb
among the Israelites, of man and beast" D ^"'3 ">£? for "K3B"73
Drn (ver. 12) : ?3 is placed like an adjective after the noun, as
in Num. viii. 16, ?3 "fa? for "rt33"v3, Stavoiryov iraaav pqrpav for
irav Biavolyov fi^rpav (ver. 12, LXX.). WH "fy : " it is Mine," it
belongs to Me. This right to the first-born was not founded upon
the fact, that " Jehovah was the Lord and Creator of all things,
and as every created object owed its life to Him, to Him should
its life be entirely devoted," as Kurtz maintains, though without
scriptural proof} but in Num. iii. 13 and viii. 17 the ground of
the claim is expressly mentioned, viz. that on the day when Je-
hovah smote all the first-born of Egypt, He sanctified to Him-
self all the first-born of the Israelites, both of man and beast.
Hence the sanctification of the first-born rested not upon the
deliverance of the first-born sons from the stroke of the destroyer
through the atoning blood of the paschal lamb, but upon the
fact that God sanctified them for Himself at that time, and
therefore delivered them. But Jehovah sanctified the first-born
of Israel to Himself by adopting Israel as His first-born son (chap.
iv. 22), or as His possession. Because Israel had been chosen
PENT. — VOL. II. C
Digitized by
Google
34 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
as the nation of Jehovah, its first-born of man and beast were
spared, and for that reason they were henceforth to be sanctified
to Jehovah. In what way, is more clearly defined in vers. 12 sqq.
Vers. 3-10. The directions as to the seven days' feast of
uuleavened bread (chap. xii. 15-20) were made known by Moses
to the people on the day of the exodus, at the first station,
namely, Succoth ; but in the account of this, only the most im-
portant points are repeated, and the yearly commemoration is
enjoined. In ver. 3, Egypt is called a " slave-house," inasmuch
as Israel was employed in slave-labour there, and treated as a
slave population (cf. chap. xx. 2 ; Deut. v. 6, vi. 12, etc.). *P pth
" strength of hand" in vers. 3, 14, and 16, is more emphatic
than the more usual f^TH *i* (chap. iii. 19, etc.). — On ver. 5, see
chap. iii. 8, and xii. 25. In ver. 6, the term "feast to Jehovah"
points to the keeping of the seventh day by a holy convocation
and the suspension of work (chap. xii. 16). It is only of the
seventh day that this is expressly stated, because it was under-
stood as a matter of course that the first was a feast of Jehovah.
— Ver. 8. "Because of that which Jehovah did to me" (TH in a.
relative sense, is qui, for "itft?, see Ewald,§ 331) : sc. u l eat un-
leavened bread," or, " I observe this service." This completion of
the imperfect sentence follows readily from the context, and the
whole verse may be explained from chap. xii. 26, 27. — Ver. 9. The
festival prescribed was to be to Israel "for a sign upon its hand,
and for a memorial between the eyes." These words presuppose
the custom of wearing mnemonic signs upon the hand and fore-
head ; but they are not to be traced to the heathen custom of
branding soldiers and slaves with marks upon the hand and fore-
head. For the parallel passages in Deut. vi. 8 and xi. 18, " bind
them for a sign upon your hand," are proofs that the allusion is
neither to branding nor writing on the hand. Hence the sign
upon the hand probably consisted of a bracelet round the wrist,
and the ziccaron between the eyes, of a band worn upon the fore-
head. The words are then used figuratively, as a proverbial
expression employed to give emphasis to the injunction to bear
this precept continually in mind, to be always mindful to observe
it. This is still more apparent from the reason assigned, " that
the law of Jehovah may be in thy mouth" For it was not by
mnemonic slips upon the hand and forehead that a law was so
placed in the mouth as to be talked of continually (Deut. vi. 7,
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIII. 1-16. 35
xi. 19), but by the reception of it into the heart and its continual
fulfilment. (See also ver. 16.) As the origin and meaning of
the festival were to be talked of in connection with the eating of
unleavened bread, so conversation about the law of Jehovah was
introduced at the same time, and the obligation to keep it re-
newed and brought vividly to mind. — Ver. 10. This ordinance
the Israelites were to keep ^^top, " at its appointed time" (i.e.
from the 15th to the 21st Abib), — "from days to days" i.e. as
often as the days returned, therefore from year to year (cf . Judg.
xi. 40, xxi. 19 ; 1 Sam. i. 3, ii. 19).
In vers. 11-16, Moses communicated to the people the law
briefly noticed in ver. 2, respecting the sanctification of the first-
born. This law was to come into force when Israel had taken
possession of the promised land. Then everything which opened
the womb was to be given up to the Lord, njrp? "Vaifii : to cause
to pass over to Jehovah, to consecrate or give up to Him as a
sacrifice (cf. Lev. xviii. 21). In " all that openeth the womb"
the first-born of both man and beast are included (ver. 2). This
general expression is then particularized in three clauses, com-
mencing with »1 : (a) npna cattle, i.e. oxen, sheep, and goats, as
clean domestic animals, but only the males ; (b) asses, as the
most common of the unclean domestic animals, instead of the
whole of these animals, Num. xviii. 15 ; (c) the first-born of the
children of Israel. The female first-born of man and beast were
exempted from consecration. Of the clean animals the first-
born male (10B abbreviated from Drn "IBB, and "tiE* from the
Chaldee "UK* to throw, the dropped young one) was to belong
to Jehovah, i.e. to be sacrificed to Him (ver. 15, and Num. xviii.
17). This law is still further explained in chap. xxii. 29, where it
is stated that the sacrificing was not to take place till the eighth
day after the birth ; and in Deut. xv. 21, 22, it is still further
modified by the command, that an animal which had any fault,
and was either blind or lame, was not to be sacrificed, but to be
slain and eaten at home, like other edible animals. These two
rules sprang out of the general instructions concerning the sacri-
ficial animals. The first-born of the ass was to be redeemed
with a male lamb or kid (nt?, as at chap. xii. 3) ; and if not re-
deemed, it was to be killed. *["$> : from I^V the nape, to break
the neck (Deut. xxi. 4, 6). The first-born sons of Israel were
also to be consecrated to Jehovah as a sacrifice ; not indeed in
Digitized by
Google
3(5 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
the manner of the heathen, by slaying and burning upon the
altar, but by presenting them to the Lord as living sacrifices,
devoting all their powers of body and mind to His service. In-
asmuch as the first birth represented all the births, the whole
nation was to consecrate itself to Jehovah, and present itself as
a priestly nation in the consecration of the first-born. But since
this consecration had its foundation, not in nature, but in the
grace of its call, the sanctification of the first birth cannot be
deduced from the separation of the first-born to the priesthood.
This view, which was very prevalent among early writers, has
been thoroughly overthrown by Outram (de Sacrif. 1, c. 4) and
Vitringa (observv. ii. c. 2, pp. 272 sqq.). As the priestly character
of the nation did not give a title in itself to the administration of
the priesthood within the theocracy, so the first-born were not
eo ipso chosen as priests through their consecration to Jehovah.
In what way they were to consecrate their life to the Lord, de-
pended upon the appointment of the Lord, which was, that they
were to perform the non-priestly work of the sanctuary, to be
servants of the priests in their holy service. Even this work
was afterwards transferred to the Levites (Num. iii.). At the
same time the obligation was imposed upon the people to redeem
their first-born sons from the service which was binding upon
them, but was now transferred to the Levites, who were substi-
tuted for them ; in other words, to pay five shekels of silver per
head to the priesthood (Num. iii. 47, xviii. 16). In anticipation
of this arrangement, which was to be introduced afterwards, the
redemption (p~}&) of the male first-born is already established
here. — On ver. 14, see chap. xii. 26. ">no : to-morrow, for the
future generally, as in Gen. xxx. 33. ntftTlD: what does this
mean ? quid sibi vult hoc prceceptum ac primogenitura (Jonathan).
—Ver. 15. un^ ne>j?ri : « he made hard" (sc. his heart, cf. chap,
vii. 3) " to let us go." The sanctification of the first-born is en-
forced in ver. 16 in the same terms as the keeping of the feast of
Mazzoth in ver. 9, with this exception, that instead of JTDJ? we
have nbtpto^>, as in Deut. vi. 8, and xi. 18. The word nbBto sig-
nifies neither amulet nor arlrffutra, but " binding" or head-
bands, as is evident from the Ohaldee KBtpto armlet (2 Sam. i.
10), RHBBto tiara (Esth. viii. 15; Ezek.'xxiv. 17, 23). This
command was interpreted literally by the Talmudists, and the
use of tephillim, phylacteries (Matt, xxiii. 5), founded upon
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIII. 1-16. 37
it j 1 the Caraites, on the contrary, interpreted it figuratively, as a
proverbial expression for constant reflection upon, and fulfilment
of, the divine commands. The correctness of the latter is obvi-
ous from the words themselves, which do not say that the com-'
mands are to be written upon scrolls, but only that they are to
be to the Israelites for signs upon the hand, and for bands be-
tween the eyes, i.e. they are to be kept in view like memorials
upon the forehead and the hand. The expression in Deut. vi. 8,
" Thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they
shall be as frontlets between thine eyes," does not point at all to
the symbolizing of the divine commands by an outward sign to
be worn upon the hand, or to bands with passages of the law in-
scribed upon them, to be worn on the forehead between the eyes ;
nor does the u advance in Deut. vi. 8 from heart to word, and
from word to hand or act," necessarily lead to the peculiar no-
tion of Sehitltz, that " the sleeve and turban were to be used as
reminders of the divine commands, the former by being fastened
to the hand in a peculiar way, the latter by an end being
brought down upon the forehead." The line of thought referred
to merely expresses the idea, that the Israelites were not only to
retain the commands of God in their hearts, and to confess them
with the mouth, but to fulfil them with the hand, or in act and
deed, and thus to show themselves in their whole bearing as the
guardians and observers of the law. As the hand is the medium
of action, and carrying in the hand represents handling, so the
space between the eyes, or the forehead, is that part of the body
which is generally visible, and what is worn there is worn to be
seen. This figurative interpretation is confirmed and placed be-
yond doubt by such parallel passages as Prov. iii. 3, " Bind them
(the commandments) about thy neck ; write them upon the tables
of thine heart" (cf. vers. 21, 22, iv. 21, vi. 21, 22, vii. 3).
1 Possibly these scrolls were originally nothing more than a literal com-
pliance with the figurative expression, or a change of the figure into a sym-
bol, so that the custom did not arise from a pure misunderstanding ; though
at a later period the symbolical character gave place more and more to the
casual misinterpretation. On the phylacteries generally, see my Archao-
logie and Herzog's CycL
Digitized by
Google
THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
JOURNEY FROM SUCCOTH, AND PASSAGE THROUGH THE RED
SEA.— CHAP. XIII. 17-XIV. 31.
Chap. xiii. 17-22. Journey from Succoth to Etham. —
Succoth, Israel's first place of encampment after their departure,
was probably the rendezvous for the whole nation, so that it
was from this point that they first proceeded in an orderly
march. The shortest and most direct route from Egypt to
Canaan would have been by the road to Gaza, in the land of the
Philistines ; but God did not lead them by this road, lest they
should repent of their movement as soon as the Philistines
opposed them, and so desire to return to Egypt. }B : fiy, after
">OS to say (to himself), i.e. to think, with the subordinate idea
of anxiety. Th'e Philistines were very warlike, and would
hardly have failed to resist the entrance of the Israelites into
Canaan, of which they had taken possession of a very large
portion. But the Israelites were not prepared for such a con-
flict, as is sufficiently evident from their despair, in chap. xiv. 10
sqq. For this reason God made them turn round (3D2 for 3?',
see Ges. § 67) by the way of the desert of the Red Sea. Pre-
vious to the account of their onward march, it is still further
stated in vers. 18, 19, that they went out equipped, and took
Joseph's bones with them, according to his last request. D'tSW,
from t?pn lumbus, lit. lumbis accincti, signifies equipped, as a
comparison of this word as it is used in Josh. i. 14} iv. 12, with
DWn in Num. xxxii. 30, 32, Deut. iii. 18, places beyond all
doubt ; that is to say, not u armed," Ka0a>vXurfievoi (Sym.), but
prepared for the march, as contrasted with fleeing in disorder
like fugitives. For this reason they were able to fulfil Joseph's
request, from which fact Calvin draws, the following conclusion :
" In the midst of their adversity the people had never lost sight
of the promised redemption. For unless the celebrated adjura-
tion of Joseph had been a subject of common conversation
among them all, Moses would never have thought of it." —
Ver. 20. From Succoth they went to Etham. With regard to
the situation of Succoth (from ribD huts, probably a shepherd
encampment), only so much can be determined, that this place
was to the south-east of Raemses, on the way to Etham. Etham
was " at the end of the desert," which is called the desert of
Etham in Num. xxxiii. 8, and the desert of Shur (Jifar, see
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XUI. 17-22. 39
Gen. xvi. 7) in Ex. xv. 22 ; so that it was where Egypt ends
and the desert of Arabia begins, in a line which carves from the
northern extremity of the Gulf of Arabia up to the Birket
Temseh, or Crocodile Lake, and then on to Lake Menzalet.
According to the more precise statements of travellers, this line
is formed from the point of the gulf northwards, by a broad
sandy tract of land to the east of Ajrud, which never rises
more than about three feet above the water-mark (Robinson,
Pal. i. p. 80). It takes in the banks of the old canal, which
commence, about an hour and a half to the north of Suez, and
run northwards for a distance which Seetzen accomplished in 4
hours upon camels (Rob. Pal. i. p. 548 ; Seetzen, R. iii. pp. 151,
152). Then follow the so-called Bitter Lakes, a dry, sometimes
swampy basin, or deep white salt plain, the surface of which,
according to the measurements of French engineers, is 40 or
50 feet lower than the ordinary water-mark at Suez. On the
north this basin is divided from the Birket Temseh by a still
higher tract of land, the so-called Isthmus of Arbek. Hence
" Etham at the end of the desert" is to be sought for either on
the Isthmus of Arbek, in the neighbourhood of the later Sera-
peum, or at the southern end of the Bitter Lakes. The distance
is a conclusive argument against the former", and in favour of
the latter ; for although Seetzen travelled from Suez to Arbek
in 8 hours, yet according to the accounts of the French savan,
du Bois Aym.6, who passed through this basin several times,
from the northern extremity of the Bitter Lakes to Suez is
60,000 metres (16 hours' journey), — a distance so great, that the
children of Israel could not possibly have gone from Etham to
Haehiroth in a day's march. Hence we must look for Etham
at the southern extremity of the basin of the Bitter Lake, 1
which Israel might reach in two days from Abu Keishib, and
then on the third day arrive at the plain of Suez, between
Ajrud and the sea. Succoth, therefore, must be sought on the
1 There is no force in the objection to this situation, that according to
different geognostic indications, the Gulf of Suez formerly stretched much
farther north, and covered the basin of the Bitter Lake ; for there is no
evidence that it reached as far as this in the time of Moses ; and the state-
ments of early writers as to the position of Heroopolis in the inner corner of
the Arabian Gulf, and not far to the north of Klysma, furnish no clear evi-
dence of this, as Knobel has already observed.
Digitized by
Google
40 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
•western border of the Bitter Lake. — Vers. 21, 22. From Ethatn,
at the edge of the desert which separates Egypt from Asia, the
Israelites were to enter the pathless desert, and leave the inha-
bited country. Jehovah then undertook to direct the march, and
give them a safe-conduct, through a miraculous token of His
presence. Whilst it is stated in vers. 17, 18, that Elohim led
them and determined the direction of their road, to show that
they did not take the course, which they pursued, upon their own
judgment, but by the direction of God ; in vers 21, 22, it is said
that " Jehovah went before them by day in a pillar of cloud, to
lead them the way, and by night in a pillar of fire, to give them
light, to go by day and night," i.e. that they might march at all
hours. 1 To this sign of the divine presence and guidance there
was a natural analogon in the caravan fire, which consisted of
small iron vessels or grates, with wood fires burning in them,
fastened at the end of long poles, and carried as a guide in front
of caravans, and, according to Curtius (de gestis Alex. M. V.
2, 7), in trackless countries in the front of armies also, and by
which the direction of the road was indicated in the day-time
by the smoke, and at night by the light of the fire. There was
a still closer analogy in the custom of the ancient Persians, as
described by Curtius (iii. 3, 9), of carrying fire, u which they
called sacred and eternal," in silver altars, in front of the army.
But the pillar of cloud and fire must not be confounded with
any such caravan and army fire, or set down as nothing more
than a mythical conception, or a dressing up of this natural
custom. The cloud was not produced by an ordinary caravan
fire, nor was it " a mere symbol of the presence of God, which
derived all its majesty from the belief of the Israelites, that
Jehovah was there in the midst of them," according to Kdster's
attempt to idealize the rationalistic explanation ; but it had a
miraculous origin and a supernatural character. We are not to
regard the phenomenon as consisting of two different pillars,
that appeared alternately, one of cloud, and the other of fire.
1 Knobel is quite wrong in affirming, that according to the primary
work, the cloud was first instituted after the erection of the tabernacle.
For in the passages cited in proof of this (chap. xl. 34 sqq. ; Num. iz. 15
sqq., x. 11, 12, cf. xvii. 7), the cloud is invariably referred to, with the
definite article, as something already known, so that all these passages refer
to ver. 21 of the present chapter.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIII. 17-22. 41
There was but one pillar of both cloud and fire (chap. xiv. 24) ;
for even when shining in the dark, it is still called the pillar of
cloud (chap. xiv. 19), or the cloud (Num. ix. 21) ; so that it was
a cloud with a dark side and a bright one, causing darkness and
also lighting the night (xiv. 20), or " a cloud, and fire in it by
night" (xl. 38). Consequently we have to imagine the cloud as
the covering of the fire, so that by day it appeared as a dark
cloud in contrast with the light of the sun, but by night as a
fiery splendour, " a fire-look" (e'S'ntriDS, Num. ix. 15, 16).
When this cloud went before the army of Israel, it assumed
the form of a column ; so that by day it resembled a dark
column of smoke rising up towards heaven, and by night a
column of fire, to show the whole army what direction to take.
But when it stood still above the tabernacle, or came down upon
it, it most probably took the form of a round globe of cloud ; and
when it separated the Israelites from the Egyptians at the Red
Sea, we have to imagine it spread out like a bank of cloud,
forming, as it were, a dividing wall. In this cloud Jehovah, or
the Angel of God, the visible representative of the invisible God
under the Old Testament, was really present with the people of
Israel, so that He spoke to Moses and gave him His command-
ments out of the cloud. In this, too, appeared " the glory of
the Lord" (chap. xvi. 10, xl. 34 ; Num. xvii. 7), the Shechinah
of the later Jewish theology. The fire in the pillar of cloud
was the same as that in which the Lord revealed Himself to
Moses out of the bush, and afterwards descended upon Sinai
amidst thunder and lightning in a thick cloud (chap. xix. 16, 18).
It was a symbol of the " zeal of the Lord," and therefore was
enveloped in a cloud, which protected Israel by day from heat,
sunstroke, and pestilence (Isa. iv. 5, 6, xlix. 10 ; Ps. xci. 5, 6,
cxxi. 6), and by night lighted up its path by its luminous splen-
dour, and defended it from the terrors of the night and from
all calamity (Ps. xxvii. 1 sqq., xci. 5, 6) ; but which also threat-
ened sudden destruction to those who murmured against God
(Num. xvii. 10), and sent out a devouring fire against the
rebels and consumed them (Lev. x. 2 ; Num. xvi. 35). As
Sartorius has aptly said, " "We must by no means regard it as a.
mere appearance or a poetical figure, and just as little as a mere
mechanical clothing of elementary forms, such, for example, as
storm-clouds or natural fire. Just as little, too, must we sup-
Digitized by
Google
42 THE SECOND BOOK OF HOSES.
pose the visible and material part of it to have been an element
of the divine nature, which is purely spiritual. We must rather
regard it as a dynamic conformation, or a higher corporeal form,
composed of the earthly sphere and atmosphere, through the
determining influence of the personal and specific (speciem
f aciens) presence of God upon the earthly element, which cor-
poreal form God assumed and pervaded, that He might mani-
fest His own real presence therein." 1 — Ver. 22. This sign of the
presence of God did not depart from Israel so long as the people
continued in the wilderness.
Chap. xiv. Passage op the Israelites through the
Eed Sea; destruction of Pharaoh and his Army. —
Vers. 1, 2. At Etham God commanded the Israelites to turn
(3}t?) and encamp by the sea, before Pihachiroth, between Mig-
dol and the sea, before Baalzephon, opposite to it. In Num.
xxxiii. 7, the march is described thus: on leaving Etham they
turned up to (>t) Piliachiroth, which is before ( , ?.B"'? in the
front of) 'Baalzephon, and encamped before Migdol. The only
one of these places that can be determined with any certainty is
Pihachiroth, or Hachiroih (Num. xxxiii. 8, pi being simply the
Egyptian article), which name has undoubtedly been preserved
in the Ajrud mentioned by Edrisi in the middle of the twelfth
century. At present this is simply a fort, with a well 250 feet
deep, the water of which is so bitter, however, that camels can
hardly drink it. It stands on the pilgrim road from Kahira to
Mecca, four hours' journey to the north-west of Suez (vid. Ro-
binson, Pal. i. p. 65). A plain, nearly ten miles long and about
as many broad, stretches from Ajrud to the sea to the west of
1 " This is done," Sartorim proceeds to say, " not by His making His
own invisible nature visible, nor yet merely figuratively or ideally, but by
His rendering it objectively perceptible through the energy it excites, and
the glorious effects it produces. The curtain (velum) of the natural which
surrounds the Deity is moved and lifted (revelatur) by the word of His will,
and' the corresponding intention of His presence (per dextram Dei). But
this is effected not by His causing the light of His countenance, which is
unapproachable, to burst forth unveiled, but by His weaving out of the
natural element a holy, transparent veil, which, like the fiery cloud, both
shines and throws a shade, veils and unveils, so that it is equally true that
God dwells in light and that He dwells in darkness (2 Chron. vi. 1 ; 1 Tim.
vi. 16), as true that He can be found as that He must always be sought."
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIV. 8-9. 43
Suez, and from the foot of Atakah to the arm of the sea on the
north of Suez {Robinson, Pal. i. 65). This plain most pro-
bably served the Israelites as a place of encampment, so that
they encamped before, i.e. to the east of, Ajrud towards the sea.
The other places must also be sought in the neighbourhood of
Hachiroth (Ajrud), though no traces of them have been disco-
vered yet. Migdol cannot be the Migdol twelve Eoman miles
to the south of Pelusium, which formed the north-eastern bound-
ary of Egypt (Ezek. xxix. 10), for according to Num. xxxiii. 7,
Israel encamped before Migdol ; nor is it to be sought for in the
hill and mountain-pass called Montala by Burckfiardt, el Mun-
tala by Robinson (pp. 63, 64), two hours' journey to the north-
Vest of Ajrud, as Knobel supposes, for this hill lies too far to the
west, and when looked at from the sea is almost behind Ajrud;
so that the expression " encamping before Migdol" does not suit
this situation, not to mention the fact that a tower (?^?o) does
not indicate a watch-tower ("f-fO). Migdol was probably to the
south of Ajrud, on one of the heights of the At&kah, and near
it, though more to the south-east, Baalzeplwn (hcus Typhonis),
which Micliaelis and Forster suppose to be Heroopolis, whilst
Knobel places it on the eastern shore, and others to the south of
Hachiroth. If Israel therefore did not go straight into the de-
sert from Etham, on the border of the desert, but went south-
wards into the plain of Suez, to the west of the head of the Red
Sea, they were obliged to bend round, i.e. " to turn" from the
road they had taken first. The distance from Etham to the
place of encampment at Hachiroth must be at least a six hours'
journey (a tolerable day's journey, therefore, for a whole nation),
as the road from Suez to Ajrud takes four hours (Robinson, i.
p. 66V
Vers. 3-9. This turn in their route was not out of the way
for the passage through the Red Sea ; but apart from this, it was
not only out of the way, but a very foolish way, according to
human judgment. God commanded Moses to take this road, that
He might be honoured upon Pharaoh, and show the" Egyptians
that He was Jehovah (cf. vers. 30, 31). Pharaoh would say of
the Israelites, They have lost their way; they are wandering about
in confusion ; the desert has shut them in, as in a prison upon
which the door is shut (?V "tip as in Job xii. 14) ; and in his ob-
duracy he would resolve to go after them with his army, and
Digitized by
Google
44 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
bring them under his sway again. — Vers. 4 sqq. When it was
announced that Israel had fled, " the heart of Pharaoh and his
servants turned against the people" and they repented that they
had let them go. When and whence the information came,
we are not told. The common opinion, that it was brought after
the Israelites changed their route, has no foundation in the text.
For the change in Pharaoh's feelings towards the Israelites, «nd
his regret that he had let them go, were caused not by their
supposed mistake, but by their flight. Now the king and his
servants regarded the exodus as a flight, as soon as they recovered
from the panic caused by the death of the first-born, and began to
consider the consequences of the permission given to the people to
leave his service. This may have occurred as early as the second
day after the exodus. In that case, Pharaoh would have had
time to collect chariots and horsemen, and overtake the Israelites
at Hachiroth, as they could easily perform the same journey in
two days, or one day and a half, to which the Israelites had
taken more than three. "He yoked his chariot (had it yoked,
cf. 1 Kings vi. 14), and took his people (i.e. his warriors) with
him," viz. " six hundred chosen war chariots (ver. 7), and all the
chariots of Egypt" (sc. that he could get together in the time),
and " royal guards upon them all." D , ??t5', rpurrdiat, tristatae
qui et terni statores vocantur, nomen est secundi gradus post
regiam dignitatem (Jerome on Ezek. xxiii. 23), not charioteers
(see my Com. on 1 Kings ix. 22). According to ver. 9, the army
raised by Pharaoh consisted of chariot horses (331 DID), riding
horses (D^B, lit. runners, 1 Kings v. 6), and T'jn, the men be-
- longing to them. War chariots and cavalry were always the
leading force of the Egyptians (cf. Isa. xxxi. 1, xxxvi. 9). Three
times (vers. 4, 8, and 17) it is stated that Jehovah hardened
Pharaoh's heart, so that he pursued the Israelites, to show that
God had decreed this hardening, to glorify Himself in the judg-
ment and death of the proud king, who would not honour God,
the Holy One, in his life. " And the children of Israel were
going out with a high hand:" ver. 8 is a conditional clause in the
sense of, " although they went out" (Ewald, § 341). WJ T, the
high hand, is the high hand of Jehovah with the might which it
displayed (Isa. xxvi. 11), not the armed hand of the Israelites.
This is the meaning also in Num. xxxiii. 3 ; it is different in
Num. xv. 30. The very fact that Pharaoh did not discern the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIV. 10-29 45
lifting np of Jehovah's hand in the exodus of Israel displayed
the hardening of his heart. " Beside Pihachiroth :" see ver. 2.
Vers. 10-14. When the Israelites saw the advancing army
of the Egyptians, they were greatly alarmed ; for their situation
to human eyes was a very unfortunate one. Shut in on the east
by the sea, on the south and west by high mountains, and with
the army of the Egyptians behind them, destruction seemed in-
evitable, since they were neither outwardly armed nor inwardly
prepared for a successful battle. Although they cried unto the
Lord, they had no confidence in His help, notwithstanding all
the previous manifestations of the fidelity of the true God ; they
therefore gave vent to the despair of their natural heart in com-
plaints against Moses, who had brought them out of the servi-
tude of Egypt to give them up to die in the desert. " Hast thou,
because there were no graves at all (T$ Y?P, a double negation to
give emphasis) in Egypt, fetched us to die in the desert ?" Their
further words in ver. 12 exaggerated the true state of the case
from cowardly despair. For it was only when the oppression
increased, after Moses' first interview with Pharaoh, that they
complained of what Moses had done (chap. v. 21), whereas at
first they accepted his proposals most thankfully (chap. iv. 31),
and even afterwards implicitly obeyed his directions. — Ver. 13.
Moses met their unbelief and fear with the energy of strong
faith, and promised them such help from the Lord, that they
would never see again the Egyptians, whom they had seen that
day. DTPKl itPK Jogs no t mean § v rpoirov empd/care (LXX.),
quemadmodum vidistis (Ros., Kn.) ; but the sentence is inverted :
" The Egyptians, whom ye have seen to-day, ye will never see
again." — Ver. 14. u Jehovah will fight for you (D37, dat comm.),
but you will be silent," i.e. keep quiet, and not complain any
more (cf. Gen. xxxiv. 5).
Vers. 15-29. The words of Jehovah to Moses, u What criest
thou to Me?" imply that Moses had appealed to God for help, or
laid the complaints of the people before Him, and do not convey
any reproof, but merely an admonition to resolute action. The
people were to move forward, and Moses was to stretch out his
hand with his staff over the 3ea and divide it, so that the people
might go through the midst on dry ground. Vers. 17 and 18
repeat the promise in vers. 3, 4. The command and promise
were followed by immediate help (vers. 19-29). Whilst Moses
Digitized by
Google
46 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
divided the water with his staff, and thus prepared the way, the
angel of God removed from before the Israelites, and placed
himself behind them as a defence against the Egyptians, who
were following them. " Upon his chariots, and upon Ms horse-
men" (ver. 17), is in apposition to "all his Iwst;" as Pharaoh's
army consisted entirely of chariots and horsemen (cf. ver. 18).
— Ver. 20. u And it was the cloud and the darkness (sc. to the
Egyptians), and lighted up the night (sc. to the Israelites)." Fuit
nubes partim lucida et partim tenebricosa, ex una parte tenebricosa
fuit u&gyptiis, ex altera lucida Israelitis (Jonathan). Although
the article is striking in t\&n>?\, the difficulty is not to be removed,
as Ewald proposes, by substituting ^H™, " and as for the cloud,
it caused darkness;" for in that case the grammar would re-
quire the imperfect with i consec. This alteration of the text is
also rendered suspicious from the fact that both Onkelos and the
LXX. read and render the word as a substantive. — Vers. 21,
22. When Moses stretched out his hand with the staff (ver. 16)
over the sea, " Jehovah made the water go (flow away) by a strong
east wind the whole night, and made the sea into dry (ground), and
the water split itself" (i.e. divided by flowing northward and
southward); "and the Israelites went in the midst of the sea
(where the water had been driven away by the wind) in the dry,
and the water was a wall (i.e. a protection formed by the dam-
ming up of the water) on the rigid and on the left." D'liJ, the
east wind, which may apply either to the south-east or north-
east, as the Hebrew has special terms for the four quarters only.
Whether the wind blew directly from the east, or somewhat from
the south-east or north-east, cannot be determined, as we do not
know the exact spot where the passage was made. In any case,
/ the division of the water in both directions could only have been
effected by an east wind ; and although even now the ebb is
strengthened by a north-east wind, as Teschendorf says, and the
flood is driven so much to the south by a strong north-west wind
that the gulf can be ridden through, and even forded on foot, to
the north of Suez (v. Schub. Keise ii. p. 269), and " as a rule
the rise and fall of the water in the Arabian Gulf is nowhere so
dependent upon the wind as it is at Suez" (Wellsted, Arab. ii.
41, 42), the drying of the sea as here described cannot be ac-
counted for by an ebb strengthened by the east wind, because
the water is all driven southwards in the ebb, and not sent in
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIV. 1&-29. 47
two opposite directions. Such a division could only be produced
by a wind sent by God, and working with omnipotent force, in
connection with which the natural phenomenon of the ebb may
no doubt have exerted a subordinate influence. 1 The passage
was effected in the night, through the whole of which the wind
was blowing, and in the morning watch (between three and six
o'clock, ver. 24) it was finished.
As to the possibility of a whole nation crossing with their
flocks, Robinson concludes that this might have been accomplished
within the period of an extraordinary ebb, which lasted three, or
at the most four hours, and was strengthened by the influence of
a miraculous wind. " As the Israelites," he observes, " num-
bered more than two millions of persons, besides flocks and herds,
they would of course be able to pass but slowly. If the part left
dry were broad enough to enable them to cross in a body one
thousand abreast, which would require a space of more than half
a mile in breadth (and is perhaps the largest supposition admis-
sible), still the column would be more than two thousand per-
sons in depth, and in all probability could not have extended less
than two miles. It would then have occupied at least an hour
in passing over its own length, or in entering the sea ; and de-
ducting this from the largest time intervening, before the Egyp-
tians also have entered the sea, there will remain only time
enough, under the circumstances, for the body of the Israelites
to have passed, at the most, over a space of three or four miles."
(Researches in Palestine, vol. i. p. 84.)
But as the dividing of the water cannot be accounted for by
an extraordinary ebb, even though miraculously strengthened,
we have no occasion to limit the time allowed for the crossing to
the ordinary period of an ebb. If God sent the wind, which
divided the water and laid the bottom dry, as soon as night set
in, the crossing might have begun at nine o'clock in the evening,
if not before, and lasted till four or five o'clock in the morning
1 But as the ebb at Suez leaves the shallow parts of the gulf so far dry,
when a strong wind is blowing, that it is possible to cross over them, we
may understand how the legend could have arisen among the Ichthyophagi
of that neighbourhood (DM. Sic. 3, 89) and even the inhabitants of
Memphis (Emeb. prasp. ev. 9, 27), that the Israelites took advantage of a
strong ebb, and how modern writers like Clericus have tried to show that
the passage through the sea may be so accounted for.
Digitized by
Google
48 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
(see ver. 27). By this extension of the time we gain enough for
the flocks, which Robinson has left out of his calculation. The
Egyptians naturally followed close upon the Israelites, from
whom they were only divided by the pillar of cloud and fire ;
and when the rear of the Israelites had reached the opposite
shore, they were in the midst of the sea. And in the morning
watch Jehovah cast a look upon them in the pillar of cloud and
fire, and threw their army into confusion (ver. 24). The breadth
of the gulf at the point in question cannot be precisely deter-
mined. At the narrowest point above Suez, it is only two-thirds
of a mile in breadth, or, according to Niebuhr, 3450 feet ; but
it was probably broader formerly, and even now is so farther up,
opposite to Tell Kolzum (Bob. i. pp. 84 and 70). The place
where the Israelites crossed must have been broader, otherwise
the Egyptian army, with more than six hundred chariots and
many horsemen, could not have been in the sea and perished
there when the water returned. — " And Jehovah looked at the
army of the Egyptians in (with) the pillar of cloud and fire, and
troubled it." This look of Jehovah is to be regarded as the ap-
pearance of fire suddenly bursting forth from the pillar of cloud
that was turned towards the Egyptians, which threw the Egyp-
tian army into alarm and confusion, and not as " a storm with
thunder and lightning," as Josephus and even Rosenmuller as-
sume, on the ground of Ps. lxxviii. 18, 19, though without
noticing the fact that the psalmist has merely given a poetical
version of the event, and intends to show " how all the powers
of nature entered the service of the majestic revelation of Je-
hovah, when. He judged Egypt and set Israel free" {Delitzsch).
The fiery look of Jehovah was a much more stupendous pheno-
menon than a storm ; hence its effect was incomparably grander,
viz. a state of confusion in which the wheels of the chariots were
broken off from the axles, and the Egyptians were therefore
impeded in their efforts to escape. — Ver. 25. " And (Jehovah)
made the wheels of his (the Egyptian's) chariots give way, and
made, that he (the Egyptian) drove in difficulty." Jro to drive a
chariot (2 Sam. vi. 3, cf. 2 Kings ix. 20).— Vers. 26', 27. Then
God directed Moses to stretch out his staff again over the sea,
and the sea came back with the turning of the morning (when
the morning turned, or approached) to its position (tn'W peren-
nitas, the lasting or permanent position), and the Egyptians were
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIV. 30, 81 i XV. 1-21. 49
flying to meet it. u When the east wind which divided the sea
ceased to blow, the sea from the north and south began to flow
together on the western side;" whereupon, to judge from chap
xv. 10, the wind began immediately to blow from the west, and
drove the waves in the face of the flying Egyptians. " And
thus Jehovah shook the Egyptians (i.e. plunged them into the
greatest confusion) in the midst of the sea," so that Pharaoh's
chariots and horsemen, to the very last man, were buried in the
waves.
Vers. 30, 31. This miraculous deliverance of Israel from the
power of Egypt, through the mighty hand of their God, pro-
duced so wholesome a fear of the Lord, that they believed in
Jehovah, and His servant Moses. — Ver. 31. " The great hand :"
i.e. the might which Jehovah had displayed upon Egypt. In ad-
dition to the glory of God through the judgment upon Pharaoh
(vers. 4, 17), the guidance of Israel through the sea was also
designed to establish Israel still more firmly in the fear of the
Lord and in faith. But faith in the Lord was inseparably con-
nected with faith in Moses as the servant of the Lord. Hence
the miracle was wrought through the hand and staff of Moses.
But this second design of the miraculous guidance of Israel did
not exclude the first, viz. glory upon Pharaoh. From this
manifestation of Jehovah's omnipotence, the Israelites were to
discern not only the merciful Deliverer, but also the holy Judge
of the ungodly, that they might grow in the fear of God, as
well as in the faith which they had already shown, when,
trusting in the omnipotence of Jehovah, they had gone, as
though upon dry land (Heb. xi. 29), between the watery walls
which might at any moment have overwhelmed them.
MOSES' SONG AT THE BED SEA. — CHAP. XV. 1-21.
In the song of praise which Moses and the children of Israel
sang at the Red Sea, in celebration of the wonderful works of
Jehovah, the congregation of Israel commemorated the fact of
its deliverance and its exaltation into the nation of God. By
their glorious deliverance from the slave-house of Egypt, Jeho-
vah had practically exalted the seed of Abraham into His own
nation ; and in the destruction of Pharaoh and his host, He had
glorified Himself as God of the gods and King of the heathen,
PENT. — VOL. II. D
Digitized by
Google
50 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
■whom no power on earth could defy with impunity. As the
fact of Israel's deliverance from the power of its oppressors is of
everlasting importance to the Church of the Lord in its conflict
with the ungodly powers of the world, in which the Lord con-
tinually overthrows the enemies of His kingdom, as He over-
threw Pharaoh and his horsemen in the depths of the sea : so
Moses' song at the Red Sea furnishes the Church of the Lord
with the materials for its songs of praise in all the great con-
flicts which it has to sustain, during its onward course, with the
powers of the world. Hence not only does the key-note of this
song resound through all Israel's songs, in praise of the glorious
works of Jehovah for the good of His people (see especially
Isa. xii.),. hut the song of Moses the servant of God will also be
sung, along with the song of the Lamb, by the conquerors who
stand upon the " sea of glass," and have gained the victory over
the beast and his image (Rev. xv. 3).
The substance of this song, which is entirely devoted to the
praise and adoration of Jehovah, is the judgment inflicted upon
the heathen power of the world in the fall of Pharaoh, and the
salvation which flowed from this judgment to Israel. Although
Moses is not expressly mentioned as the author of the song, its
authenticity, or Mosaic authorship, is placed beyond all doubt
by both the contents and the form. The song is composed of
three gradually increasing strophes, each of which commences
with the praise of Jehovah, and ends with a description of the
overthrow of the Egyptian host (vers. 2-5, 6-10, 11-18). The
theme announced in the introduction in ver. 1 is thus treated in
three different ways ; and whilst the omnipotence of God, dis-
played in the destruction of the enemy, is the prominent topic
in the first two strophes, the third depicts with prophetic confi-
dence the fruit of this glorious event in the establishment of
Israel, as a kingdom of Jehovah, in the promised inheritance.
Modern criticism, it is true, has taken offence at this prophetic
insight into the future, and rejected the song of Moses, just be-
cause the wonders of God are carried forward in vers. 16, 17,
beyond the Mosaic times. But it was so natural a thing that,
after the miraculous deliverance of the Israelites from Egypt,
they should turn their eyes to Canaan, and, looking forward
with certainty to the possession of the promised land, should an-
ticipate with believing confidence the foundation of a sanctuary
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XV. 1A-5. 51
there, in which their God would dwell with them, that none but
those who altogether reject the divine mission of Moses, and set
down the mighty works of God in Egypt as myths, could ever
deny to Moses this anticipation and prospect Even Ewald
admits that this grand song of praise " was probably the im-
mediate effect of first enthusiasm in the Mosaic age," though
he also ignores the prophetic character of the song, and denies
the reality of any of the supernatural wonders of the Old Tes-
tament. There is nothing to prevent our understanding the
words, " then sang Moses," as meaning that Moses not only
sang this song with the Israelites, but composed it for the con-
gregation to the praise of Jehovah.
Vers. 16-5. Introduction and first strophe. — The introduc-
tion, which contains the theme of the song, " Sing will I to the
Lord, for highly exalted is He, horse and his rider He hath
thrown into the sea," was repeated, when sung, as an anti-strophe
by a chorus of women, with Miriam at their head (cf. vers.
20, 21) ; whether after every verse, or only at the close of the
longer strophes, cannot be determined, nw to arise, to grow
up, trop. to show oneself exalted ; connected with an inf. abs.
to give still further emphasis. Jehovah had displayed His supe-
riority to all earthly power by casting horses and riders, the
proud army of the haughty Pharaoh, into the sea. This had
filled His people with rejoicing : (ver. 2), " My strength and
song is J ah, He became my salvation ; He is my God, whom I
extol, my father's God, whom I exalt." TjJ strength, might, not
praise or glory, even in Ps. viii. 2. TTipT, an old poetic form for
""not, from ">»T, primarily to hum ; thence T3T tyaXKeiv, to play
music, or sing with a musical accompaniment. J ah, the con-
centration of Jehovah, the God of salvation ruling the course of
history with absolute freedom (cf. vol. i. p. 74), has passed from
this song into the Psalms, but is restricted to the higher style
of poetry. u For He became salvation to me, granted me deliver-
ance and salvation ;" on the use of van consec. in explanatory
clauses, see Gen. xxvi. 12. This clause is taken from our song,
and introduced in Isa. xii. 2, Ps. cxviii. 14. yK nt : this Jah,
such an one is my God. *STOK : Hiphil of nu, related to nto, mto,
to be lovely, delightful, Hiph. to extol, to praise, Sogdo-a, glorifi-
cabo (LXX., Vulg.). " The God of my father ;" i.e. of Abraham
as the ancestor of Israel, or, as in chap. iii. 6, of the three
Digitized by
Google
52 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
patriarchs combined. What He promised them (Gen. xv. 14,
xlvi. 3, 4) He had now fulfilled. — Ver. 3. "Jehovah is a man of
war:" one who knows how to make war, and possesses the
power to destroy His foes. u Jehovah is His name :" i.e. He
has just proved Himself to be the God who rules with un-
limited might. For (ver. 4) u Pharaoh's chariots and his might
(his military force) He cast into the sea, and the choice (the
chosen ones) of his knights (shelishim, see chap. xiv. 7) were
drowned in the Red Sea." — Ver. 5. " Floods cover them (*D^D3*,
defectively written for VD3* = *D3^, and the suffix *0 for to, only
used here) ; they go down into the deep like stone" which never
appears again.
Vers. 6-10. Jehovah had not only proved Himself to be a
true man of war in destroying the Egyptians, but also as the
glorious and strong one, who overthrows His enemies at the very
moment when they think they are able to destroy His people. —
Ver. 6. " Thy right hand, Jehovah, glorified in power (gloriously
equipped with power : on the Yod in T^*?, see Gen. xxxi. 39 ;
the form is masc, and JW, which is of common gender, is first
of all construed as a masculine, as in Prov. xxvii. 16, and then
as a feminine), Thy right lumd dashes in pieces the enemy."
JTJ = YT} : only used here, and in Judg. x. 8. The thought is
quite a general one : the right hand of Jehovah smites every
foe. This thought is deduced from the proof just seen of the
power of God, and is still further expanded in ver 7, " In the
fulness of Thy majesty Thou pullest down Thine opponents."
D^n generally applied to the pulling down of buildings ; then
used figuratively for the destruction of foes, who seek to de-
stroy the building (the work) of God ; in this sense here and
Ps. xxviii. 5. W?i> : those that rise up in hostility against a
man (Deut. xxxiii. 11 ; Ps. xviii. 40, etc.). " Thou lettest out
Thy burning heat, it devours them like stubble." fin, the burning
breath of the wrath of God, which Jehovah causes to stream
out like fire (Ezek. vii. 3), was probably a play upon the fiery
look cast upon the Egyptians from the pillar of cloud (cf. Isa.
ix. 18, x. 17 ; and on the last words, Isa. v. 24, Nah. i. 10). —
Vers. 8-10. Thus had Jehovah annihilated the Egyptians.
" And by the breath of Thy nostrils (i.e. the strong east wind sent
by God, which is described as the blast of the breath of His
nostrils ; cf. Ps. xviii. 16) ilie waters heaped themselves up (piled
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XV. 9-18. 53
themselves up, so that it was possible to go between them like
walls) ; tlie flowing ones stood like a heap" (13 cumulus; it occurs
in Josh. iii. 13, 16, and Ps. xxxiii. 7, lxxviii. 13, where it is bor-
rowed from this passage. DvTJ : the running, flowing ones ; a
poetic epithet applied to waves, rivers, or brooks, Ps. lxxviii. 16,
44 ; Isa. xliv. 3). " The waves congealed in the heart of the sea :"
a poetical description of the piling up of the waves like solid
masses.
Ver. 9. " The enemy said : I pursue, overtake, divide spoil, my
soul becomes full of them ; I draw my sword, my hand will root
them out." By these short clauses following one another with-
out any copula, the confidence of the Egyptian as he pursued
them breathing vengeance is very strikingly depicted. t?M : the
soul as the seat of desire, i.e. of fury, which sought to take
vengeance on the enemy, " to cool itself on them." B""tfn : to
drive from their possession, to exterminate (cf. Num. xiv. 12).
— Ver. 10. " Thou didst blow with Thy breath : the sea covered
them, they sank as lead in the mighty waters." One breath of
God was sufficient to sink the proud foe in the waves of the sea.
The waters are called D V 1 V ?K, because of the mighty proof of the
Creator's glory which is furnished by the waves as they rush
majestically along.
Vers. 11-18. Third strophe. On the ground of this glori-
ous act of God, the song rises in the third strophe into firm
assurance, that in His incomparable exaltation above all gods
Jehovah will finish the work of salvation, already begun, fill all
the enemies of Israel with terror at the greatness of His arm,
bring His people to His holy dwelling-place, and plant them on
the mountain of His inheritance. What the Lord had done
thus far, the singer regarded as a pledge of the future. — Ver.
11. " Who is like unto Thee among the gods, Jehovah (DvN :
not strong ones, but gods, Elohim, Ps. lxxxvi. 8, because none
of the many so-called gods could perform such deeds), who is
like unto Thee, glorified in holiness ?" God had glorified Him-
self in holiness through the redemption of His people and the
destruction of His foes ; so that Asaph could sing, " Thy way,
O God, is -in holiness" (Ps. lxxvii. 13). Ehp, holiness, is the
sublime and incomparable majesty of God, exalted above all the
imperfections and blemishes of the finite creature (yid. chap.
ads. 6).- " Fearful for praises, doing wonders." The bold ex-
Digitized by
Google
54 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
pression ripnn tnia conveys more than summe venerandus, a. colen-
dus laudibus, and signifies terrible to praise, terribilis laudibus.
As His rule among men is fearful (Ps. lxvi. 5), because He
performs fearful miracles, so it is only with fear and trembling
that man can sing songs of praise worthy of His wondrous works.
Omnium enim laudantium vires, linguas et mentes superant ideoque
magno cum timore et tremore eum laudant omnes angeli et sancti
(C. a Lap.). " Thou stretchest out Thy hand, the earth swallows
them" With these words the singer passes in survey all the
mighty acts of the Lord, which were wrapt up in this miraculous
overthrow of the Egyptians. The words no longer refer to the
destruction of Pharaoh and his host. What Egypt had experi-
enced would come upon all the enemies of the Lord and His
people. Neither the idea of the earth swallowing them, nor the
use of the imperfect, is applicable to the destruction of the Egyp-
tians (see vers. 1, 4, 5, 10, 19, where the perfect is applied to it
as already accomplished). — Ver. 13. " Thou leadest through Thy
mercy the people whom Thou redeemest; Thou guidest them
through Thy might to Thy holy habitation." The deliverance
from Egypt and guidance through the Red Sea were a pledge to
the redeemed people of their entrance into the promised land.
The holy habitation of God was Canaan (Ps. lxxviii. 54), which
had been consecrated as a sacred abode for Jehovah in the midst
of His people by the revelations made to the patriarchs there,
and especially by the appearance of God at Bethel (Gen. xxviii.
16 sqq., xxxi. 13, xxxv. 7). — Ver. 14. " People hear, they are
afraid; trembling seizes the inhabitants of Philistia." — Ver. 15.
" Then are the princes (alluphim, see Gen. xxxvi. 15) of Edom
confounded; the mighty men of Moab, trembling seizes them; all
the inJiabitants of Canaan despair." Dv'K, like D7HK in 2 Kings
xxiv. 15, scriptio plena for DyK, strong, powerful ones. As soon
as these nations should hear of the miraculous guidance of Israel
through the Red Sea, and Pharaoh's destruction, they would be
thrown into despair from anxiety and alarm, and would not op-
pose the march of Israel through their land. — Ver. 16. "Pear
and dread fall upon them ; for the greatness of Thine arm (the
adjective 7H& placed as a substantive before the noun) they are
dumb (^B'^ , from DOT) as stones, till Thy people pass through,
JehovaJi, till the people which Thou hast purchased pass through"
Israel was still on its march to Canaan, an evident proof that
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XV. 11-18. 55
vers. 13-15 do not describe what was past, but that future events
were foreseen in spirit, and are represented by the use of per-
fects as being quite as certain as if they bad already happened.
The singer mentions not only Edom and Moab, but Philistia
also, and the inhabitants of Canaan, as enemies who are so
paralyzed with terror, as to offer no resistance to the passage of
Israel through their territory ; whereas the history shows that
Edom did oppose their passing through its land, and they were
obliged to go round in consequence (Num. xx. 18 sqq. ; Deut. ii.
3, 8), whilst Moab attempted to destroy them through the power
of Balaam's curse (Num. xxii. 2 sqq.) ; and what the inhabi-
tants of Philistia and Canaan had to fear, was not their passing
through, but their conquest of the land. 1 We learn, however,
from Josh. ii. 9, 10 and ix. 9, that the report of Israel's miracu-
lous passage through the Bed Sea had reached to Canaan, and
filled its inhabitants with terror. — Ver. 17. " Thou wilt bring and
plant them in the mountain of Thine inheritance, the place which
Thou hast made for Thy dwelling-place, Jehovah, for the sanc-
tuary., Lord, which Thy. hands prepared" On the dagesh dirim.
in Enpp, see chap. ii. 3. The futures are not to be taken as ex-
pressive of wishes, but as simple predictions, and are not to be
twisted into preterites, as they have been by Knobel. The
" mountain of Jehovah's inheritance" was not the hill country of
Canaan (Deut. iii. 25), but the mountain which Jehovah had
prepared for a sanctuary (Ps. Ixxviii. 54), and chosen as a
dwelling-place through the sacrifice of Isaac. The planting of
Israel upon this mountain does not signify the introduction of
the Israelites into the promised land, but the planting of the
people of God in the house of the Lord (Ps. xcii. 14), in the
future sanctuary, where Jehovah would perfect His fellowship
with His people, and where the people would show themselves
by their sacrifices to be the " people of possession," and would
1 The fact that the inhabitants of Philistia and Canaan are described in
the same terms as Edom and Moab, is an unquestionable proof that this song
was composed at a time when the command to exterminate the Canaanites
had not yet been given, and the boundary of the territory to be captured
by the Israelites was not yet fixed ; in other words, that it was sung by
Moses and the Israelites after the passage through the Bed Sea. In the
words "QJP "IJJ in ver. 16, there is by no means the allusion to, or play upon,
the passage through the Jordan, which Knobel introduces.
Digitized by
Google
56 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES
serve Him for ever as their King. This was the goal, to which
the redemption from Egypt pointed, and to which the prophetic
foresight of Moses raised both himself and his people in this
song, as he beholds in spirit and ardently desires the kingdom of
Jehovah in its ultimate completion. 1 The song closes in ver. 18
with an inspiring prospect of the time, when " Jehovah will be
King (of His people) for ever and ever;" and in ver. 19, it is
dovetailed into the historical narrative by the repetition of the
fact to which it owed its origin, and by the explanatory " for,"
which points back to the opening verse.
Vers. 19-21. In the words " Pharaoh's horse, with his chariots
and horsemen," Pharaoh, riding upon his horse as the leader of
the army, is placed at the head of the enemies destroyed by
Jehovah. In ver. 20, Miriam is called " the prophetess," not
ob poetieam et miisicam facultatem (Ros.), but because of her
prophetic gift, which may serve to explain her subsequent op-
position to Moses (Num. xi. 1, 6); and " the sister of Aaron,"
though she was Moses' sister as well, and had been his deli-
verer /in his infancy, not "because Aaron had his own inde-
pendent spiritual standing by the side of Moses" (Baumg.), but
to point out the position which she was afterwards to occupy in
the congregation of Israel, namely, as ranking, not with Moses,
but with Aaron, and like him subordinate to Moses, who had
been placed at the head of Israel as the mediator of the Old
Covenant, and as such was Aaron's god (chap. iv. 16, Kurtz).
1 Auberlen's remarks in the Jahrb. f. d. Theol. iii. p. 793, are quite to the
point : " In spirit Moses already Baw the people brought to Canaan, which
Jehovah had described, in the promise given to the fathers and repeated
to him, as His own dwelling-place where He would abide in the midst of
His people in holy separation from the nations of the world. When the first
stage had been so gloriously finished, he could already see the termination
of the journey." ..." The nation was so entirely devoted to Jehovah, that
its owu dwelling-place fell into the shade beside that of its God, and assumed
the appearance of a sojourning around the sanctuary of Jehovah, for God
went up before the people in the pillar of cloud and fire. The fact that a
mountain is mentioned in ver. 17 as the dwelling-place of Jehovah is no
proof of a vaticinium post eventum, but is a true prophecy, having its natural
side, however, in the fact that mountains were generally the sites chosen
for divine worship and for temples ; a fact with which Moses was already
acquainted (Gen. zzii. 2 ; Ex. iii. 1, 12 ; compare such passages as Num.
xxii. 41, xxxiii. 52, Micah iv. 1, 2). In the actual fulfilment it was Mount
Zion upon which Jehovah was enthroned as King in the midst of His people.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XV. 22-27. 57
As prophetess and sister of Aaron she led the chorus of women,
who replied to the male chorus with timbrels and dancing, and
by taking up the first strophe of the song, and in this way took
part in the festival ; a custom that was kept up in after times in
the celebration of victories (Judg. xi. 34 ; 1 Sam. xviii. 6, 7, xxi.
12, xxix. 5), possibly in imitation of an Egyptian model (see my
Archaologie, § 137, note 8).
ISRAEL CONDUCTED FROM THE RED SEA TO THE MOUNTAIN
OF GOD. — CHAP. XV. 22-XVII. 7.
Chap. xv. 22-27. March from the Red Sea to Marah
and Elim. — Being thus delivered from Egypt and led safely
through the Bed Sea, Israel was led into the desert to the sanc-
tuary of Sinai, to be adopted and consecrated by Jehovah as His
possession. — Ver. 22. Leaving the Red Sea, they went into the
desert of Shur. This name is given to the tract of desert which
separates Egypt from Palestine, and also from the more elevated
parts of the desert of Arabia, and stretches from the Mediter-
ranean to the head of the Arabian Gulf or Red Sea, and thence
along the eastern shore of the sea to the neighbourhood of the
Wady Gharandel. In Num. xxxiii. 8 it is called the desert of
Etham, from the town of Etham, which stood upon the border
(see chap. xiii. 20). The spot where the Israelites encamped
after crossing the sea, and sang praises to the Lord for their
gracious deliverance, is supposed to have been the present Ayun
Musa (the springs of Moses), the only green spot in the northern
part of this desolate tract of desert, where water could be ob-
tained. At the present time there are several springs there,
which yield a dark, brackish, though drinkable water, and a
few stunted palms ; and even till a very recent date country
houses have been built and gardens laid out there by the richer
inhabitants of Suez. From this point the Israelites went three
days without finding water, till they came to Marah, where there
was water, but so bitter that they could not drink it. The first
spot on the road from Ayun Musa to Sinai where water can be
found, is in the well of Howdra, 33 English miles from the
former. It is now a basin of 6 or 8 feet in diameter, with two
feet of water in it, but so disagreeably bitter and salt, that the
Bedouins consider it the worst water in the whole neighbour-
Digitized by
Google
58 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
hood (Robinson, i. 96). The distance from Ayun Musa and
the quality of the water both favour the identity of Howdra and
Marah. A whole people, travelling with children, cattle, and
baggage, could not accomplish the distance in less than three
days, and there is no other water on the road from Ayun Musa
to Howara. Hence, from the time of Burckhardt, who was the
first to rediscover the well, Howdra has been regarded as the
Marah of the Israelites. In the Wady Atnara, a barren valley
two hours to the north of Howara, where Ewald looked for it,
there is no water to be found ; and in the Wady Gharandel, two
hours to the south, to which Lepsius assigned it, the quality of
the water does not agree with our account. 1 It is true that no
trace of the name has been preserved; but it seems to have
been given to the place by the Israelites simply on account of
the bitterness of the water. This furnished the people with an
inducement to murmur against Moses (ver. 24). They had
probably taken a supply of water from Ayun Musa for the three
days' march into the desert. But this store was now exhausted ;
and, as Luther says, " when the supply fails, our faith is soon
gone." Thus even Israel forgot the many proofs of the grace
of God, which it had received already. — Ver. 25. When Moses
cried to the Lord in consequence, He showed him some wood
which, when thrown into the water, took away its bitterness. The
Bedouins, who know the neighbourhood, are not acquainted with
such a tree, or with any other means of making bitter water
sweet ; and this power was hardly inherent in the tree itself,
though it is ascribed to it in Ecclus. xxxviii. 5, but was imparted
to it through the word and power of God. We cannot assign
any reason for the choice of this particular earthly means, as the
Scripture says nothing about any " evident and intentional con-
trast to the change in the Nile by which the sweet and pleasant
water was rendered unfit for use" (Kurtz). The word YV
"wood" (see only Num. xix. 6), alone, without anything in the
context to explain it, does not point to a " living tree" in con-
1 The small quantity of water at Howara, " which is hardly sufficient for
a few hundred men, to say nothing of so large an army as the Israelites
formed" (Seetzen), is no proof that Howara and Marah are not identical.
For the spring, which is now sanded up, may have flowed more copiously at
one time, when it was kept in better order. Its present neglected state is the
cause of the scarcity.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XV. 22-27. 59
trast to the "dead stick." And if any contrast had been in-
tended to be shown between the punishment of the Egyptians
and the training of the Israelites, this intention would certainly
have been more visibly and surely accomplished by using the
staff with which Moses not only brought the plagues upon Egypt,
but afterwards brought water out of the rock. If by J*? we
understand a tree, with which ^l-W, however, hardly agrees, it
would be much more natural to suppose that there was an
allusion to the tree of life, especially if we compare Gen. u. 9
and iii. 22 with Rev. xxii. 2, u the leaves of the tree of life
were for the healing of the nations," though we cannot regard
this reference as established. All that is clear and undoubted
is, that by employing these means, Jehovah made Himself
known to the people of Israel as their Physician, and for this
purpose appointed the wood for the healing of the bitter water,
which threatened Israel with disease and death (2 Kings iv.
40).
By this event Jehovah accomplished two things : (a) " there
He put (made) for it (the nation) an ordinance and a right"
and (b) " there He proved it." The ordinance and right which
Jehovah made for Israel did not consist in the words of God
quoted in ver. 26, for they merely give an explanation of the law
and right, but in the divine act itself. The leading of Israel to
bitter water, which their nature could not drink, and then the
sweetening or curing of this water, were to be a ph for Israel,
i.e., an institution or law by which God would always guide and
govern His people, and a &&W? or right, inasmuch as Israel could
always reckon upon the help of God, and deliverance from every
trouble. But as Israel had not yet true confidence in the Lord,
this was also a trial, serving to manifest its natural heart, and,
through the relief of its distress on the part of God, to refine
and strengthen its faith. The practical proof which was given
of Jehovah's presence was intended to impress this truth upon the
Israelites, that Jehovah as their Physician would save them from
all the diseases which He had sent upon Egypt, if they would
hear His voice, do what was right in His eyes, and keep all His
commandments.
Ver. 27. Elim, the next place of encampment, has been
sought from olden time in the Wady Gharandel, about six miles
south of Howdra ; inasmuch as this spot, with its plentiful sup-
Digitized by
Google
60 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
ply of comparatively good water, and its luxuriance of palms,
tamarisks, acacias, and tall grass, which cause it to be selected
even now as one of the principal halting-places between Suez
and Sinai, quite answers to Elim, with its twelve wells of water
and seventy palm-trees (cf. Bob. i. pp. 100, 101, 105). It is true
the distance from How&ra is short, but the encampments of such
a procession as that of the Israelites are always regulated by the
supply of water. Both Baumgarten and Kurtz have found in
Elim a place expressly prepared for Israel, from its bearing the
stamp of the nation in the number of its wells and palms : a well
for every tribe, and the shade of a palm-tree for the tent of each
of the elders. But although the number of the wells corre-
sponded to the twelve tribes of Israel, the number of the elders was
much larger than that of the palms (chap. xxiv. 9). One fact
alone is beyond all doubt, namely, that at Elim, this lovely oasis
in the barren desert, Israel was to learn how the Lord could
make His people he down in green pastures, and lead them
beside still waters, even in the barren desert of this life (Ps.
xxiii. 2).
Chap. xvi. Quails and Manna in the Desert of Sin. —
Ver. 1. From Elim the congregation of Israel proceeded into the
desert of Sin. According to Num. xxxiii. 10, they encamped at
the Red Sea between Elim and the desert of Sin ; but this is
passed over here, as nothing of importance happened there.
Judging from the nature of the ground, the place of encamp-
ment at the Red Sea is to be found at the mouth of the Wady
Taiyibeh. For the direct road from the W. Gharandel to Sinai,
and the only practicable one for caravans, goes over the table-
land between this wady and the Wady Useit to the upper end
of the W. Taiyibeh, a beautiful valley, covered with tamarisks
and shrubs, where good water may be found by digging, and
which winds about between steep rocks, and opens to the sea at
Has Zelimeh. To the north of this the hills and rocks come
close to the sea, but to the south they recede, and leave a sandy
plain with numerous shrubs, which is bounded on the east by
wild and rugged rocky formations, and stretches for three miles
along the shore, furnishing quite space enough therefore for the
Israelitish camp. It is about eight hours' journey from Wady
Gharandel, so that by a forced march the Israelites might have
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVI. 1. 61
accomplished it in one day. From this point they went " to the
desert of Sin, which is between Elim arid Sinai." The place of
encampment here is doubtful. There are two roads that lead
from W. Taiyibeh to Sinai : the lower, which enters the desert
plain by the sea at the Murkha or Morcha well, not far from the
mouth of the Wady eth Thafary, and from which you can either
go as far as Tur by the sea-coast, and then proceed in a north-
easterly direction to Sinai, or take a more direct road through
Wady Shelldl and Badireh into Wady Mukatteb and Feirdn,
and so on to the mountains of Horeb ; and the upper road, first
pointed out by Burckhardt and Robinson, which lies in a S.E.
direction from W. Taiyibeh through W. Shuleikeh, across an ele-
vated plain, then through Wady Humr to the broad sandy plain
of el Debbe or Debbet en Nasb, thence through Wady Nasb to
the plain of Debbet er Ramleh, which stretches far away to the
east, and so on across the Wadys Chamile and Seich in almost
a straight line to Horeb. One of these two roads the Israelites
must have taken. The majority of modern writers have decided
in favour of the lower road, and place the desert of Sin in the
broad desert plain, which commences at the foot of the mountain
that bounds the Wady Taiyibeh towards the south, and stretches
along the sea-coast to Ras Muliammed, the southernmost point
of the peninsula, the southern part of which is now called el
Kaa. The encampment of the Israelites in the desert of Sin is
then supposed to have been in the northern part of this desert
plain, where the well Murklia still furnishes a resting-place plenti-
fully supplied with drinkable water. Ewald has thus represented
the Israelites as following the desert of el Kaa to the neigh-
bourhood of Tur, and then going in a north-easterly direction
to Sinai. But apart from the fact that the distance is too great
for the three places of encampment mentioned in Num. xxxiii.
12—14, and a whole nation could not possibly reach Rephidim in
three stages by this route, it does not tally with the statement in
Num. xxxiii. 12, that the Israelites left the desert of Sin and
went to Dofkah ; so that Dofkah and the places that follow were
not in the desert of Sin at all. For these and other reasons,
De Laborde, v. Raumer, and others suppose the Israelites to
have gone from the fountain of Murklia to Sinai by the road
which enters the mountains not far from this fountain through
Wady Shellai, and so continues through Wady Mukatteb to
Digitized by
Google
62 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
Wady Feiran {Robinson, i. p. 105). But this view is hardly
reconcilable with the encampment of the Israelites " in the de-
sert of Sin, which is between Elim and Sinai." For instance,
the direct road from W. Gharandel (Elim) to Sinai does not
touch the desert plain of el Kda at all, but tnrns away from it
towards the north-east, so that it is difficult to understand how
this desert could be said to lie between Elim and Sinai. For
this reason, even Kurtz does not regard the clause " which is
between Elim and Sinai" as pointing out the situation of the
desert itself, but (contrary to the natural sense of the words) as
a more exact definition of that part or point of the desert of Sin
at which the road from Elim to Sinai crosses it. But nothing is
gained by this explanation. There is no road from the place of
encampment by the Ked Sea in the Wady Taiyibeh by which a
whole nation could pass along the coast to the upper end of this
desert, so as to allow the Israelites to cross the desert on the way
from Taiyibeh to the W. Sbellal. As the mountains to the
south of the W. Taiyibeh come so close to the sea again, that it
is only at low water that a narrow passage is left (Burckhardt,
p. 985), the Israelites would have been obliged to turn eastwards
from the encampment by the Red Sea, to which they had no
doubt gone for the sake of the water, and to go all round the
mountain to get to the Murkha spring. This spring (according
to Burchhardt, p. 983, " a small lake in the sandstone rock,*close
at the foot of the mountain") is " the principal station on this
road," next to Ayun Musa and Gharandel ; but the water is " of
the worst description, partly from the moss, the bog, and the dirt
with which the well is filled, but chiefly no doubt from the salt
of the soil by which it is surrounded," and men can hardly drink
it ; whereas in the Wady Thafary, a mile (? five English miles)
to the north-east of Murkha, there is a spring that " yields the
only sweet water between Tor and Suez" (p. 982). Now, even
if we were to assume that the Israelites pitched their camp, not
by this, the only sweet water in the neighbourhood, but by the
bad water of Murkha, the Murkha spring is not situated in the
desert of el Kda, but only on the eastern border of it ; so that if
they proceeded thence into the Wady Sbellal, and so on to the
Wady Feiran, they would not have crossed the desert at all. In
addition to this, although the lower road through the valley of
Mukatteb is described by Burchhardt as " much easier and more
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVI. 1. 63
frequented," and by Robinson as " easier" than the upper road
across Nasseb (Nasb), there are two places in which it runs
through very narrow defiles, by which a large body of people
like the Israelites could not possibly have forced their way
through to Sinai. From the Murkha spring, the way into the
valley of Mukatteb is through " a wild mountain road," which is
shut out from the eyes of the wanderer by precipitous rocks.
" We got off our dromedaries," says Dieterici, ii. p. 27, " and left
them to their own instinct and sure tread to climb the dangerous
pass. We looked back once more at the desolate road which we
had threaded between the rocks, and saw our dromedaries, the
only signs of life, following a serpentine path, and so climbing
the pass in this rocky theatre Nakb el Butera." Strauss speaks
of this road in the following terms : "We went eastwards through
a large plain, overgrown with shrubs of all kinds, and reached a
narrow pass, only broad enough for one camel to go through, so
that our caravan emerged in a very pictorial serpentine fashion.
The wild rocks frowned terribly on every side." Moreover, it is
only through a " terribly wild pass" that you can descend from
the valley Mukatteb into the glorious valley of Feiran (Strauss,
p. 128). 1
For these reasons we must adopt KnobeVa conclusions, and
seek the desert of Sin in the upper road which leads from
1 This pass is also mentioned by Graul (Reise ii. p. 226) aa " a wild ro-
mantic mountain pass," and he writes respecting it, " For five minutes the
road down was so narrow and steep, that the camels stept in fear, and we
ourselves preferred to follow on foot. If the Israelites came up here on their
way from the sea at Ras Zelime, the immense procession must certainly have
taken a long time to get through the narrow gateway." To this we may add,
that if Moses had led the people to Sinai through one of these narrow passes,
they could not possibly have reached Sinai in a month from the desert of Sin,
to say nothing of eight days, which was all that was left for them, if, as is
generally supposed, and as Kurtz maintains, their stay at the place of en-
campment in the desert of Sin, where they arrived on the 15th day of the
second month (xvi. 1), lasted full seven days, and their arrival at Sinai took
place on the first day of the third month. For if a pass is so narrow that
only one camel can pass, not more than three men could walk abreast. Now
if the people of Israel, consisting of two millions of men, had gone through
such a pass, it would have taken at least twenty days for them all to pass
through, as an army of 100,000 men, arranged three abreast, would reach
27 English miles ; so that, supposing the pass to be not more than five
minutes walk long, 100,000 Israelites would hardly go through in a day, to
Bay nothing at all about their flocks and herds.
Digitized by
Google
64 THE SECOND BOOK OF HOSES.
Gharandel to Sinai, viz. in the broad sandy table-land el Debbe
or Debbet er Ramie, which stretches from the Tih mountains
over almost the whole of the peninsula from N.W. to S.E.
(vid. Robinson, i. 112), and in its south-eastern part touches
the northern walls of the Horeb or Sinai range, which helps
to explain the connection between the names Sin and Sinai,
though the meaning " thorn-covered" is not established, but
is merely founded upon the idea that P? has the same mean-
ing as njD, This desert table-land, which is essentially distin-
guished from the limestone formations of the Tih mountains,
and the granite mass of Horeb, by its soil- of sand and sand-
stone, stretches as far as Jebel Humr to the north-west, and
the Wady Khamile and Barak to the south-west {vid. Robin-
son, i. p. 101, 102). Now, if this sandy table-land is to be
regarded as the desert of Sin, we must look for the place of
Israel's encampment somewhere in this desert, most probably
in the north-western portion, in a straight line between Elim
(Gharandel) and Sinai, possibly in Wady Nasb, where there is
a well surrounded by palm-trees about six miles to the north-
west of Sarbut el Khadim, with a plentiful supply of excellent
water, which Robinson says was better than he had found any-
where since leaving the Nile (i. 110). The distance from
W. Taiyibeh to this spot is not greater than that from Gharan-
del to Taiyibeh, and might therefore be accomplished in a hard
day's march.
Vers. 2—12. Here, in this arid sandy waste, the whole con-
gregation murmured against Moses and Aaron on account of
the want of food. What they brought with them from Egypt
had been consumed in the 30 days that had elapsed since they
came out (ver. 1). In their vexation the people expressed the
wish that they had died in Egypt by the flesh-pot, in the midst
of plenty, " by tlie hand of Jehovah" i.e. by the last plague
which Jehovah sent upon Egypt, rather than here in the desert
of slow starvation. The form U*?9 is a Eiphil according to the
consonants, and should be pointed vfa, from P?n for Tpn (see
Ges. § 72, Anm. 9, and Ewald, § 114c). As the want really
existed, Jehovah promised them help (ver. 4). He would rain
bread from heaven, which the Israelites should gather every day
for their daily need, to try the people, whether they would walk
in His law or not. In what the trial was to consist, is briefly
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVI 2-12. 65
indicated in ver. 5 : " And it will come to pass on ilie sixth day
(of the week), t/iat they will prepare what they have brought, and
it will be double what they gather daily'' The meaning is, that
what they gathered and brought into their tents on the sixth
day of the week, and made ready for eating, would be twice as
much as what they gathered on every other day ; not that Je-
hovah would miraculously double what wa», brought home on
the sixth day, as Knobel interprets the words in order to make
out a discrepancy between ver. 5 and ver. 22. r?n, to prepare,
is to be understood as applying partly to the measuring of what
had been gathered (ver. 18), and partly to the pounding and
grinding of the grains of manna into meal (Num. xi. 8). In
what respect this was a test for the people, is pointed out in
vers. 16 sqq. Here, in vers. 4 and 5, the promise of God is only
briefly noticed, and its leading points referred to ; it is described
in detail afterwards, in the communications which Moses and
Aaron make to the people. In vers. 6, 7, they first tell the
people, " At even, then shall ye know that Jehovah hath brought
you out of Egypt ; and in the morning, then shall ye see the glory
of the Lord." Bearing in mind the parallelism of the clauses,
we obtain this meaning, that in the evening and in the morning
the Israelites would perceive the glory of the Lord, who had
brought them out of Egypt. u Seeing" is synonymous with
" knowing." Seeing the glory of Jehovah did not consist in
the sight of the glory of the Lord which appeared in the cloud,
as mentioned in ver. 10, but in their perception or experience of
that glory in the miraculous gift of flesh and bread (ver. 8,
cf. Num. xiv. 22). u By His hearing" (ijJDB'a), i.e. because He
has heard, u your murmuring against Jehovah (" against Him"
in ver. 8, as in Gen. xix. 24) ; for what are we, that ye mur-
mur against us V The murmuring of the people against Moses
and Aaron as their leaders really affected Jehovah as the actual
guide, and not Moses and Aaron, who had only executed His
will. Jehovah would therefore manifest His glory to the people,
to prove to them that He had heard their murmuring. The
announcement of this manifestation of God is more fully ex-
plained to the people by Moses in ver. 8, and the explanation is
linked on to the leading clause in ver. 7 by the words, " when
He giveth," etc. Ye- shall see the glory of Jehovah, when
Jehovah shall give you, etc. — Vers. 9, 10. But before Jehovah
PENT. — VOL. II. B
Digitized by
Google
66 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
manifested Himself to the people in His glory, by relieving
their distress, He gave them to behold His glory in the cloud,
and by speaking out of the cloud, confirmed both the reproaches
and promises of His servants. In the murmuring of the people,
their unbelief in the actual presence of God had been clearly
manifested. u It was a deep unbelief," says Luther, " that they
had thus fallen back, letting go the word and promise of God,
and forgetting His former miracles and aid." Even the pillar
of cloud, this constant sign of the gracious guidance of God,
had lost its meaning in the eyes of the people ; so that it was
needful to inspire the murmuring multitude with a salutary
fear of the majesty of Jehovah, not only that their rebellion
against the God who had' watched them with a father's care
might be brought to mind, but also that the fact might be deeply
impressed upon their hearts, that the food about to be sent was
a gift of His grace. ", Coming near before Jehovah" (ver. 9),
was coming out of the tents to the place where the cloud was
standing. On thus coming out, " they turned towards the
desert" (ver. 10), i.e. their faces were directed towards the
desert of Sin ; " and, behold, the glory of Jehovah appeared in
the cloud," i.e. in a flash of light bursting forth from the cloud,
and revealing the majesty of God. This extraordinary sign of
the glory of God appeared in the desert, partly to show the
estrangement of the murmuring nation from its God, but still
more to show to the people, that God could glorify Himself by
bestowing gifts upon His people even in the barren wilder-
ness. For Jehovah spoke to Moses out of this sign, and con-
firmed to the people what Moses had promised them (vers.
11, 12).
Vers. 13-15. The same evening (according to ver. 12, "be-
tween the two evenings," vid. chap. xii. 6) quails came up and
covered the camp, npjf : to advance, applied to great armies.
wn, with the article indicating the generic word, and used in a
collective sense, are quails, 6pruyo/ii]Tpa (LXX.) ; i.e. the quail-
king, according to Hesy chins Sprvl; VTrep/ieye9r)<;, and Phot. Spru!;
ft&ycvi, hence a large species of quails, oprvye'} (Josephus), cotur-
niees (Vulg.). Some suppose it to be the Kath of the Arabs, a
kind of partridge which is found in great abundance in Arabia,
Palestine, and Syria. These fly in such dense masses that the
Arab boys often kill two or three at a time, by merely striking
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVI. 13-21. 67
at them with a stick as they fly (Burckhardt, Syr. p. 681). But
in spring the quails also come northwards in immense masses
from the interior of Africa, and return in autumn, when they
sometimes arrive so exhausted, that they can be caught with the
hand (cf. Diod. Sic. i. 60 ; v. Schubert, Reise ii. p. 361). Such
a flight of quails was now brought by God, who caused them to
fall in the camp of the Israelites, so that it was completely
covered by them. Then in the morning there came an " effusion
of dew roundabout the camp; and when the effusion of dew ascended
(i.e. when the mist that produced the dew had cleared away),
behold there (it lay) upon the surface of the desert, fine, congealed,
fine as the hoar-frost upon the ground." The meaning of the
air. Xey. DBDnp is uncertain. The meaning, scaled off, scaly,
decorticatum, which is founded upon the Chaldee rendering
^l?? 1 ?, is neither suitable to the word nor to the thing. The ren-
dering volutatum, rotundum, is better; and better still perhaps
that of Meier, " run together, curdled." When the Israelites
noticed this, which they had never seen before, they said to one
another, wn J», ri hm tovto (LXX.), " what is this ?" for they
knew not what it was. JO for np belongs to the popular phrase-
ology, and has been retained in the Chaldee and Ethiopic, so
that it is undoubtedly to be regarded as early Semitic. From
the question, man hi, the divine bread received the name of
man (ver. 31), or manna. Kimchi,. however, explains it as mean-
ing donum etportio. Luther follows him, and says, u Mann in
Hebrew means ready money, a present or a gift ;" whilst Ge-
senius and others trace the word to njD, to divide, to apportion,
and render Vfin \o " what is apportioned, a gift or present." But
the Arabic word to which appeal is made, is not early Arabic; and
this explanation does not suit the connection. How could the
people say " it is apportioned," when they did not know what it
was, and Moses had to tell them, it is the bread which Jehovah
has given you for food ? If they had seen at once that it was
food sent them by God, there would have been no necessity for
Moses to tell them so. ,
Vers. 16-21. After explaining the object of the manna,
Moses made known to them at once the directions of God about
gathering it. In the first place, every one was to gather accord-
ing to the necessities of his family, a bowl a head, which held,
according to ver. 36, the tenth part of an ephah. Accordingly
Digitized by
Google
6S THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
they gathered, "he that made much, and lie that made little" ue. he
that gathered much, and he that gathered little, and measured
it with the omer ; and he who gathered much had no surplus,
and he who gathered little had no lack : " every one according to
the measure of his eating had they gathered" These words are
generally understood by the Rabbins as meaning, that whether
they had gathered much or little, when they measured it in their
tents, they had collected just as many omers as they needed for
the number in their families, and therefore that no one had
either superfluity or deficiency. Calvin, on the other hand, and
other Christian commentators, suppose the meaning to be, that
all that was gathered was placed in a heap, and then measured
out in the quantity that each required. In the former case, the
miraculous superintendence of God was manifested in this, that
no one was able to gather either more or less than what he
needed for the number in his family ; in the second case, in the
fact that the entire quantity gathered, amounted exactly to what
the whole nation required. In both cases, the superintending
care of God would be equally wonderful, but the words of the
text decidedly favour the old Jewish view. — Vers. 19 sqq. In
the second place, Moses commanded them, that no one was to
leave any of what had been gathered till the next morning.
Some of them disobeyed, but what was left went into worms
(D\j>?in D"V literally rose into worms) and stank. Israel was to
take no care for the morrow (Matt. vi. 34), but to enjoy the
daily bread received from God in obedience to the giver. The
gathering was to take place in the morning (ver. 21) ; for when
the sun shone brightly, it melted away.
Vers. 22-31. Moreover, God bestowed His gift in such a
manner, that the Sabbath was sanctified by it, and the way was
thereby opened for its sanctification by the law. On the sixth
day of the week the quantity yielded was twice as much, viz.
two omers for one (one person). When the princes of the
congregation informed Moses of this, he said to them, "Let to-
morrow he rest (jinaB*), a holy Sabbath to the Lord." They were
to bake and boil as much as was needed for the day, and keep
what was over for the morrow, for on the Sabbath they would
find none in the field. They did this, and what was kept for
the Sabbath neither stank nor bred worms. It is perfectly clear
from this event, that the Israelites were not acquainted with any
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVI. 22-31. 69
sabbatical observance at that time, bat that, whilst the way was
practically opened, it was through the decalogue that it was
raised into a legal institution (see chap. xx. 8 sqq.). tfnaE> is an
abstract noun denoting "rest," and nae> a concrete, literally the
observer, from which it came to be used as a technical term for
the seventh day of the week, which was to be observed as a day
of rest to the Lord. — Vers. 27 sqq. On the seventh day some of
the people went out to gather manna, notwithstanding Moses'
command, but they found nothing. Whereupon God reproved
their resistance to His commands, and ordered them to remain
quietly at home on the seventh day. Through the command-
ments which the Israelites were to keep in relation to the manna,
this gift assumed the character of a temptation, or test of their
obedience and faith (cf. ver. 4). — Ver. 31. The manna was " like
coriander-seed, white ; and the taste of it like cake with honey." *U :
Chald. KVJ ; LXX. Koptov ; Vulg. coriandrum ; according to
Dioscorid. 3, 64, it was called 70/8 by the Carthaginians. rOT**
is rendered eyicpv; by the LXX.; according to AtJienaws and the
Greek Scholiasts, a sweet kind of confectionary made with oil.
In Num. xi. 7, 8, the manna is said to have had the appearance
of bdellium, a fragrant and transparent resin, resembling wax
(Gen. ii. 12). It was ground in handmills or pounded in
mortars, and either boiled in pots or baked on the ashes, and
tasted like IBtfn 1&? f « dainty of oil," i.e. sweet cakes boiled with
oil.
This a bread of heaven " (Ps. lxxviii. 24, cv. 40) Jehovah
gave to His people for the first time at a season of the year and
also in a place in which natural manna is still found. It is
ordinarily met with in the peninsula of Sinai in the months of
June and July, and sometimes even in May. It is most abun-
dant in the neighbourhood of Sinai, in Wady Feir&n and es
Sheikh, also in Wady Gharandel and Taiyibeh, and some of the
valleys to the south-east of Sinai (Bitter, 14, p. 676 ; Seetzen's
Reise iii. pp. 76, 129). In warm nights it exudes from the
branches of the tarfah-tree, a kind of tamarisk, and falls down in
the form of small globules upon the withered leaves and branches
that lie under the trees ; it is then gathered before sunrise, but
melts in the heat of the sun. In very rainy seasons it continues
in great abundance for six weeks long ; but in many seasons it
entirely fails. It has the appearance of gum, and has a sweet,
Digitized by
Google
70 > THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES
honey-like taste ; and when taken in large quantities, it is said
to act as a mild aperient (Burckhardt, Syr. p. 954 ; WelUted in
Hitter, p. 674). There are striking points of resemblance,
therefore, between the manna of the Bible and the tamarisk
manna. Not only was the locality in which the Israelites first
received the manna the same as that in which it is obtained
now ; but the time was also the same, inasmuch as the 15th day
of the second month (ver. 1) falls in the middle of our May, if not
somewhat later. The resemblance in colour, form, and appear-
ance is also unmistakeable ; for f though the tamarisk manna is
described as a dirty yellow, it is also said to be white when it
falls upon stones. Moreover, it falls upon the earth in grains,
is gathered in the morning, melts in the heat of the sun, and
has the flavour of honey. But if these points of agreement
suggest a connection between the natural manna and that of the
Scriptures, the differences, which are universally admitted, point
with no less distinctness to the miraculous character of the bread
of heaven. This is seen at once in the fact that the Israelites
received the manna for 40 years, in all parts of the desert, at
every season of the year, and in sufficient quantity to satisfy the
wants of so numerous a people. According to ver. 35, they
ate manna " until they came to a land inhabited, unto the borders
of the land of Canaan ;" and according to Josh. v. 11, 12, the
manna ceased, when they kept the Passover after crossing the
Jordan, and ate of the produce of the land of Canaan on the
day after the Passover. Neither of these statements is to be
so strained as to be made to signify that the Israelites ate no
other bread than manna for the whole 40 years, even after
crossing the Jordan : they merely affirm that the Israelites re-
ceived no more manna after they had once entered the in-
habited land of Canaan; that the period of manna or desert
food entirely ceased, and that of bread baked from corn, or
the ordinary food of the inhabited country, commenced when
they kept the Passover in the steppes of Jericho, and ate un-
leavened bread and parched cakes of the produce of the land as
soon as the new harvest had been consecrated by the presenta-
tion of the sheaf of first-fruits to God.
But even in the desert the Israelites had other provisions at
command. In the first place, they had brought large flocks and
herds with them out of Egypt (chap. xii. 38, xvii. 3) ; and these
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVI. 22-81. 71
they continued in possession of, not only at Sinai (chap, xxxiv. 3),
but also on the border of Edom and the country to the east of
the Jordan (Num. xx. 19, xxxii. 1). Now, if the maintenance
of these nocks necessitated, on the one hand, their seeking for
grassy spots in the desert ; on the other hand, the possession of
cattle secured them by no means an insignificant supply of milk
and flesh for food, and also of wool, hair, and skins for clothing.
Moreover, there were different tribes in the desert at that very
time, such as the Ishmaelites and Amalekites, who obtained a
living for themselves from the very same sources which must
necessarily have been within reach of the Israelites. Even now
there are spots in the desert of Arabia where the Bedouins sow
and reap ; and no doubt there was formerly a much larger
number of such spots than there are now, since the charcoal
trade carried on by the Arabs has interfered with the growth of
trees, and considerably diminished both the fertility of the val-
leys and the number and extent of the green oases (cf. Ruppell,
Nubien, pp. 190, 201, 256). For the Israelites were not always
wandering about ; but after the sentence was pronounced, that
they were to remain for 40 years in the desert, they may have
remained not only for months, but in some cases even for years,
in certain places of encampment, where, if the soil allowed, they
could sow, plant, and reap. There were many of their wants,
too, that they could supply by means of purchases made either
from the trading caravans that travelled through the desert, or
from tribes that were settled there ; and we find in one place an
allusion made to their buying food and water from the Edomites
(Deut. ii. 6, 7). It is also very obvious from Lev. viii. 2, xxvi.
31, 32, ix. 4, x. 12, xxiv. 5 sqq., and Num. vii. 13 sqq., that
they were provided with wheaten meal during their stay at
Sinai. 1 But notwithstanding all these resources, the desert was
" great and terrible " (Deut. i. 19, viii. 15) ; so that, even though
it is no doubt the fact that the want of food is very trifling in that
region (cf. Burckhardt, Syria, p. 901), there must often have been
districts to traverse, and seasons to endure, in which the natural
resources were either insufficient for so numerous a people, or
failed altogether. It was necessary, therefore, that God should
' Vide Hengstenberg's Geschichte Bikam's, p. 284 sqq. For the English
translation, see " Hengstenberg on the Genuineness of Daniel, etc.," p. 566.
Clark. 1847.
Digitized by
Google
72 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
interpose miraculously, and give His people bread and water
and flesh by supernatural means. So that it still remains true,
that God fed Israel with manna for 40 years, until their entrance
into an inhabited country rendered it possible to dispense with
these miraculous supplies. We must by no means suppose that
the supply of manna was restricted to the neighbourhood of
Sinai ; for it is expressly mentioned after the Israelites had left
Sinai (Num. xi. 7 sqq.), and even when they had gone round
the land of Edom (Num. xxi. 5). But whether it continued
outside the true desert, — whether, that is to say, the Israelites
were still fed with manna after they had reached the inhabited
country, viz. in Gilead and Bashan, the Amoritish kingdoms
of Sihon and Og, which extended to Edrei in the neighbour-
hood of Damascus, and where there was no lack of fields, and
vineyards, and wells of water (Num. xxi. 22), that came into
the possession of the Israelites on their conquest of the land, — or
during their encampment in the fields of Moab opposite to
Jericho, where they were invited by the Moabites and Edomites
to join in their sacrificial meals (Num. xxv. 2), and where they
took possession, after the defeat of the Midianites, of their cattle
and all that they had, including 675,000 sheep and 72,000
beeves (Num. xxxi. 31 sqq.), — cannot be decided in the negative,
as Hengstenberg supposes ; still less can it be answered with con-
fidence in the affirmative, as it has been by C. v. Raumer and
Kurtz. For if, as even Kurtz admits, the manna was intended
either to supply the want of bread altogether, or where there
was bread to be obtained, though not in sufficient quantities, to
make up the deficiency, it might be supposed that no such de-
ficiency would occur in these inhabited and fertile districts, where,
according to Josh. i. 11, there were sufficient supplies, at hand to
furnish ample provision for the passage across the Jordan. It is
possible too, that as there were more trees in the desert at that time
than there are now, and, in fact, more vegetation generally, there
may have been supplies of natural manna in different localities,
in which it is not met with at present, and that this manna
harvest, instead of yielding only 5 or 7 cwt., as is the case now,
produced considerably more. 1 Nevertheless, the quantity which
1 The natural manna was not exclusively confined to the tamarisk, which
seems to be the only tree in the peninsula of Sinai that yields it now ; but,
according to both ancient and modern testimony, it has been found in' Persia,
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVI. 22-81. 73
the Israelites gathered every day, — viz. an omer a head, or at
least 2 lbs., — still remains a divine miracle ; though this statement
in vers. 16 sqq. is not to be understood as affirming, that for 40
years they collected that quantity every day, but only, that when-
ever and wherever other supplies failed, that quantity could be
and was collected day by day.
Moreover, the divine manna differed both in origin and
composition from the natural produce of the tamarisk. Though
the tamarisk manna resembles the former in appearance, colour,
and taste, yet according to the chemical analysis to which it has
been submitted by Mitscherlich, it contains no farina, but simply
saccharine matter, so that the grains have only the consistency of
wax ; whereas those of the manna supplied to the Israelites were
so hard that they could be ground in mills and pounded in mor-
tars, and contained so much meal that it was made into cakes
and baked, when it tasted like honey-cake, or sweet confectionary
prepared with oil, and formed a good substitute for ordinary
bread. There is no less difference in the origin of the two.
The manna of the Israelites fell upon the camp with the
morning dew (vers. 13, 14 ; Num. xi. 9), therefore evidently
out of the air, so that Jehovah might be said to have rained it
from heaven (ver. 4) ; whereas the tamarisk manna drops upon
the ground from the fine thin twigs of this shrub, and, in Ehren-
bertfs opinion, in consequence of the puncture of a small, yellow
insect, called coccus maniparus. But it may possibly be pro-
duced apart from this insect, as JLepsius and Teschendorf found
branches with a considerable quantity of manna upon them,
and saw it drop from trees in thick adhesive lumps, without
being able to discover any coccus near (see Hitter, 14, pp. 675-6).
Now, even though the manna of the Bible may be connected
with the produce of the tamarisk, the supply was not so in-
separably connected with these shrubs, as that it could only fall
to the earth with the dew, as it was exuded from their branches.
After all, therefore, we can neither deny that there was some
connection between the two, nor explain the gift of the heavenly
manna, as arising from an unrestricted multiplication and increase
of this gift of nature. We rather regard the bread of heaven
as the production and gift of the grace of God, which fills all
Chorasan, and other parts of Asia, dropping from other trees. Cf . Rosen-
miiUer iibi supra, and Hitter, 14, pp. 686 aqq.
Digitized by
Google
74 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
nature with its powers and productions, and so applies them to
its purposes of salvation, as to create out of that which is natural
something altogether new, which surpasses the ordinary pro-
ductions of nature, both in quality and quantity, as far as the
kingdom of nature is surpassed by the kingdom of grace. and
glory.
Vers. 32-36. As a constant memorial of this bread of God
for succeeding generations, Jehovah commanded Moses to keep
a bowl full ("iDtyi *6p, the filling of a bowl) of the manna.
Accordingly Aaron placed a jar of manna (as it is stated in
vers. 34, 35, by way of anticipation, for the purpose of summing
up everything of importance relating to the manna) " before
Jehovah," or speaking still more exactly, " before the testi-
mony," i.e. the tables of the law (see chap. xxv. 16), or accord-
ing to Jewish tradition, in the ark of the covenant (Heb. ix. 4).
rosJX, from |3V to guard round, to preserve, signifies a jar or
bottle, not a basket. According to the Jerusalem Targum, it
was an earthenware jar; in the LXX. it is called ard/ivos
%pv<rov?, a golden jar, but there is nothing of this kind in the
original text. — Ver. 36. In conclusion, the quantity of the manna
collected for the daily supply of each individual, which was pre-
served in the sanctuary, is given according to the ordinary
measurement, viz. the ephah. The common opinion, that "iD*y
was the name for a measure of capacity, which was evidently
shared by the Seventy, who have rendered the word yofwp, has
no foundation so far as the Scriptures are concerned. Not only
is it a fact, that the word omer is never used as a measure except
in this chapter, but the tenth of an ephah is constantly indi-
cated, even in the Pentateuch, by " the tenth part of an ephah"
(Lev. v. 11, vi. 13 ; Num. v. 15, xxviii. 5), or " a tenth deal"
(Ex. xxix. 40 ; Lev. xiv. 10, etc. ; in all 30 times). The omer
was a small vessel, cup, or bowl, which formed part of the fur-
niture of every house, and being always of the same size, could
be used as a measure in case of need. 1 The ephah is given by
Bertheau as consisting of 1985*77 Parisian cubic inches, and
\
1 Omer proprie nomen poculi fuit, quale secum gestare solent Orientates,
per deserta iter facientes, ad hauriendam si quam riviis i>el fons offemt
aquam. . . . Hoc in poculo, alia vasa non habentes, et mannam collegerunt
Israelite (Michaelis, Supplem. ad Lex. hebr., p. 1929). Cf. Hengstenberg,
Dissertations on the Pentateuch, vol. ii. p. 172.
Digitized by
Google
CHAT. XVII. 1-7 75
holding 739,800 Parisian grains of water; Thenius, however,
gives only 1014*39 Parisian, or 1124-67 Rhenish inches. (See
my Archaologie, ii. 141-2.)
Chap. xvii. 1-7. Want of Wateb at Rephidim. — Ver. 1.
On leaving the desert of Sin, the Israelites came DiTJ'DD?,
" according to their journeys," i.e. in several marches performed
with encampings and departures, to Rephidim, at Horeb, where
they found no water. According to Num. xxxiii. 12-14, they
encamped twice between the desert of Sin and Rephidim, viz.
at Dofkah and Alush. The situation of Rephidim may. be de-
termined with tolerable certainty, partly from ver. 6 as com-
pared with chap, xviii. 5, which shows that it is to be sought for
at Horeb, and partly from the fact, that the Israelites reached
the desert of Sinai, after leaving Rephidim, in a single day's
march (chap. xix. 2). As the only way from Debbet er Ramleh
to Horeb or Sinai, through which a whole nation could pass,
lies through the large valley of es-Sheikh, Rephidim must be
sought for at the point where this valley opens into the broad
plain of er Rahah ; and not in the defile with Moses' seat (Mokad
Seidna Musa) in it, which is a day's journey from the foot of
Sinai, or five hours from the point at which the Sheikh valley
opens into the plain of er Rahah, or the plain of Szueir or
Suweiri, 1 because this plain is so far from Sinai, that the Israel-
ites could not possibly have travelled thence to the desert of
Sinai in a single day ; nor yet at the fountain of Abu Suweirah,
which is three hours to the north of Sinai (Strauss, p. 131), for
the Sheikh valley, which is only a quarter of a mile broad at this
spot, and enclosed on both sides by tall cliffs (Robinson, i. 215),
would not afford the requisite space for a whole nation ; and the
•well found here, which though small is never dry (Robinson, i.
216), neither tallies with the want of water at Rephidim, nor
stands " upon the rock at (in) Horeb," so that it could be taken
to be the spring opened by Moses. The distance from Wady
Nasb (in the desert of Sin) to the point at which the upper
Sinai road reaches the Wady es Sheikh is about 15 hours
(Robinson, vol. iii. app.), and the distance thence to the plain of
1 Burckhardt, p. 799 ; v. Raumer, Zug der Israeliten, p. 29 ; Robinson's
Palestine, pp. 178, 179; De Laborde, comment., p. 78; Teschendorf, Reise i.
p. 244.
Digitized by
Google
76 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
er Rahah through the Sheikh valley, which runs in a large
semicircle to Horeb, 10 hours more (Burckkardt, pp. 797 sqq.),
whereas the straight road across el Oerf, Wady Solaf, and Nukb
Hawy to the convent of Sinai is only seven hours and a half
(Robinson, vol. iii. appendix). The whole distance from Wady
Nasb to the opening of the Sheikh valley into the plain of er
Rahah, viz. 25 hours in all, the Israelites might have accom-
plished in three days, answering to the three stations, Dofkah,
Alush, and Rephidim. A trace of Dofkah seems to have been
retained in el Tabbacha, which Seetzen found in the narrow rocky
valley of Wady Gni, i.e. KineJi, after his visit to Wady Mukatteb,
on proceeding an hour and a half farther in a north-westerly (?)
direction, and where he saw some Egyptian antiquities. Knobel
supposes the station Alush to have been in the Wady Oesch or
Osh (Robinson, i. 125 ; BurckJtardt, p. 792), where sweet water
may be met with at a little distance off. But apart from the
improbability of Alush being identical with Osh, even if al
were the Arabic article, the distance 'is against it, as it is at least
twelve camel-hours from Horeb through the Sheikh valley.
Alush is rather to be sought for at the entrance to the Sheikh
valley ; for in no other case could the Israelites have reached
Rephidim in one day.
Vers. 2-7. As there was no water to drink in Rephidim, the
people murmured against Moses, for having brought them out of
Egypt to perish with thirst in the wilderness. This murmuring
Moses called " tempting God," i.e. unbelieving doubt in the
gracious presence of the Lord to help them (ver. 7). In this
the people manifested not only their ingratitude to Jehovah, who
had hitherto interposed so gloriously and miraculously in every
time of distress or need, but their distrust in the guidance of
Jehovah and the divine mission of Moses, and such impatience
of unbelief as threatened to break out into open rebellion
against Moses. " Yet a little" he said to God (i.e. a very little
more), " and they stone me ;" and the divine long-suffering and
grace interposed in this case also, and provided for the want
without punishing their murmuring. Moses was to pass on
before the people, and, taking some of the elders with him, and
his staff with which he smote the Nile, to go to the rock at
Horeb, and smite upon the rock with the staff, at the place
where God should stand before him, and water would come out
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVII. 8-1S. 77
of the rock. The elders were to be eye-witnesses of the miracle,
that they might bear their testimony to it before the unbelieving
people, " ne dicere possint, jam ab antiquis temporibus fontes ibi
fuisse" (Jtasht). Jehovah's standing before Moses upon the
rock, signified the gracious assistance of God. ^S? lOJf fre-
quently denotes the attitude of a servant when standing before
his master, to receive and execute his commands. Thus Jeho-
vah condescended to come to the help of Moses, and assist His
people with His almighty power. His gracious presence caused
water to flow out of the hard dry rock, though not till Moses
struck it with his staff, that the people might acknowledge him
afresh as the possessor of supernatural and miraculous powers.
The precise spot at which the water was smitten out of the rock
cannot be determined ; for there is no reason whatever for fixing
upon the summit of the present Horeb, Has el Sufsafeh, from
which you can take in the whole of the plain of er Rahah
{Robinson, i. p. 154). — Ver. 7. From this behaviour of the un-
believing nation the place received the names Massah and Merx-
bah, " temptation and murmuring," that this sin of the people
might never be forgotten (cf. Deut. vi. 16 ; Ps. lxxviii. 20,
xcv. 8, cv. 41).
CONFLICT WITH AMALEK. — CHAP. XVII. 8-16.
Vers. 8-13. The want of water had only just been provided
for, when Israel had to engage in a conflict with the Amalekites,
who had fallen upon their rear and smitten it (Deut. xxv. 18).
The expansion of this tribe, that was descended from a grandson
of Esau (see Gen. xxxvi. 12), into so great a power even in the
Mosaic times, is perfectly conceivable, if we imagine the process
to have been analogous to that which we have already described
in the case of the leading branches of the Edomites, who had
grown into a powerful nation through the subjugation and in-
corporation of the earlier population of Mount Seir. The Ama-
lekites had no doubt come to the neighbourhood of Sinai for the
same reason for which, even in the present day, the Bedouin
Arabs leave the lower districts at the beginning of summer, and
congregate in the mountain regions of the Arabian peninsula,
viz. because the grass is dried up in the former, whereas in the
Digitized by
Google
78 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
latter the pasturage remains green much longer, on account of
the climate being comparatively cooler (Burckhardt, Syr. p. 789).
There they fell upon the Israelites, probably in the Sheikh val-
ley, where the rear had remained behind the main body, not
merely for the purpose of plundering or of disputing the posses-
sion of this district and its pasture ground with the Israelites,
but to assail Israel as the nation of God, and if possible to de-
stroy it. The divine command to exterminate Amalek (ver. 14)
points to this ; and still more the description given of the Ama-
lekites in Balaam's utterances, as D^J n TT!, "the beginning," i.e.
the first and foremost of the heathen nations (Num. xxiv. 20).
In Amalek the heathen world commenced that conflict with the
people of God, which, while it aims at their destruction, can only
be terminated -by the complete annihilation of the ungodly
powers of the world. Earlier theologians pointed out quite cor-
rectly the deepest ground for the hostility of the Amalekites,
when they traced the causa belli to this fact, " quod timebat Ama-
lec, qui erat de semine Esau, jam implendam benedictionem, quam
Jacob obtinuit et prceripuit ipsi Esau, prcesertim cum in magna
potentia venirent Israelites, ut promissam occuparent terram"
MiXnster, C. a Lapide, etc.). This peculiar significance in the
conflict is apparent, not only from the divine command to exter-
minate the Amalekites, and to carry on the war of Jehovah with
Amalek from generation to generation (vers. 14 and 16), but
also from the manner in which Moses led the Israelites to battle
and to victory. Whereas he had performed all the miracles in
Egypt and on the journey by stretching out his staff, on this
occasion he directed his servant Joshua to choose men for the
war, and to fight the battle with the sword. He himself went
with Aaron and Hur to the summit of a hill to hold up the
staff of God in his hands, that he might procure success to the
warriors through the spiritual weapons of prayer.
The proper name of Joshua, who appears here for the first
time in the service of Moses, was Hosea (J^'" 1 ); he was a prince
of the tribe of Ephraim (Num. xiii. 8, 16; Deut. xxxii. 44). The
name ?ttfrP, " Jehovah is help" (or, God-help), he probably re-
ceived at the time when he entered Moses' service, either before
or after the battle with the Amalekites (see Num. xiii. 16, and
Hengstenberg, Dissertations, vol. ii.). Hur, who also held a pro-
minent position in the nation, according to chap. xxiv. 14 ; in
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVIL 8-18. 79
connection with Aaron, was the son of Caleb, the son of Hez-
ron, the grandson of Judah (1 Chron. ii. 18-20), and the grand-
father of Bezaleel, the architect of the tabernacle (chap. xxxi. 2,
xxxv. 30, xxxviii. 22, cf. 1 Chron. ii. 19, 20). According to
Jewish tradition, he was the husband of Miriam. — The battle
was fought on the day after the first attack (ver. 9). The hill
(npaa, not Mount Horeb), upon the summit of which Moses took
up his position during the battle, along with Aaron and Hur,
cannot be fixed upon with exact precision, but it was probatyy
situated in the table-land of Fureia, to the north of er Rahah
and the Sheikh valley, which is a fertile piece of pasture ground
(Burckhardtj p. 801 ; Robinson, i. pp. 139, 215), or else in the
plateau which runs to the north-east of the Horeb mountains
and to the east of the Sheikh valley, with the two peaks Umlahz
and Um Alawy; supposing, that is, that the Amalekites attacked
the Israelites from Wady Muklifeh or es Suweiriyeh. Moses
went to the top of the hill that he might see the battle from
thence. He took Aaron and Hur with him, not as adjutants to
convey his orders to Joshua and the army engaged, but to sup-
port him in his own part in connection with the conflict. This
was to hold up his hand with the staff of God in it. To under-
stand the meaning of this sign, it must be borne in mind that,
although ver. 11 merely speaks of the raising and dropping of
the hand (in the singular), yet, according to ver. 12, both hands
were supported by Aaron and Hur, who stood one on either side,
so that Mose3 did not hold up his hands alternately, but grasped
the staff with both his hands, and held it up with the two. The
lifting up of the hands has been regarded almost with unvarying
unanimity by Targumists, Rabbins, Fathers, Reformers, and
nearly all the more modern commentators, as the sign or atti-
tude of prayer. Kurtz, on the contrary, maintains, in direct
opposition to the custom observed throughout the whole of the
Old Testament by all pious and earnest worshippers, of lifting
up their hands to God in heaven, that this view attributes an
importance to the outward form of prayer which has no analogy
even in the Old Testament; he therefore agrees with Lake-
macher, in RosentnUller's Scholien, in regarding the attitude of
Moses with his hand lifted up as " the attitude of a commander
superintending and directing the battle," and the elevation of the
hand as only the means adopted for raising the staff, which was
Digitized by
Google
80 THE SECOND BOOK OF HOSES.
elevated in the sight of the warriors of Israel as the hanner of
victory. But this meaning cannot be established from vers. 15
and 16. For the altar with the name " Jehovah my banner? and
the watchword " the hand on the banner of Jehovah, war of the
Lord against Amalek," can neither be proved to be connected
with the staff which Moses held in his hand, nor be adduced as
a proof that Moses held the staff in front of the Israelites as the
banner of victory. The lifting up of the staff of God was, no
doubt, a banner to the Israelites of victory over their foes, but
not in this sense, that Moses directed the battle as commander-
in-chief, for he had transferred the command to Joshua ; nor yet
in this sense, that he imparted divine powers to the warriors by
means of the staff, and so secured the victory. To effect this, he
would not have lifted it up, but have stretched it out, either
over the combatants, or at all events towards them, as in the case
of all the other miracles that were performed with the staff. The
lifting up of the staff secured to the warriors the strength needed
to obtain the victory, from the fact that by means of the staff
Moses brought down this strength from above, i.e. from the
Almighty God in heaven; not indeed by a merely spiritless
and unthinking elevation of the staff, but by the power of his
prayer, which was embodied in the lifting up of his hands with the
staff, and was so far strengthened thereby, that God had chosen
and already employed this staff as the medium of the saving
manifestation of His almighty power. There is no other way in
which we can explain the effect produced upon the battle by the
raising and dropping (n^n) of the staff in his hands. As long
as Moses held up the staff, he drew down from God victorious
powers for the Israelites by means of his prayer ; but when he
let it fall through the exhaustion of the strength of his hands,
he ceased to draw down the power of God, and Arnalek gained
the upper hand. The staff, therefore, as it was stretched out on
high, was not a sign to the Israelites that were fighting, for it is
by no means certain that they could see it in the heat of the
battle ; but it was a sign to Jehovah, carrying up, as it were, to
God the wishes and prayers of Moses, and bringing down from
God victorious powers for Israel. If the intention had been to
hold it up before the Israelites as a banner of victory, Moses
would not have withdrawn to a hill apart from the field of battle,
but would either have carried it himself in front of the army, or
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVII. U-16. 81
have given it to Joshua as commander, to he home hy him in
front of the combatants, or else have entrusted it to Aaron, who
had performed the miracles in Egypt, that he might carry it at
their head. The pure reason why Moses did not do this, but
withdrew from the field of battle to lift up the staff of God upon
the summit of a hill, and to secure the victory by so doing, is to
be found in the important character of the battle itself. As the
heathen world was now commencing its conflict with the people
of God in the persons of the Amalekites, and the prototype
of the heathen world, with its hostility to God, was opposing
the nation of the Lord, that had been redeemed from the bond-
age of Egypt and was on its way to Canaan, to contest its en-
trance into the promised inheritance ; so the battle which Israel
fought with this foe possessed a typical significance in relation
to all the future history of Israel. It could not conquer by the
sword alone, but could only gain the victory by the power of
God, coming down from on high, and obtained through prayer
and those means of grace with which it had been entrusted.
The means now possessed by Moses were the staff, which was,
as it were, a channel through which the powers of omnipotence
were conducted to him. In most cases he used it under the
direction of God; but God had not promised him miraculous
help for the conflict with the Amalekites, and for this reason he
lifted up his hands with the staff in prayer to God, that he might
thereby secure the assistance of Jehovah for His struggling
people. At length he became exhausted, and with the falling
of his hands and the staff he held, the flow of divine power
ceased, so that it was necessary to support his arms, that they
might be kept firmly directed upwards (™ON, lit. firmness) until
the enemy was entirely subdued. And from this Israel was to
learn the lesson, that in all its conflicts with the ungodly powers
of the world, strength for victory could only be procured through
the incessant lifting up of its hands in prayer. " And Joshua
discomfited Amalek and his people (the Amalekites and their
people) with the edge of the sword" (i.e. without quarter. See
Gen. xxxiv. 26).
Vers. 14^16. As this battle and victory were of such signi-
ficance, Moses was to write it for a memorial IB??, in " the book"
appointed for a record of the wonderful works of God, and " to
put it into the ears of Joshua" i.e. to make known to him, and
PENT. — VOL. II. F
Digitized by
Google
82 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
impress upon him, that Jehovah would utterly put out the re-
membrance of Amalek from under heaven ; not " in order that
he might carry out this decree of God on the conquest of Canaan,"
as Knobel supposes, but to strengthen his confidence in the help
of the Lord against all the enemies of Israel. In Deut. xxv. 19
the Israelites are commanded to exterminate Amalek, when God
should have given them rest in the land of Canaan from all
their enemies round about. — Vers. 15, 16. To praise God for
His help, Moses built an altar, which he called "Jehovah my
banner? and said, when he did so, " The hand on the throne (or
banner) o/Jah ! War to the Lord from generation to generation ! "
There is nothing said about sacrifices being offered upon this
altar. It has been conjectured, therefore, that as a place of
worship and thank-offering, the altar with its expressive name
was merely to serve as a memorial to posterity of the gracious
help of the Lord, and that the words which were spoken by
Moses were to serve as a watchword for Israel, keeping this act
of God in lively remembrance among the people in all succeed-
ing generations. *3 (ver. 16) merely introduces the words as in
Gen. iv. 23, etc. The expression ■* D3 "7J? T is obscure, chiefly
on account of the cm. Xey. D3. In the ancient versions (with
the exception of the Septuagint, in which TC D3 is treated as one
word, and rendered /epwjxiia) D3 is taken to be equivalent to HD3
(1 Kings x. 19 ; Job xxvi. 9) for KM, and the clause is ren-
dered " the hand upon the throne of the Lord." But whilst some
understand the laying of the hand (sc. of God) upon the throne
to be expressive of the attitude of swearing, others regard the
hand as symbolical of power. There are others again, like
Clericus, who suppose the hand to denote the hand laid by the
Amalekites upon the throne of the Lord, i.e. on Israel. But if
D3 signifies throne or adytum arcanum, the words can hardly be
understood in any other sense than " the hand lifted up to the
throne of Jehovah in heaven, war to the Lord," etc.; and thus
understood, they can only contain an admonition to Israel to
follow the example of Moses, and wage war against Amalek
with the hands lifted up to the throne of Jehovah. Modern
expositors, however, for the most part regard D3 as a corruption
of 03, " the hand on the banner of the Lord." But even ad-
mitting this, though many objections may be offered to its cor-
rectness, we must not understand by " the banner of Jehovah'
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVIII. 1-12. 83
the Staff of Moses, but , only the altar with the name Jehovah-
nissl, as the symbol or memorial of the victorious help afforded
by God in the battle with the Amalekites.
JETHEO TIIE MIDIANITE IN THE CAMP OF ISRAEL. —
CHAP. XVIII.
Vers. 1-12. The Amalekites had met Israel with hostility,
as the prototype of the heathen who would strive against the
people and kingdom of God. But Jethro, the Midianitish priest,
appeared immediately after in the camp of Israel, not only as
Moses' father-in-law, to bring back his wife and children, but
also with a joyful acknowledgment of all that Jehovah had done
to the Israelites in delivering them from Egypt, to offer burnt-
offerings to the God of Israel, and to celebrate a sacrificial meal
with Moses, Aaron, and all the elders of Israel ; so that in the per-
son of Jethro the first-fruits of the heathen, who would hereafter
seek the living God, entered into religious fellowship with the
people of God. As both the Amalekites and Midianites were de-
scended from Abraham, and stood in blood-relationship to Israel,
the different attitudes which they assumed towards the Israelites
foreshadowed and typified the twofold attitude which the heathen
world would assume towards the kingdom of God. (On Jethro,
see chap. ii. 18 ; on Moses' wife and sons, see chap. ii. 21, 22 ;
and on the expression in ver. 2, " after he had sent her back,"
chap. iv. 26.) — Jethro came to Moses " into the wilderness, where
he encamped at the mount of God." The mount of God is
Horeb (chap. iii. 1) ; and the place of encampment is Eephidim,
at Horeb, i.e. at the spot where the Sheikh valley opens into the
plain of er Rahah (chap. xvii. 1). This part is designated as a
wilderness; and according to Robinson (1, pp. 130, 131) the
district round this valley and plain is "naked desert," and
"wild and desolate." The occasion for Jethro the priest to
bring back to his son-in-law his wife and children was furnished
by the intelligence which had reached him, that Jehovah had
brought Israel out of Egypt (ver. 1), and, as we may obviously
supply, had led them to Horeb. When Moses sent his wife and
sons back to Jethro, he probably stipulated that they were to
return to him on the arrival of the Israelites at Horeb. For
when God first called Moses at Horeb, He foretold to him that
Digitized by
Google
84 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
Israel would be brought to this mountain on its deliverance from
Egypt (chap. iii. 12). 1
Vers. 6-12. When Jethro announced his arrival to Moses
(" he said," sc. through a messenger), he received his f ather-in-
• law with the honour due to his rank ; and when he had conducted
him to his tent, he related to him all the leading events connected
with the departure from Egypt, and all the troubles they had
met with on the way, and how Jehovah had delivered them out
of them all. Jethro rejoiced at this, and broke out in praise to
Jehovah, declaring that Jehovah was greater than all gods, i.e.
that He had shown Himself to be exalted above all gods, for
God is great in the eyes of men only when He makes known
His greatness through the display of His omnipotence. He then
gave a practical expression to his praise by a burnt-offering and
slain-offering, which he presented to God. The second '3 in
1 Kurtz (Hist, of 0. C. iii. 46, 53) supposes that it was chiefly the report
of the glorious result of the battle with Amalek which led Jethro to resolve
to bring Moses' family back to him. There is no statement, however, to
this effect in the biblical text, but rather the opposite, namely, that what
Jethro had heard of all that God had done to Moses and Israel consisted of
the fact that Jehovah had brought Israel out of Egypt. Again, there are
not sufficient grounds for placing the arrival of Jethro at the camp of Israel,
in the desert of Sinai and after the giving of the law, as Ranlce has done.
For the fact that the mount of God is mentioned as the place of encamp-
ment at the time, is an argument in favour of Rephidim, rather than against
it, as we have already shown. And we can see no force in the assertion that
the circumstances, in which we find the people, point rather to the longer
stay at Sinai, than to the passing halt at Rephidim. For how do we know
that the stay at Rephidim was such a passing one, that it would not afford
time enough for Jethro's visit ? It is true that, according to the ordinary
assumption, only half a month intervened between the arrival of the Israel-
ites in the desert of Sin and their arrival in the desert of Sinai; but within
this space of time everything might have taken place that is said to have
occurred on the march from the former to the latter place of encampment.
It is not stated in the biblical text that seven days were absorbed in the
desert of Sin alone, but only that the Israelites spent a Sabbath there, and
had received manna a few days before, so that three or four days (say from
Thursday to Saturday inclusive) would amply suffice for all that took place.
If the Israelites, therefore, encamped there in the evening of the 15th, they
might have moved farther on the morning of the 19th or 20th, and after a two
days' journey by Dofkah and Alush have reached Rephidim on the 21st or 22d.
They could then have fought the battle with the Amalekites the following
day, so that Jethro might have come to the camp on the 24th or 25th, and
held the sacrificial meal with the Israelites the next day. In that case there
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVIII. 6-12. 85
ver. 11 is only an emphatic repetition of the first, and iti>K i^na
is not dependent upon W1J, but upon ?i*U, or upon T^Jn under-
stood, which is to be supplied in thought after the second "O :
" Tlmt He has proved Himself great by the affair in which they (the
Egyptians) dealt proudly against them (the Israelites)." Com-
pare Neh. ix. 10, from which it is evident, that to refer these
words to the destruction of Pharaoh and his army in the Red
Sea as a punishment for their attempt to destroy the Israelites
in the water (chap. i. 22) is too contracted an interpretation ;
and that they rather relate to all the measures adopted by the
Egyptians for the oppression and detention of the Israelites, and
signify that Jehovah had shown Himself great above all gods by
all the plagues inflicted upon Egypt down to the destruction of
Pharaoh and his army in the Red Sea. — Ver. 12. The sacrifices,
which Jethro offered to God, were applied to a sacrificial meal,
in which Moses joined, as well as Aaron and all the elders.
would still be four or five days left for him to see Moses sitting in judgment
a whole day long (ver. 13), and for the introduction of the judicial arrange-
ments proposed by Jethro ; — amply sufficient time, inasmuch as one whole
day would suffice for the sight of the judicial sitting, which is said to have
taken place the day after the sacrificial meal (ver. 13). And the election
of judges on the part of the people, for which Moses gave directions in ac-
cordance with Jethro's advice, might easily have been carried out in two
days. For, on the one hand, it is most probable that after Jethro had
watched this severe and exhausting occupation of Moses for a whole day, he
spoke to Moses on the subject the very same evening, and laid his plan be-
fore him ; and on the other hand, the execution of this plan did not require
a very long time, as the people were not scattered over a whole country, but
were collected together in one camp. Moreover, Moses carried on all his
negotiations with the people through the elders as their representatives ; and
the judges were not elected in modern fashion by universal suffrage, but
were nominated by the people, i.e. by the natural representatives of the
nation, from the body of elders, according to their tribes, and then ap-
pointed by Moses himself. — Again, it is by no means certain that Israel ar-
rived at the desert of Sinai on the first day of the third month, and that
only half a month (15 or 16 days) elapsed between their arrival in the
desert of Sin and their encamping at Sinai (cf. chap. xix. 1). And lastly,
though Kurtz still affirms that Jethro lived on the other side of the Elanitic
Gulf, and did not set out till he heard of the defeat of the Amalekites, in
which case a whole month might easily intervene between the victory of
Israel and the arrival of Jethro, the two premises upon which this conclu-
sion is based, are assumptions without foundation, as we have already
shown at chap. iii. 1 in relation to the former, and have just shown in re-
lation to the latter.
Digitized by
Google
86 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
Eating bread before God signified the holding of a sacrificial
meal, which was eating before God, because it was celebrated in
a holy place of sacrifice, where God was supposed to be present.
Vers. 13-24. The next day Jethro saw how Moses was occu-
pied from morning till evening in judging the people, who
brought all their disputes to him, that he might settle them ac-
cording to the statutes of God. 7? "»OV : as in Gen. xviii. 8.
The people came to Moses " to seek or inquire of God " (ver.
15), i.e. to ask for a decision from God : in most cases, this
means to inquire through an oracle ; here it signifies to desire a
divine decision as to questions in dispute. By judging or de-
ciding the cases brought before him, Moses made known to the
people the ordinances and laws of God. For every decision was
based upon some law, which, like all true justice here on earth,
emanated first of all from God. This is the meaning of ver.
16, and not, as Knobel supposes, that Moses made use of the
questions in dispute, at the time they were decided, as good
opportunities for giving laws to the people. Jethro condemned
this plan (vers. 18 sqq.) as exhausting, wearing out (/>?3 lit. to
fade away, Ps. xxxvii. 2), both for Moses and the people : for
the latter, inasmuch as they not only got wearied out through
long waiting, but, judging from ver. 23, very often began to
take the law into their own hands on account of the delay in the
judicial decision, and so undermined the well-being of the com-
munity at large; and for Moses, inasmuch as the work was
necessarily too great for him, and he could not continue for any
length of time to sustain such a burden alone (ver. 18). The
obsolete form of the inf. const. WC'J? for Srfoy is only used here,
but is not without analogies in the Pentateuch. Jethro advised
him (vers. 19 sqq.) to appoint judges from the people for all the
smaller matters in dispute, so that in future only the more diffi-
cult cases, which really needed a superior or divine decision,
would be brought to him that he might lay them before God.
" / will give thee counsel, and God be with thee {i.e. help thee to
carry out this advice) : Be thou to the people DwSji So, towards
God" i.e. lay their affairs before God, take the place of God in
matters of judgment, or, as Luther expresses it, " take charge of
the people before God." To this end, in the first place, he was to
instruct the people in the commandments of God, and their own
walk and conduct ("WW? with a double accusative, to enlighten,
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVIII. 25-27. 87
instruct ; T}/f. the walk, the whole behaviour ; fibgo particular
actions) ; secondly, he was to select able men (W) '•B'JK men of
moral strength, 1 Kings i. 52) as judges, men who were God-
fearing, sincere, and unselfish (gain-hating), and appoint them
to administer justice to the people, by deciding the simpler
matters themselves, and only referring the more difficult ques-
tions to him, and so to lighten his own duties by sharing the
burden with these judges. Tf?9 'P? (ver. 22) "make light of
(that which lies) upon thee." If he would do this, and God
would command him, he would be able to stand, and the people
would come to their place, i.e. to Canaan, in good condition
(DWa). The apodosis cannot begin with *|W1, " then God will
establish thee," for rns never has this meaning ; but the idea
is this, "if God should preside over the execution of the plan
proposed." — Ver. 24. Moses followed this sage advice, and, as
he himself explains in Deut. i. 12-18, directed the people to
nominate wise, intelligent, and well-known men from the heads
of the tribes, whom he appointed as judges, instructing them to ad-
minister justice with impartiality and without respect of persons.
Vers. 25-27. The judges chosen were arranged as chiefs
(D"nb) over thousands, hundreds, fifties, and tens, after the
analogy of the military organization of the people on their march
(Num. xxxi. 14), in such a manner, however, that this arrange-
ment was linked on to the natural division of the people into
tribes, families, etc. (see my Arehaologie, § 140). For it is
evident that the decimal division was not made in an arbitrary
manner according to the number of heads, from the fact that,
on the one hand, the judges were chosen from the heads of
the tribes and according to their tribes (Deut. i. 13) ; and
on the other hand, the larger divisions of the tribes, viz. the
families (mishpachoth), were also called thousands (Num. i.
16, x. 4 ; Josh. xxii. 14, etc.), just because the number of
their heads of families would generally average about a thou-
sand ; so that in all probability the hundreds, fifties, and tens
denote smaller divisions of the nation, in which there were
about this number of fathers. Thus in Arabic, for example,
" the ten" is a term used to signify a family (cf. Hengstenberg,
Dissertations v. ii. 343, and my Arch. § 149). The difference
between the harder or greater matters and the smaller matters
consisted in this : questions which there was no definite law to
Digitized by
Google
88 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
decide were great or hard ; whereas, on the other hand, those
which could easily he decided from existing laws or general
principles of equity were simple or small. (Vide Joh. Selden de
Synedriia i. c. 16, in my Arch. § 149, Not. 3, where the dif-
ferent views are discussed respecting the relative positions and
competency of the various judges, about which there is no precise
information given in the law.) So far as the total number of
judges is concerned, all that can be affirmed with certainty is,
that the estimated number of 600 judges over thousands, 6000
over hundreds, 12,000 over fifties, and 60,000 over tens, in all
78,600 judges, which is given by Grotius and in the Talmud, and
according to which there must have been a judge for every seven
adults, is altogether erroneous (cf. J. Selden I.e. pp. 339 seq.).
For if the thousands answered to the families (mishpachoth),
there cannot have been a thousand males in every one ; and- in
the same way the hundreds, etc., are not to be understood as con-
sisting of precisely that number of persons, but as larger or
smaller family groups, the numerical strength of which we do
not know. And even if we did know it, or were able to estimate
it, this would furnish no criterion by which to calculate the
number of the judges, for the text does not affirm that every
one of these larger or smaller family groups had a judge of its
own ; in fact, the contrary may rather be inferred, from the fact
that, according to Deut. i. 15, the judges were chosen out of the
heads of the tribes, so that the number of judges must have
been smaller than that of the heads, and can hardly therefore
have amounted to many hundreds, to say nothing of many thou-
sands.
ARRIVAL AT SINAI, AND PREPARATION FOR THE
COVENANT. — CHAP. XIX.
Vers. 1, 2. In the third month after their departure from
Egypt, the Israelites arrived at Sinai, proceeding from Rephidim
into the desert of Sinai, and encamping there before the mountain.
On what day of the month, the received text does not state.
The striking expression Wi Di'3 (" the same day"), without any
previous notice of the day, cannot signify the first day of the
month ; nor can '^yB'n B*ihn signify the third new moon in the
year, and be understood as referring to the first day of the third
x
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIX. 1, 2. 89
month. For although, according to the etymology of vhh (from
Enn to he new), it might denote the new moon, yet in chrono-
logical data it is never used in this sense ; but the day of the
month is invariably appended after the month itself has been
given (e.g. ehnViriK chap. xl. 2, 17 ; Gen. viii. 5, 13 ; Num. i. 1,
xxix. 1, xxxiii. 38, etc.). Moreover, in the Pentateuch the word
B^n never signifies new moon ; bnt the new moons are called
CCnn n5>sn (Num. x. 10, xxviii. 11, cf. Hengstenberg, Disserta-
tions, vol. ii. 297). And even in such passages as 1 Sam. xx.
5, xviii. 24, 2 Kings iv. 23, Amos viii. 5, Isa. i. 13, etc., where
Bhn is mentioned as a feast along with the Sabbaths and other
feasts, the meaning new moon appears neither demonstrable nor
necessary, as Vftft in this case denotes the feast of the month, the
celebration of the beginning of the month. If, therefore, the
text is genuine, and the date of the month has not dropt out
(and the agreement of the ancient versions with the Masoretic
text favours this conclusion), there is no other course open, than
to understand tie, as in Gen. ii. 4 and Num. iii. 1, and pro-
bably also in the unusual expression Bhnn DV 1 , Ex. xl. 2, in the
general sense of time ; so that here, and also in Num. ix. 1,
xx. 1, the month only is given, and not the day of the month,
and it is altogether uncertain whether the arrival in the desert
of Sinai took place on one of the first, one of the middle, or one
of the last days of the month. The Jewish tradition, which
assigns the giving of the law to the fiftieth day after the Passover,
is of far too recent a date to pass for historical (see my Archaa-
logie, § 83, 6).
The desert of Sinai is not the plain of er Eahah to the north
of Horeb, but the desert in front (133) of the mountain, upon
the summit of which Jehovah came down, whilst Moses ascended
it to receive the law (ver. 20 and xxxiv. 2). This mountain is
constantly called Sinai so long as Israel stayed there (vers. 18,
20, 23, xxiv. 16, xxxiv. 2, 4, 29, 32 ; Lev. vii. 38, xxv. 1,
xxvi. 46, xxvii. 34 ; Num. iii. 1 ; see also Num. xxviii. 6 and
Deut. xxxiii. 2) ; and the place of their encampment by the
mountain is also called the " desert of Sinai," never the desert of
Horeb (Lev. vii. 38 ; Num. i. 1, 19, iii. 14, ix. 1, x. 12, xxvi. 64,
xxxiii. 15). But in Ex. xxxiii. 6 this spot is designated as
" Mount Horeb," and in Deuteronomy, as a rale, it is spoken of
briefly as "Horeb" (Deut. i. 2, 6, 19, iv. 10, 15, v. 2, ix. 8,
Digitized by
Google
90 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
xviii. 16, xxviii. 69). And whilst the general identity of Sinai
and Horeb may be inferred from this ; the fact, that wherever
the intention of the writer is to give a precise and geographical
description of the place where the law was given, the name
Sinai is employed, leads to the conclusion that the term Horeb
was more general and comprehensive than that of Sinai ; in other
words, that Horeb was the range of which Sinai was one parti-
cular mountain, which only came prominently out to view when
Israel had arrived at the mount of legislation. This distinc-
tion between the two names, which Hengstenberg was the first to
point out and establish (in his Dissertations, 'vol. ii. p. 325), is
now generally admitted ; so that the only room that is left for
any difference of opinion is with reference to the extent of the
Horeb range. There is no ground for supposing that the name
Horeb includes the whole of the mountains in the Arabian
peninsula. Sufficient justice is done to all the statements in the
Bible, if we restrict this name to the southern and highest range
of the central mountains, — to the exclusion, therefore, of the
Serbal group. 1 This southern range, which Arabian geo-
graphers and the Bedouins call Jebel Tur or Jebel Tur Sina,
consists of three summits : (1) a central one, called by the Arabs
Jebel Musa (Moses' Mountain), and by Christians either Horeb
or else Horeb-Sinai, in which case the northern and lower peak,
or Has es Sufsafeh, is called Horeb, and the southern and loftier
one Sinai ; (2) a western one, called Jebel Humr, with Mount
Catlierine on the south, the loftiest point in the whole range ;
and (3) an eastern one, called Jebel el Deir (Convent Mountain)
or Episteme {vide Hitter, 14, pp. 527 sqq.). — Near this range there
are two plains, which furnish space enough for a large encamp-
ment. One of these is the plain of er Rahah, on the north and
north-west of Horeb-Sinai, with a level space of an English
square mile, which is considerably enlarged by the Sheikh
valley that opens into it from the east. At its southern ex-
tremity Horeb, with its granite rocks, runs almost precipitously
to the height of 1200 or 1500 feet; and towards the west it is
also shut in as with a wall by the equally precipitous spurs of
1 The hypothesis advocated by Lepsius, that Sinai or Horeb is to be
sought for in Serbal, has very properly met with no favour. For the ob-
jections to this, see Ritter, Erdkunde 14, pp. 738 sqq. ; and Kurtz, History
of O. C, vol. iii. p. 94 sqq.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIX. 1, z. 9t
Jebel Humr. The other plain, which is called Sebayeh, lies to
the south-east of Sinai, or Jebel Musa in the more restricted
sense; it is from 1400 to 1800 feet broad, 12,000 feet long,
and is shut in towards the south and east by mountains, which
rise very gently, and do not reach any considerable height.
There are three wadys leading to this plain from er Rahah and
the Sheikh valley. The most westerly of these, which separates
Horeb-Sinai from Jebel Humr with Mount Catherine on the
south, is called el I^eja, and is a narrow defile full of great blocks
of stone, and shut in towards the south like a cul de sac by Mount
Catherine. The central one, which separates Horeb from Jebel
Deir, is Wady Shoeib (Jethro valley), with the convent of Sinai
in it, which is also called the Convent Valley in consequence.
This is less confined, and not so much strewed with stones;
towards the south it is not quite shut in, and yet not quite open,
but bounded by a steep pass and a grassy mountain-saddle,
viz. the easily accessible Jebel Sebayeh. The third and most
easterly is the Wady es Sebayeh, which is from 400 to 600 feet
broad, and leads from the Sheikh valley, in a southern and
south-westerly direction, to the plain of the same name, which
stretches like an amphitheatre to the southern slope of Sinai, or
Jebel Musa, in the more restricted sense. When seen from this
plain, "Jebel Musa has the appearance of a lofty and splendid
mountain cone, towering far above the lower gravelly hills by
which it is surrounded " (Ritter, pp. 540, 541).
Since Robinson, who was the first to describe the plain of
er Rahah, and its fitness for the encampment of Israel, visited
Sinai, this plain has generally been regarded as the site where
Israel encamped in the " desert of Sinai." Robinson supposed
that he had discovered the Sinai of the Bible in the northern
peak of Mount Horeb, viz. Ras es Sufsafeh. But Ritter, Kurtz,
and others have followed Laborde and F. A. Strauss, who were
the first to point out the suitableness of the plain of Sebayeh to
receive a great number of people, in fixing upon Jebel Musa in
the stricter sense, the southern peak of the central groups which
tradition had already indicated as the scene of the giving of the
law, as the true Mount Sinai, where Moses received the laws
from God, and the plain of Sebayeh as the spot to which Moses
led the people (i.e. the men) on the third day, out of the camp
of God and through the Sebayeh valley (ver. 16). For this
Digitized by
Google
X
92 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
plain Is far better adapted to be the scene of such a display of
the nation, than the plain of er Rahah : first, because the hills
in the background slope gradually upwards in the form of an
amphitheatre, and could therefore hold a larger number of
people ; x whereas the mountains which surround the plain of
er Rahah are so steep and rugged, that they could not be made
use of in arranging the people; — and secondly, because the
gradual sloping of the plain upwards, both on the east and south,
would enable even the furthest rows to see Mount Sinai in all
its majestic grandeur ; whereas the plain of er Rahah slopes
downwards towards the north, so that persons standing in the
background would be completely prevented by those in front from
seeing Ras es Sufsafeh. — If, however, the plain of es Sebayeh
so entirely answers to all the topographical data of the Bible,
that we must undoubtedly regard it as the spot where the people
of God were led up to the foot of the mountain, we cannot
possibly fix upon the plain of er Rahah as the place of encamp-
ment in the desert of Sinai. The very expression " desert of
Sinai," which is applied to the place of encampment, is hardly
reconcilable with this opinion. For example, if the Sinai of
the Old Testament is identical with the present Jebel Musa,
and the whole group of mountains bore the name of Horeb, the
plain of er Rahah could not with propriety be called the desert
of Sinai, for Sinai cannot even be seen from it, but is completely
hidden by the Ras es Sufsafeh of Horeb. Moreover, the road
from the plain of er Rahah into the plain of es Sebayeh through
the Sebayeh valley is so long and so narrow, that the people of
Israel, who numbered more than 600,000 men, could not pos-
sibly have been conducted from the camp in er Rahah into
the Sebayeh plain, and so up to Mount Sinai, and then, after
being placed in order there, and listening to the promulgation
of the law, have returned to the camp again, all in a single day.
The- Sebayeh valley, or the road from the Sheikh valley to the
commencement of the plain of Sebayeh, is, it is true, only an
1 " Sinai falls towards the south for about 2000 feet into low granite
hills, and then into a large plain, which is about 1600 feet broad and nearly
five miles long, and rises like an amphitheatre opposite to the mountain
both on the south and east. It is a plain that Beems made to accom-
modate a large number gathered round the foot of the mountain " (Strauss,
p. 135).
~\
igitized byv
Google
CHAP. XIX. 1, 2. 93
hour long. But we have to add to this the distance from the
point at which the Sebayeh valley opens into the Sheikh valley
to the western end of the plain of er Rahah, viz. two hours'
journey, and the length of the plain of Sebayeh itself, which is
more than five miles long ; so that the Israelites, at least those
who were encamped in the western part of the plain of er Rahah,
would have to travel four or five hours before they could be
posted at the foot of Sinai. 1 Teschendorf calls this a narrow, bad
road, which the Israelites were obliged to pass through to Sinai,
when they came out of the Sheikh valley. At any rate, this is
true of the southern end of the valley of Sebayeh, from the
point at which it enters the plain of Sebayeh, where we can
hardly picture it to ourselves as broad enough for two hundred
men to walk abreast in an orderly procession through the
valley; 2 consequently, 600,000 men would have required two
hours' time simply to pass through the narrow southern end of
the valley of Sebayeh. Now, it is clear enough from the
narrative itself that Moses did not take merely the elders, as the
representatives of the nation, from the camp to the mountain to
meet with God (ver. 17), but took the whole nation, that is to
say, all the adult males of 20 years old and upwards ; and this
is especially evident from the command so emphatically and re-
peatedly given, that no one was to break through the hedge placed
' Some Englishmen who accompanied F. A. Strawis " had taken three-
quarters of an hour for a fast walk from the Sebayeh plain to Wady es
Sheikh ;" so that it is not too much to reckon an hour for ordinary walking.
DSbel took quite six hours to go round Horeb-Sinai, which is only a little
larger than Jebel Deir ; so that at least three hours must be reckoned as
necessary to accomplish the walk from the eastern end of the plain of er Rahah
through the Wady Sebayeh to the foot of Sinai. And Robinson took fifty
minutes to go with camels from the commencement of the Sheikh valley, at
the end of the Convent Valley, to the point at which it is joined by the valley
of Sebayeh (Palestine i. p. 215).
2 We are still in want of exact information from travellers as to the
breadth of the southern end of the valley of Sebayeh. Riiter merely states,
on the ground of MS. notes in Strauss' diary, that " at first it is somewhat
contracted on account of projections in the heights by which it is bounded
towards the south, but it still remains more than 500 feet broad." And
" when it turns towards the north-west, the wady is considerably widened ;
so that at the narrowest points it is more than 600 feet broad. And very
frequently, at the different curves in the valley, large basins are formed,
which would hold a considerable number of people."
Digitized by
Google
94 THE SECOND BOOK OF M0SE6.
round the mountain. It may also be inferred from the design
of the revelation itself, which was intended to make the deepest
impression upon the whole nation of that majesty of Jehovah
and the holiness of His law.
Under these circumstances, if the people had been encamped
in the plain of er Italian and the Sheikh valley, they could not
have been conducted to the foot of Sinai and stationed in the
plain of Sebayeh in the course of six hoars, and then, after hear-
ing the revelation of the law, have returned to their tents on the
same day ; even assuming, as Kurtz does (iii. p. 117), that " the
people were overpowered by the majesty of the promulgation
of the law, and fled away in panic;" for flight through so narrow
a valley would have cansed inevitable confusion, and therefore
would have prevented rather than facilitated rapidity of move-
ment. There is not a word, however, in the original text about
a panic, or about the people flying (see chap. xx. 18) : it is merely
stated, that as soon as the people witnessed the alarming phe-
nomena connected with the descent of God upon the mountain,
they trembled in the camp (chap. xix. 16), and that when they
were conducted to the foot of the mountain, and " saw the thun-
derings, and the lightnings, and the noise of the trumpet, and the
mountain smoking," and heard the solemn promulgation of the
decalogue, they trembled (W£, chap. xx. 18), and said to Moses,
through their elders and the heads of tribes, that they did not
wish God to speak directly to them any more, but wished Moses
to speak to God and listen to His words ; whereupon, after God
had expressed His approval of these words of the people, Moses
directed the people to return to their tents (chap. xx. 18 sqq. ;
Deut. v. 23-30). If, again, we take into consideration, that
after Moses had stationed the people at the foot of the mountain,
he went up to God to the summit of Sinai, and came down
again at the command of God -to repeat the charge to the
people, not to break through the hedge round the mountain
(vers. 20-25), and it was not till after this, that God proclaimed
the decalogue, and that this going up and down must also have
taken up time, it cannot have been for so very short a time that
the people continued standing round the bottom of the moun-
tain. But if all these difficulties be regarded as trivial, and we
include the evening and part of the night In order to afford time
for the people to return to their tents ; not only is there nothing
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIX. 9-6. 95
in the biblical text to require the hypothesis which assigns the
encampment to the plain of er Rahah, and the posting of the
people at Sinai to the plain of Sebayeh, but there are various
allusions which seem rather to show that such a hypothesis is
inadmissible. It is very obvious from -chap. xxiv. 17, that the
glory of the Lord upon the top of the mountain could be seen
from the camp ; and from chap, xxxiv. 1-3, that the camp, with
both the people and their cattle in it, was so immediately in the
neighbourhood of Sinai, that the people could easily have
ascended the mountain, and the cattle could have grazed upon
it. Now this does not apply in the least to the plain of er
Eahah, from which not even the top of Jebel Musa can be
seen, and where the cattle could not possibly have grazed upon
it, but only to the plain of Sebayeh ; and therefore proves that
the camp in " the desert of Sinai" is not to be sought for in the
plain of er Rahah, but in the plain of Sebayeh, which reaches
to the foot of Sinai. If it should be objected, on the other hand,
that there is not room in this plain for the camp of the whole
nation, this objection is quite as applicable to the plain of er
Eahah, which is not large enough in itself to take in the entire
camp, without including a large portion of the Sheikh valley ;
and it loses all its force from the fact, that the mountains by
which the plain of Sebayeh is bounded, both on the south and
east, rise so gently and gradually, that they could be made use
of for the camp, and on these sides therefore the space is alto-
gether unlimited, and would allow of the widest dispersion of
the people and their flocks.
Vers. 3-6. Moses had known from the time of his call that
Israel would serve God on this mountain (iii. 12) ; and as soon
as the people were encamped opposite to it, he went up to God,
i.e. up the mountain, to the top of which the cloud had probably
withdrawn. There God gave him the necessary instructions for
preparing for the covenant: first of all assuring him, that He had
brought the Israelites to Himself to make them His own nation,
and that He would speak to them from the mountain (vers. 4-9) ;
and then ordering him to sanctify the people for this revelation
of the Lord (vers. 10-15). The promise precedes the demand ;
for the grace of God always anticipates the wants of man, and
does not demand before it has given. Jehovah spoke to Moses
" from Mount Horeb." Moses had probably ascended one of
Digitized by
Google
96 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
the lower heights, whilst Jehovah is to he regarded as on the
summit of the mountain. The words of God (vers. 4 sqq.) refer
first of all to what He had done for the Egyptians, and how He
had borne the Israelites on eagles' wings ; manifesting in this
way not only the separation between Israel and the Egyptians,
but the adoption of Israel as the nation of His especial grace
and favour. The " eagles' wings" are figurative, and denote
the strong and loving care of God. The eagle watches over its
young in the most careful manner, flying under them when it
leads them from the nest, lest they should fall upon the rocks,
and be injured or destroyed (cf. Deut. xxxii. 11, and for proofs
from profane literature, Bochart, Hieroz. ii. pp. 762, 765 sqq.)-
" And brought you unto Myself:" i.e. not "led you to the
dwelling-place of God on Sinai," as Knobel supposes ; but took
you into My protection and My especial care. — Ver. 5. This
manifestation of the love of God to Israel formed only the pre-
lude, however, to that gracious union which Jehovah was now
about to establish between the Israelites and Himself. If they
would hear His voice, and keep the covenant which was about
to be established with them, they should be a costly possession
to Him out of all nations (cf. Deut. vii. 6, xiv. 2, xxvi. 18).
n?ip does not signify property in general, but valuable property,
that which is laid by, or put aside («D), hence a treasure of
silver and gold (1 Chron. xxix. 3 ; Eccl. ii. 8). In the Sept. the
expression is rendered Xab<; irepiovaws, which the Scholiast in
Octat. interprets e£aipero?, and in Mai. iii. 17 el<s irepiiroCtjaiv :
hence the two phrases in the New Testament, Xoo? irepiovtruyt
in Tit. ii. 14, and Xao? eh irepiiroinaiv in 1 Pet. ii. 9. Jehovah
had chosen Israel as His costly possession out of all the nations
of the earth, because the whole earth was His possession, and
all nations belonged to Him as Creator and Preserver. The
reason thus assigned for the selection of Israel precludes at the
very outset the exclusiveness which would regard Jehovah as
merely a national Deity. The idea of the segullah is explained
in ver. 6 : "Ye shall be unto Me a kingdom of priests." n -??9?
signifies both kingship, as the embodiment of royal supremacy,
exaltation, and dignity, and the kingdom, or the union of both
king and subjects, i.e. the land and nation together with its
king. In the passage before us, the word has been understood
by most of the early commentators, both Jewish and Christian,
x-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIX. 8-6. 97
and also in the ancient versions, 1 in the first or active sense, so
that the expression contains the idea, " Ye shall be all priests
and kings"- {Luther) ; prceditos fore tarn sacerdotali quam regie
honore {Calvin) ; quod reges et saeerdotes sunt in republica, id
vos eritis mihi (Drusius). This explanation is required by both
the passage itself and the context. For apart from the fact
that kingship is the primary and most general meaning of the
■word naPDD (cf. *1W IwDD, the kingship, or government of
David), the other (passive) meaning would not be at all suitable
here ; for a kingdom of priests could never denote the fellowship
existing in a kingdom between the king and the priests, but only
a kingdom or commonwealth consisting of priests, i.e. a king-
dom the members and citizens of which were priests, and as
priests constituted the n????, in other words, were possessed of
royal dignity and power ; for f w | ?D, fiaaikeia, always includes
the idea of "fco or ruling (Paerikeveiv). The LXX. have quite
hit the meaning in their rendering : fiacrtkeiov iepdrevfm. Israel
was to be a regal body of priests to Jehovah, and not merely a
nation of priests governed by Jehovah. The idea of the theo-
cracy, or government of God, as founded by the establishment
of the Sinaitic covenant institution in Israel, is not at all involved
in the term " kingdom of priests." The theocracy established by
the conclusion of the covenant (chap, xxiv.) was only the means
adopted by Jehovah for making His chosen people a royal body
of priests ; and the maintenance of this covenant was the indis-
pensable subjective condition, upon which their attainment of this
divinely appointed destiny and glory depended. This promise
of Jehovah expressed the design of the call of Israel, to which
it was to be fully conducted by the covenant institution of the
theocracy, if it maintained the covenant with Jehovah. The
object of Israel's kingship and priesthood was to be found in
the nations of the earth, out of which Jehovah had chosen
Israel as a costly possession. This great and glorious promise,
the fulfilment of which could not be attained till the completion
1 LXX. : (iocai'keiat itpuTiv/tx, a royal priesthood, i.e. a priestly na-
tion of royal power and glory, pna fO^D : Kings-priests (Onkelos). —
" Eritis coram me reges coronati {vbbl ^Of) vincti coronis) et saeerdotes
ministrantes n (Jonathan). — " Eritis meo nomini reges et saeerdotes" (Jer.
Targ.).
I PENT. — VOL. II. G
Digitized by
Google
98 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
of the kingdom of God, when the Israel of God, the Church of
the Lord, which Jesus Christ, the first-begotten from the dead,
and prince (ap%w, ruler) of the kings of the earth, has made
a " kingdom," " priests onto God and His Father" (Rev. L 6
and v. 10, where the reading should be /ScwiXtt? teal lepeis),
is exalted to glory with Christ as the first-born among many
brethren, and sits upon His throne and reigns, has not been
introduced abruptly here. On the contrary, the way was already
prepared by the promises made to the patriarchs, of the blessing
which Abraham would become to all the nations of the earth,
and of the kings who were to spring from him and come out of
the loins of Israel (Gen. xii. 3, xvii. 6, xxxv. 11), and still more
distinctly by Jacob's prophecy of the sceptre of Judah, to whom,
through Shiloh, the willing submission of the nations should be
made (Gen. xlix. 10). But these promises and prophecies are
outshone by the clearness, with which kingship and priesthood
over and for the nations are foretold of Israel here. This king-
ship, however, is not merely of a spiritual kind, consisting, as
Luther supposes, in the fact, that believers " are lords over
death, the devil, hell, and all evil," but culminates in the uni-
versal sway foretold by Balaam in Num. xxiv. 8 and 17 sqq.,
by Moses in his last words (Deut. xxxiii. 29), and still more
distinctly in Dan. vii. 27, to the people of the saints of the Most
High, as the ultimate end of their calling from God. The
spiritual attitude of Israel towards the nations was the result of
its priestly character. As the priest is a mediator between God
and man, so Israel was called to be the vehicle of the know-
ledge and salvation of God to the nations of the earth. By
this it unquestionably acquired an intellectual and spiritual
character ; but this includes, rather than excludes, the govern-
ment of the world. For spiritual and intellectual supremacy
and rule must eventually ensure the government of the world,
as certainly as spirit is the power that overcomes the world.
And if the priesthood of Israel was the power which laid the
foundation for its kingship, — in other words, if Israel obtained
the H37DD or government over the nations solely as a priestly
nation, — the Apostle Peter, when taking up this promise (I. ii. 9),
might without hesitation follow the Septuagint rendering (ficurC-
Xeiov lepdrevfrn), and substitute in the place of the " priestly
kingdom," a " royal priesthood ;" for there is no essential dif-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIX. 8-6. 99
ference between the two, the kingship being founded upon the
priesthood, and the priesthood completed by the kingship.
As a kingdom of priests, it was also necessary that Israel
should be a " holy nation." Gens sancta hie dicitur non respectu
pietatis vel sanctimonies, sed quam Deus singulari privilegio ab
aliis separavit. Verum ab hoc sanctijicatione pendet altera, netnpe
ut sanctitatern colant, qui Dei gratia eximii sunt, atque ita vicis-
sim Deum sanctificent (Calvin). This explanation is in general
a correct one ; for these words indicate the dignity to which
Israel was to be elevated by Jehovah, the Holy One, through
its separation from the nations of the earth. But it cannot be
shown that tPfti? ever means " separated." Whether we suppose
it to be related to BHn, and Bhh the newly shining moonlight, or
compare it with the Sanskrit dhusch, to be splendid, or beautiful,
in either case the primary meaning of the word is, " to be
splendid, pure, untarnished." Dieslel has correctly observed,
that the holiness of God and Israel is most closely connected
with the covenant relationship ; but he is wrong in the conclu-
sion which he draws from this, namely, that " holy" was origi-
nally only a u relative term," and that a thing was holy " so far
as it was the property of God." For the whole earth is Jehovah's
property (ver. 5), but it is not holy on that account. Jehovah
is not holy only " so far as within the covenant He is both pos-
session and possessor, absolute life and the source of life, and
above all, both the chief good and the chief model for His
people" (Diestel), or " as the truly separate One, enclosed within
Himself, who is self-existent, in contrast with the world to which
He does not belong" (Hofmanri) ; but holiness pertains to God
alone, and to those who participate in the divine holiness, — not,
however, to God as the Creator and Preserver of the world, but
to God as the Redeemer of man. Light is the earthly reflection
of His holy nature : the Holy One of Israel is the light of Israel
(Isa. x. 17, cf. 1 Tim. vi. 16). The light, with its purity and
splendour, is the most suitable earthly element to represent the
brilliant and spotless purity of the Holy One, in whom there is
no interchange of light and darkness (Jas. i. 17). God is
called the Holy One, . because He is altogether pure, the clear
and spotless light ; so that in the idea of the holiness of God
there are embodied the absolute moral purity and perfection of
the divine nature, and His unclouded glory. Holiness and glory
Digitized by
Google
100 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
are inseparable attributes in God ; but in His relation to the
world they are so far distinguished, that the whole earth is full
of His glory, whilst it is to and in Israel that His holiness is
displayed (Isa. vi. 3) ; in other words, the glory of God is mani-
fested in the creation and preservation of the world, and His
holy name in the election and guidance of Israel (compare
Ps. civ. with Ps. ciii.). God has displayed the glory of His
name in the creation of the heavens and the earth (Ps. viii.) ;
but His way in Israel (Ps. lxxvii. 14), i.e. the work of God in
His kingdom of grace, is holy ; so that it might be said, that
the glory of God which streams forth in the material creation
is manifested as holiness in His saving work for a sinful world,
to rescue it from the <f>66pa of sin and death and restore it to
the glory of eternal life, and that it was manifested here in the
fact, that by the counsels of His own spontaneous love (Deut.
iv. 37) He chose Israel as His possession, to make of it a holy
nation, if it hearkened to His voice and kept His covenant. It
was not made this, however, by being separated from the other
nations, for that was merely the means of attaining the divine
end, but by the fact, that God placed the chosen people in the
relation of covenant fellowship with Himself, founded His king-
dom in Israel, established in the covenant relationship an insti-
tution of salvation, which furnished the covenant people with
the means of obtaining the expiation of their sins, and securing
righteousness before God and holiness of life with God, in order
that, by the discipline of His holy commandments, under the
" guidance of His holy arm, He might train and guide them to
the holiness and glory of the divine life. But as sin opposes
holiness, and the sinner resists sanctification, the work of the
holiness of God reveals itself in His kingdom of grace, not only
positively in the sanctification of those who suffer themselves to
be sanctified and raised to newness of life, but negatively also,
in the destruction of all those who obstinately refuse the guid-
ance of His grace; so that the glory of the thrice Holy One (Isa.
vi. 3) will be fully manifested both in the glorification of His
chosen people and the deliverance of the whole creation from the
bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children
of God (Rom. viii. 21), and also in the destruction of hardened
sinners, the annihilation of everything that is ungodly in this
world, the final overthrow of Satan and his kingdom, and the
X
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIX. 7-16. 101
founding of the new heaven and new earth. Hence not only
is every person, whom God receives into the sphere of His sin-
destroying grace, ^ij, or holy ; but everything which is applied
to the realization of the divine work of salvation, or consecrated
by God to this object. The opposite of ^i?, holy, is ?n, Koivo<s y
profanus (from 7?n to be loose, lit. the unbound), not devoted
to holy purposes and uses (cf. Lev. x. 10) ; and this term was
applied, not only to what was sinful and unclean ("?!?)> but to
everything earthly in its natural condition, because the whole
earth, with all that is upon it, has been involved in the conse-
quences of sin. n
Vers. 7-15. When Moses communicated to the people
through their elders this incomparable promise of the Lord, they
promised unanimously (WIT) to do all that Jehovah said ; and
when Moses reported to the Lord what the people had answered,
He said to Moses, " I will come to thee in the darkness of the
cloud, that the people may listen to My speaking to thee (3 W?&
as in Gen. xxvii. 5, etc.), and also believe thee for ever." As God
knew the weakness of the sinful nation, and could not, as the
Holy One, come into direct intercourse with it on account of its
unholiness, but was about to conclude the covenant with it
through the mediation of Moses, it was necessary, in order to
accomplish the design of God, that the chosen mediator should
receive special credentials ; and these were to consist in the fact
that Jehovah spoke to Moses in the sight and hearing of the
people, that is to say, that He solemnly proclaimed the funda-
mental law of the covenant in the presence of the whole nation
(chap. xix. 16-xx. 18), and showed by this fact that Moses was
the recipient and mediator of the revelation of God, in order that
the people might believe him "for ever" as the law was to pos-
sess everlasting validity (Matt. v. 18). — Vers. 10-16. God then
commanded Moses to prepare the 'people for His appearing or
speaking to them : (1) by their sanctification, through the wash-
ing of the body and clothes (see Gen. xxxv. 2), and abstinence
from conjugal intercourse (ver. 15) on account of the defile-
ment connected therewith (Lev. xv. 18); and (2) by setting
bounds round the people, that they might not ascend or touch
the mountain. The hedging or bounding (^•M?) of the people
is spoken of in ver. 23 as setting bounds about the mountain,
and consisted therefore in the erection of a barrier round the
Digitized by
Google
102 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
mountain, which was to prevent the people from ascending or
touching it. Any one who touched it (tfi?RJ, " its end" i.e. the
outermost pr lowest part of the mountain) was to be put to
death, whether man or beast. u No hand shall touch him" (the
individual who passed the barrier and touched the mountain),
i.e. no one was to follow him within the appointed boundaries,
but he was to be killed from a distance either by stones or darts.
(JTJ* for iTW, see Gesenius, § 69.) Not till " ilve drawing out of
tJie trumpet blast," or, as Luther renders it, "only when it
sounded long," could they ascend the mountain (ver. 13). /?*?,
from 73) to stream violently with noise, is synonymous with
'•J' 1 ? 0£ (J° s h» ▼*• 5), and was really the same thing as the l&ttP,
i.e. a long wind instrument shaped like a horn. ?5'n "^o is to
draw the horn, i.e. to blow the horn with tones long drawn out.
This was done either to give a signal to summon the people to
war (Judg. iii. 27, vi. 34), or to call them to battle (Judg. vii.
18 ; Job xxxix. 24, 25, etc.), or for other public proclamations.
No one (this is the idea) was to ascend the mountain on pain of
death, or even to touch its outermost edge ; but when the horn
was blown with a long blast, and the signal to approach was
given thereby, then they might ascend it (see ver. 21),— of course
not 600,000 men, which would have been physically impossible,
but the people in the persons of their representatives the elders.
1PI3 rtuS signifies to go up the mountain in ver. 13 as well as in
ver. 12, and not merely to come to the foot of the mountain
(see Deut. v. 5).
Vers. 16-25. After these preparations, on the morning of the
third day (from the issuing of this divine command), Jehovah
came down upon the top of Mount Sinai (ver. 20), manifesting
His glory in fire as the mighty, jealous God, in the midst of
thunders (fb$>) and lightnings, so that the mountain burned with
fire (Deut. iv. 11, v. 20), and the smoke of the burning mountain
ascended as the smoke (]fV for )vty), and the whole mountain
trembled (ver. 18), at the same time veiling in a thick cloud the
fire of His wrath and jealousy, by which the unholy «re con-
sumed. Thunder and lightning bursting forth from the thick
cloud, and fire with smoke, were the elementary substrata, which
rendered the glory of the divine nature visible to men, though in
such a way that the eye of mortals beheld no form of the spiri-
tual and invisible Deity. These natural phenomena were accom-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIX. 16-25. 103
panied by a loud trumpet blast, which u blew long and waxed
louder and louder" (vers. 16 and 19 ; see Gen. viii. 3), and was, as
it were, the herald's call, announcing to the people the appear-
ance of the Xiord, and summoning them to assemble before Him
and listen to His words, as they sounded forth from the fire and
cloudy darkness. The blast (^p) of the shophar (ver. 19), i.e.
the trakirir/^ Geov, the trump of God, such a trumpet as is used
in the service of God (in heaven, 1 Thess. iv. 16 ; see Winer's
Grammar), is not " the voice of Jehovah," but a sound resembling
a trumpet blast. Whether this sound was produced by natural
means, or, as some of the earlier commentators supposed, by
angels, of whom myriads surrounded Jehovah when He came
down upon Sinai (Deut. xxxiii. 2), it is impossible to decide. At
this alarming phenomenon, " all the people that was in the camp
trembled" (ver. 16). For according to chap. xx. 20 (17), it was
intended to inspire them with a salutary fear of the majesty of
God. Then Moses conducted the people (i.e. the men) out of
the camp of God, and stationed them at the foot of the moun-
tain outside the barrier (ver. 17) ; and " Moses spake" (ver. 19),
i.e. asked the Lord for His commands, u and God answered loud"
(Mp3), and told him to come up to the top of the mountain. He
then commanded him to go down again, and impress upon the
people that no one was to break through to Jehovah to see, i.e.
to break down the barriers that were erected around the moun-
tain as the sacred place of God, and attempt to penetrate into
the presence of Jehovah. Even the priests, who were allowed
to approach God by virtue of their office, were to sanctify them-
selves, that Jehovah might not break forth upon them (fiE 1 ), Le.
dash them to pieces. (On the form <^pVJ} for n" 1 " 1 ?!?? see Ewald,
§ 199 a). The priests were neither ^ the sons of Aaron," i.e.
Levitical priests, nor the first-born or principes populi, but " those
who had hitherto discharged the duties of the priestly office
according to natural right, and custom" (Baumgarten). Even
these priests were too unholy to be able to come into the pre-
sence of the holy God. This repeated enforcement of the com-
mand not to touch the mountain, and the special extension of it
even to the priests, were intended to awaken in the people a
consciousness of their own unholines3 quite as much as of the
unapproachable holiness of Jehovah. But this separation from
God, which arose from the unholiness of the nation, did not ex-
Digitized by
Google
104 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
tend to Moses and Aaron, who were to act as mediators, and
were permitted to ascend the mountain. Moreover, the prospect
of ascending the holy mountain " at the drawing of the blast"
was still before the people (ver. 13). And the strict prohibition
against breaking through the barrier, to come of their own accord
into the presence of Jehovah, is by no means at variance with
this. When God gave the sign to ascend the mountain, the
people might and were to draw near to Him. This sign, viz.
the long-drawn trumpet blast, was not to be given in any case
till after the promulgation of the ten words of the fundamental
law. But it was not given even after this promulgation ; not,
however, because " the development was altogether an abnormal
one, and not in accordance with the divine appointment in ver.
13, inasmuch as at the thunder, the lightning, and the sound of
the trumpet, with which the giving of the law was concluded,
they lost all courage, and instead of waiting for the promised
signal, were overcome with fear, and ran from the spot," for there
is not a word inlhe text about running away ; but because the
people were so terrified by the alarming phenomena which
accompanied the coming down of Jehovah upon the mountain,
that they gave up the right of speaking with God, and from a
fear of death entreated Moses to undertake the intercourse with
God on their behalf (chap. xx. 18-21). Moreover, we cannot
speak of an " abnormal development" of the drama, for the
simple reason, that God not only foresaw the course and issue of
the affair, but at the very outset only promised that He would
come to Moses in a thick cloud (ver. 9), and merely announced
and carried out His own descent upon Mount Sinai before the
eyes of the people in the terrible glory of His sacred majesty
(ver. 11), for the purpose of proving the people, that His fear
might be before their eyes (chap. xx. 20 ; cf. Deut. v. 28, 29).
Consequently, apart from the physical impossibility of 600,000
ascending the mountain, it never was intended that all the
people should do so. 1 What God really intended, came to pass.
1 The idea of the people fleeing and running away must have been got
by Kurtz from either Luther's or De Wette's translation. They have both of
them rendered 'U1 WJ*|, " they jkd and went far of," instead of " they
trembled and stood far off." And not only the supposed flight, but his idea
that " thunder, lightning, and the trumpet blast (which were silent in any
case during the utterance of the ten commandments), concluded the pro-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XX. 1. 105
After the people had been received into fellowship with Jehovah
through the atoning blood of the sacrifice, they were permitted
to ascend the mountain in the persons of their representatives,
and there to see God (chap. xxiv. 9-11).
THE TEN WOBDS OF JEHOVAH. — CHAP. XX. 1-21.
Ver. 1. The promulgation of the ten words of God, contain-
ing the fundamental law of the covenant, took place before
Moses ascended the mountain again with Aaron (chap. six. 24).
"All these words" are the words of God contained in vers. 2-17,
which are repeated again in Deut. v. 6-18, with "slight variations
that do not materially affect the sense, 1 and are called the " words
mulgation of the law, as they had already introduced it according to chap,
xix. 16," also rests upon a misunderstanding of the text of the Bible. There
is not a syllable in chap. xx. 18 about the thunder, lightning, and trumpet
blast bursting forth afresh after the proclamation of the ten commandments.
There is simply an account of the impression, which the alarming pheno-
mena, mentioned in chap. xix. 16-19 as attending the descent of Jehovah
upon the mountain (ver. 20), and preceding His speaking to Moses and the
people, made upon the people, who had been brought out of the camp to
meet with God.
1 The discrepancies in the two texts are the following : — In Deut. v. 8
the cop. 1 (" or" Eng. Ver.), which stands before rmpn bh (any likeness), is
omitted, to give greater clearness to the meaning ; and on the other hand it
is added before n , t5^B' by in ver. 9 for rhetorical reasons. In the fourth
commandment (ver. 12) "itoE> is chosen instead of -faf in Ex. ver. 8, and
T T
"Ot is reserved for the hortatory clause appended in ver. 15: "and re-
member that thou wast a servant," etc. ; and with this is connected the
still further fact, that instead of the fourth commandment being enforced on
the ground of the creation of the world in six days and the resting of God
on the seventh day, their deliverance from Egypt is adduced as the subjec-
tive reason for their observance of the command. In ver. 14, too, the clause"
"nor thy cattle" (Ex. ver. 10) is amplified rhetorically, and particularized
in the words " thine ox, nor thine ass, nor any of thy cattle." So again, in
ver. 16, the promise appended to the fifth commandment, " that thy days
may be long in the land," etc., is amplified by the interpolation of the
clause " and that it may go well with thee," and strengthened by the words
" as Jehovah thy God hath commanded thee." In ver. 17, instead of ■)££> "IJ/
(Ex. ver. 16), the more comprehensive expression fcOE> "ty is chosen. Again,
in the tenth commandment (ver. 18), the " neighbour's wife " is placed
first, and then, after the " house," the field is added before the " man-ser-
vant and maid-servant," whereas in Exodus the "neighbour's house" is
Digitized by
Google
106 , THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
of the covenant, the ten words," in chap, xxxiv. 28, and Dent,
iv. 13, x. 4. God spake these words directly to the people, and
not " through the medium of His finite spirits," as v. Hofmann,
Kurtz, and others suppose. There is not a word in the Old Testa-
ment about any such mediation. Not only was it Elohim, accord-
ing to the chapter before us, who spake these words to the people,
and called Himself Jehovah, who had brought Israel out of
Egypt (ver. 2), but according to Deut. v. 4, Jehovah spake these
words to Israel " face to face, in the mount, out of the midst of
the fire." Hence, according to Buxtorf (Dissert, de Decahgo in
genere, 1642), the Jewish commentators almost unanimously
affirm that God Himself spake the words of the decalogue, and
that words were formed in the air by the power of God, and not
by the intervention and ministry of angels. 1 And even from the
New Testament this cannot be proved to be a doctrine of the
Scriptures. For when Stephen says to the Jews, in Acts vii. 53,
" Ye have received the law " et? StaTtvyk<: ayyeXcov (Eng. Ver.
" by the disposition of angels "), and Paul speaks of the law in
Gal. iii. 19 as Stararyeh oV arfyekofv ("ordained by angels"),
these expressions leave it quite uncertain in what the Stardo-aeiv
of the angels consisted, or what part they took in connection
mentioned first, and then the "wife" along with the "man-servant and
maid-servant ; " and instead of the repetition of Ibrui, the synonym
ffitWin is employed. Lastly, in Deuteronomy all the commandments from
rt¥"in nS onwards are connected together by the repetition of the cop. )
before every one, whereas in Exodus it is not introduced at all. — Now if,
after what has Ipeen said, the rhetorical and hortatory intention is patent
in all the variations of the text of Deuteronomy, even down to the trans-
position of wife and house in the last commandment, this transposition
must also be attributed to the freedom with which the decalogue was repro-
duced, and the text of Exodus be accepted as the original, which is not
to be altered in the interests of any arbitrary exposition of the command-
ments.
1 This also applies to the Targums. Onkehs and Jonathan have » ?i>D*
in ver. 1, and the Jerusalem Targum *q tow W>D. But in the popular
Jewish Midrash, the statement in Deut. xxxiii. 2 (cf. Ps. lxviii, 17), that
Jehovah came down upon Sinai " out of myriads of His holiness," i.e.
attended by myriads of holy angels, seems to have given rise to the notion
that God spake through angels. Thus Joseplms represents King Herod as
saying to the people, " For ourselves, we have learned from God the most
excellent of our doctrines, and the most holy part of our law through angels"
(Ant. 15, 5, 3, Whiston's translation).
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XX. 1. 107
with the giving of the law. 1 So again, in Heb. ii. 2, where the
law, " the word spoken by angels " (&V arfyi\wv), is placed in
contrast with the "salvation which at the first began to be
spoken by the Lord " (But rov Kvplov), the antithesis is of so
indefinite a nature that it is' impossible to draw the conclusion
with any certainty, that the writer of this epistle supposed the
speaking of God at the promulgation of the decalogue to have
been effected through the medium of a number of finite spirits,
especially when we consider that in the Epistle to the Hebrews
speaking is the term applied to the divine revelation generally
(see chap. i. 1). As his object was not to describe with preci-
sion the manner in which God spake to the Israelites from Sinai,
but only to show the superiority of the Gospel, as the revelation
of salvation, to the revelation of the law ; he was at liberty to
select the indefinite expression oV dyyeXmv, and leave it to the
readers of his epistle to interpret it more fully for themselves
from the Old Testament. According to the Old Testament,
however, the law was given through the medium of angels, only
so far as God appeared to Moses, as He had done to the patri-
archs, in the form of the " Angel of the Lord," and Jehovah
came down upon Sinai, according to Deut. xxxiii. 2, surrounded
by myriads of holy angels as His escort. 8 The notion that God
1 That Stephen cannot have meant to say that God spoke through a
number of finite angels, is evident from the fact, that in ver. 88 he had
spoken just before of the Angel (in the singular) who spoke to Moses upon
Mount Sinai, and had described him in vers. 35 and 30 as the Angel who ap-
peared to Moses in the bash, i.e. as no other than the Angel of Jehovah who
was identical with Jehovah. " The Angel of the Lord occupies the same
place in ver. 38 as Jehovah in Ex. xix. The angels in ver. 63 and Gal.
iii. 19 are taken from Deut. xxxiii. And there the angels do not come in
the place of the Lord, but the Lord comes attended by them" (Hengsten-
berg).
3 Lud. • de Dieu, in his commentary on Acts vii. 53, after citing the
parallel passages Gal. iii. 19 and Heb. ii. 2, correctly observes, that " horum
diotorum haec videtur esse ratio et Veritas. S. Stephanus supra v. 39 dixit,
Angeram locutum esse cmn Mose in monte Sina, eundem nempe qui in rubo
ipsa apparuerat, ver. 35 qui quamvis in se Deus hie tamen x«r' oUonftlai
tanquam Angelus Dei cseteroramque angelorum prafectus consideratus e
medio angelorum, qui enm undique stipabant, legem in monte Mosi dedit.
. . . Atque inde colligi potest causa, cur apostolus Heb. ii. 2, 8, Legi
Evangelium tantopere anteferat. Etsi enim utriusque auctor et promul-
gator fuerit idem Dei Alius, quia tamen legem tulit in forma angeli e
senatu angelico et velatus gloria angelorum, tandem vero caro factus et in
Digitized by
Google
108 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
spake through the medium of "His finite spirits" can only be
sustained in one of two ways : either by reducing the angels to
personifications of natural phenomena, such as thunder, light-
ning, and the sound of a trumpet, a process against which the
writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews enters his protest in chap,
xii. 19, where he expressly distinguishes the " voice of words "
from these phenomena of nature ; or else by affirming, with v.
Hofmann, that God, the supernatural, cannot be conceived of
without a plurality of spirits collected under Him, or apart from
His active operation in the world of bodies, in distinction from
which these spirits are comprehended with Him and under Him,
so that even the ordinary and regular phenomena of nature
would have to be regarded as the workings of angels ; in which
case the existence of angels as created spirits would be called in
question, and they would be reduced to mere personifications of
divine powers.
The words of the covenant, or ten words, were written by
God upon two tables of stone (chap, xxxi. 18), and are called
the law and the commandment ( n J-f?^ fTjfoin) in chap. xxiv. 12,
as being the kernel and essence of the law. But the Bible con-
tains neither distinct statements, nor definite hints, with reference
to the numbering and division of the commandments upon
the two tables, — a clear proof that these points do not possess
the importance which has frequently been attributed to them.
Two different views have arisen in the course of time. Some
divide the ten commandments into two pentads, one upon each
table. Upon the first they place the commandments concerning
(1) other gods, (2) images, (3) the name of God, (4) the Sabbath,
and (5) parents ; on the second, those concerning (1) murder,
(2) adultery, (3) stealing, (4) false witness, and (5) coveting.
Others, again, reckon only three to the first table, and seven to
the second. In the first they include the commandments re-
specting (1) other gods, (2) the name of God, (3) the Sabbath,
or those which concern the duties towards God; and in the
second, those respecting (1) parents, (2) murder, (3) adultery,
(4) stealing, (5) false witness, (6) coveting a neighbour's house,
(7) coveting a neighbour's wife, servants, cattle, and other pos-
carne manifestatus, gloriam prse Be ferens non angelorum Bed unigeniti filii
Dei, erangelium ipsemet, humana voce, habitans inter homines pradicavit,
merito lex angelorum sermo, evangelium autem solius filii Dei dicitur."
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XX L 109
sessions, or those which concern the duties towards one's neigh-
bour. The first view, with the division into two fives, we find in
Josephu8 (Ant. iii. 5, 5) and Philo {quia rer. divin. hcer. § 35,
de Decal. § 12, etc.) ; it is unanimously supported by the fathers
of the first four centuries, 1 and has been retained to the present
day by the Eastern and Reformed Churches. The later Jews
agree so far with this view, that they only adopt one command
ment against coveting ; but they differ from it in combining the
commandment against images with that against false gods, and
taking the introductory words " I am the Lord thy God " to be
the first commandment. This mode of numbering, of which we
find the first traces in Julian Apostata (in Cyrilli Alex. c. Julian
I. V. init.), and in an allusion made by Jerome (on Hos. x. 10),
is at any rate of more recent origin, and probably arose simply
from opposition to the Christians. It still prevails, however,
among the modern Jews.*
The second view was brought forward by Augustine, and no
one is known to have supported it previous to him. In his
Qucest. 71 on Ex., when treating of the question how the com-
mandments are to be divided (" utrum quatuor sint usque ad
prseceptum de Sabbatho, quae ad ipsum Deum pertinent, sex au-
tem reliqua, quorum primum : Honora patrem et matrem, qua?
ad hominem pertinent : an potius ilia tria sint et ipsa septem"),
he explains the two different views, and adds, "Mihi tamen
videntur congruentius accipi ilia tria et ista septem, quoniam
Trinitatem videntur ilia, quae ad Deum pertinent, insinnare dili-
gentius intuentibus." He then proceeds still further to show
that the commandment against images is only a fuller explana-
tion of that against other gods, but that the commandment not
to covet is divided into two commandments by the repetition of
the words, " Thou shalt not covet," although " concupiscentia
1 They either speak of two tables with five commandments upon each
{Iren. adv. hser. ii. 42), or mention only one commandment against covet-
ing (Constit. apost. i. 1, vii. 8 ; Theoph. ad Autol. ii. 50 ; Tertull. adv. Marc.
ii. 17 ; Ephr. Syr. ad Ex. 20 ; Epiphan. User. ii. 2, etc.), or else they ex-
pressly distinguish the commandment against images from that against other
gods (Origen, homil. 8 in Ex. ; Hieron. ad Ephes. vi. 2 ; Greg. Naz. carm.
i. 1 ; Sulpicius Sev. hist. sacr. i. 17, etc.).
* It is adopted by Gemar. Mace. f. 24 a ; Targ. Jon. on Ex. and Deut. ;
Mechilla on Ex. xx. 16 ; Pesikta on Deut. v. 6 ; and the rabbinical com-
mentators of the middle ages.
Digitized by
Google
1 10 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
uxoris alien ae et concupiscentia domus alienae tantum in peccando
differant." In this division Augustine generally reckons the
commandment against coveting the neighbour's wife as the
ninth, according to the text of Deuteronomy ; although in several
instances he places it after the coveting of the house, according
to the text of Exodus. Through the great respect that was felt
for Augustine, this division became the usual one in the Western
Church ; and it was adopted even by Luther and the Lutheran
Church, with this difference, however, that both the Catholic
and Lutheran Churches regard the commandment not to covet
a neighbour's house as the ninth, whilst only a few here and
there give the preference, as Augustine does, to the order adopted
in Deuteronomy.
Now if we inquire, which of these divisions of the ten com-
mandments is the correct one, there is nothing to warrant either
the assumption of the Talmud and the Rabbins, that the words,
" I am Jehovah thy God," etc., form the first commandment, or
the preference given by Augustine to the text of Deuteronomy.
The words, " I am the Lord," etc., contain no independent mem-
ber of the decalogue, but are merely the preface to the com-
mandments which follow. u Hie sermo nondum senno mandati
est, sed quis sit, qui mandat, ostendit" (Origen, homil. 8 in Ex.).
But, as we have already shown, the text of Deuteronomy, in all
its deviations from the text of Exodus, can lay no claim to ori-
ginality. As to the other two views which have obtained a foot-
ing in the Church, the historical credentials of priority and
majority are not sufficient of themselves to settle the question in
favour of the first, which is generally called the Philonian
view, from its earliest supporter. It must be decided from the
text of the Bible alone. Now in both substance and form this
speaks against the Augustinian, Catholic, and Lutheran view,
and in favour of the Philonian, or Oriental and Reformed. In
substance ; for whereas no essential difference can be pointed out
in the two clauses which prohibit coveting, so that even Luther
has made but one commandment of them in his smaller cate-
chism, there was a very essential difference between the com-
mandment against other gods and that against making an image
of God, so far as the Israelites were concerned, as we may see
not only from the account of the golden calf at Sinai, but also
from the image worship of Gideon (Judg. viii. 27), Micah
Digitized by
Google
CHAP XX. L 111
(Jndg. xvii.), and Jeroboam {1 Kings xii. 28 sqq.). In form ;
for the last five commandments differ from the first five, not
only in the fact that no reasons are assigned for the former,
whereas all the latter are enforced by reasons, in which the ex-
pression " Jehovah thy God" occurs every time ; but still more
in the fact, that in the text of Deuteronomy all the command-
ments after " Thou shalt do no murder" are connected together
by the copula \ which is repeated before every sentence, and
from which we may see that Moses connected the command-
ments which treat of duties to on^'s neighbour more closely to-
gether, and by thus linking them together showed that they
formed the second half of the decalogue.
The weight of this testimony is not counterbalanced by the
division into parasholh and the double accentuation of the
Masoretic text, viz. by accents both above and below, even
if we assume that this was intended in any way to indicate a
logical division of the commandments. In the Hebrew MSS.
and editions of the Bible, the decalogue is divided into ten
parashoth, with spaces between them marked either by D (Setuma)
or S (Phetuchd) ; and whilst the commandments against other
gods and images, together with the threat and promise appended
to them (vers. 3-6), form oneparashah, the commandment against
coveting (ver. 14) is divided by a setuma into two. But accord-
ing to Kennicott (ad Ex. xx. 17, Deut. v. 18, and diss, gener.
p. 59) this setuma was wanting in 234 of the 694 MSS. con-
sulted by him, and in many exact editions of the Bible as well ;
so that the testimony is not unanimous here. It is no argument
against this division into parashoth, that it does not agree either
with the Philonian or the rabbinical division of the ten com-
mandments, or with the Masoretic arrangement of the verses
and the lower accents which correspond to this. For there can
be no doubt that it is older than the Masoretic treatment of the
text, though it is by no means original on that account. Even
when the Targum on the Song of Sol. (v. 13) says that the
tables of stone were written in ten D*t?t? or O^tP, i.e. rows or
strophes, like the rows of a garden full of sweet odours, this
Targum is much too recent to furnish any valid testimony to the
original writing and plan of the decalogue. And the upper
accentuation of the decalogue, which corresponds to the division
into parashoth, has just as little claim to be received as a testi-
Digitized by
Google
112 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
mony in favour of " a division of the verses which was once
evidently regarded as. very significant " (JZwald) ; on the con-
trary, it was evidently added to the lower accentuation simply in
order that the decalogue might be read in the synagogues on
particular days after the parashoth. 1 Hence the double accen-
tuation was only so far of importance, as showing that the
Masorites regarded the parashoth as sufficiently important, to be
retained for reading in the synagogue by a system of accentua-
tion which corresponded to them. But if this division into
parashoth had been regarded by the Jews from time immemorial
as original, or Mosaic, in its origin ; it would be impossible to
understand either the rise of other divisions of the decalogue, or
the difference between this division and the Masoretic accentua-
tion and arrangement of the verses. From all this so much at
any rate is clear, that from a very early period there was a dis-
position to unite together the two commandments against other
gods and images ; but assuredly on no other ground than be-
cause of the threat and promise with which they are followed,
and which must refer, as was correctly assumed, to both com-
mandments. But if these two commandments were classified as
one, there was no other way of bringing out the number ten,
than to divide the commandment against coveting into two. But
as the transposition of the wife and the house in the two texts
could not well be reconciled with this, the setuma which separated
them in ver 14 did not meet with universal reception.
Lastly, on the division of the ten covenant words upon the
two tables of stone, the text of the Bible contains no other infor-
mation, than that " the tables were written on both their sides "
(chap, xxxii. 15), from which we may infer with tolerable cer-
tainty, what would otherwise have the greatest probability as being
the most natural supposition, viz. that the entire contents of the
" ten words " were engraved upon the tables, and not merely the
1 See Geiger (wissensch. Ztschr. iii. 1, 151). According to the testi-
mony of a Rabbin who had embraced Christianity, the decalogue was read
in one way, when it occurred as a Sabbath parashah, either in the middle
of January or at the beginning of July, and in another way at the feast of
Pentecost, as the feast of the giving of the law ; the lower accentuation
being followed in the former case, and the upper in the latter. We may
compare with this the account given in En Israel, fol. 103, col. 3, that one
form of accentuation was intended for ordinary or private reading, the other
for public reading in the synagogue.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XX. 2. 113
ten commandments in the stricter sense, without the accompany-
ing reasons. 1 But if neither the numbering of the ten command-
ments nor their arrangement on the two tables was indicated in
the law as drawn up for the guidance of the people of Israel,
so that it was possible for even the Israelites to come to different
conclusions on the subject ; the Christian Church has all the
more a perfect right to handle these matters with Christian
liberty and prudence for the instruction of congregations in the
law, from the fact that it is no longer bound to the ten com-
mandments, as a part of the law of Moses, which has been
abolished for them through the fulfilment of Christ, but has to
receive them for the regulation of its own doctrine and life, ^
simply as being the unchangeable feorm of the holy will of God q
which was fulfilled through Christ.
Ver. 2. The ten words commenced with a declaration of
Jehovah concerning Himself, which served as a practical basis
for the obligation on the part of the people to keep the com-
mandments : "I am Jehovah thy God, who brought thee," etc.
By bringing them out of Egypt, the house of bondage, Jehovah
had proved to the Israelites that He was their God. This
glorious act, to which Israel owed its existence as an independent
nation, was peculiarly fitted, as a distinct and practical manifes-
tation of unmerited divine love, to kindle in the hearts of the
people the warmest love in return, and to incite them to keep
the commandments. These words are not to be regarded, as
1 If the whole of the contents stood upon the table, the ten words
cannot have been arranged either according to Philo's two pentads, or
according to Augustine's division into three and seven ; for in either case
there would have been far more words upon the first table than upon the
second, and, according to Augustine's arrangement, there would have been
131 upon one table, and only 41 upon the other. We obtain a much more
suitable result, if the words of vers. 2-7, t.e. the first three commandments
according to Philo's reckoning, were engraved upon the one table, and the
other seven from the Sabbath commandment onwards upon the other ; for
in that case there would be 96 words upon the first table and 76 upon the
second. If the reasons for the commandments were not written along with
them upon the tables, the commandments respecting the name and nature
of God, and the keeping of the Sabbath, together with the preamble, which
could not possibly be left out, would amount to 73 words in all, the com-
mandment to honour one's parents would contain 5 words, and the rest of the
commandments 26.
PENT. — VOL. II. H
Digitized by
Google
114 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
Knobel supposes, as either a confession, or the foundation of the
whole of the theocratical law, just as Salmons, Plato, and other
lawgivers placed a belief in the existence of the gods at the head
of their laws. They were rather the preamble, as Calvin says,
by which God prepared the minds of the people for obeying
them, and in this sense they were frequently repeated to give
emphasis to other laws, sometimes in full, as in chap. xxix. 46,
Lev. xix. 36, xxiii. 43, xxv. 38, 55, xxvi. 13, etc., sometimes
in the abridged form, " I am Jehovah your God," as in Lev. xi.
44, xviii. 2, 4, 30, xix. 4, 10, 25, 31, 34, xx. 7, etc., for which
the simple expression, " I am Jehovah," is now and then sub-
stituted, as in Lev. xix. 12, 14, 16, 18, etc.
Ver. 3. The First Word. — "Let there not be to thee (thou
shalt have no) other gods ^B ?}?," lit. beyond Me (/V as in Gen.
xlviii. 22 ; Ps. xvi. 2), or in addition to Me (?V as in Gen.
xxxi. 50 ; Deut. xix. 9), equivalent to irKr/v e/j.ov (LXX.), " by
the side of Me " (Luther). " Before Me," coram me ( Vulg., etc.),
is incorrect ; also against Me, in opposition to Me. (On ^B see
chap, xxxiii. 14). The singular nw does not require that we
should regard Elohim as an abstract noun in the sense of Deity ;
and the plural Q^pK would not suit this rendering (see Gen.
i. 14). The sentence is quite a general one, and not only pro-
hibits polytheism and idolatry, the worship of idols in thought,
word, and deed (cf. Deut. viii. 11, 17, 19), but also commands
the fear, love, and worship of God the Lord (cf. Deut. vi. 5,
13, 17, x. 12, 20). Nearly all the commandments are couched
in the negative form of prohibition, because they presuppose
the existence of sin and evil desires in the human heart.
Vers. 4-6. The Second Word. — To the prohibition of
idolatrous worship there is linked on, as a second word, the pro-
hibition of the worship of images. "After declaring in the
first commandment who was the true God, He commanded that
He alone should be worshipped ; and now He defines what is
His lawful worship " (Calvin). " Thou shalt not make to thy-
self a likeness and any form of that which is in heaven above,"
etc. itiPV is construed with a double accusative, so that the
literal rendering would be " make, as a likeness and any form,
that which is in heaven," etc. ?DB, from ?DS to carve wood or
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XX. 4-6. 115
stone, is a figure made of wood or stone, and is used in Judg.
xvii. 3 sqq. for a figure representing Jehovah, and in other places
for figures of heathen deities — of Asherah,for example, in 2 Kings
xxi. 7. njMOT does not signify an image made by man, but a
form which is seen by him (Num. xii. 8 ; Deut. iv. 12, 15 sqq.;
Job iv. 16; Ps. xvii. 15). In Deut. v. 8 (cf. iv. 16) we find
ruion-?3 ?DB "likeness of any form:" so that in this passage
also rmDFTOl is to be taken as in apposition to ?DB, and the \ as
vav explk. : " and indeed any form," viz. of Jehovah, not of
heathen gods. That the words should be so understood, is de-
manded by Deut. iv. 15 sqq., where Moses lays stress upon the ,
command, not to make to themselves an image (!>db) in the form
of any sculpture (•'OD), and gives this as the reason : " For ye saw
no form in the day when Jehovah spake to you at Horeb." This
authoritative exposition of the divine prohibition on the part of
Moses himself proves undeniably, that i>DB and ruion are to be
understood as referring to symbolical representations of Jehovah.
And the words which follow also receive their authoritative ex-
position from Deut. iv. 17 and 18. By " that which is in heaven "
we are to understand the birds, not the angels, or at the most, i
according to Deut. iv. 19, the stars as well ; by " that which is
in earth" the cattle, reptiles, and the larger or smaller animals ;
and by " that tohich is in the water" fishes and water animals.
" Under the earth" is appended to the " water," to express in a
pictorial manner the idea of its being lower than the solid
ground (cf. Deut. iy. 18). It is not only evident from the con-
text that the allusion is not to the making of images generally,
but to the construction of figures of God as objects of religious
reverence or worship, but this is expressly stated in ver. 5 ; so
that even Calvin observes, that " there is no necessity to refute
what some have foolishly imagined, that sculpture and painting
of every kind are condemned here." With the same aptness he
has just before observed, that " although Moses only speaks of
idols, there is no doubt that by implication he condemns all the
forms of false worship, which men have invented for them-
selves." — Ver. 5. " Thou shalt not pray to them and serve them." ,
(On the form &}■&% with the o-sound under the guttural, see
Ewald, § 251d.). ninnE'n signifies bending before God in prayer,
and invoking His name ; "tty, worship by means of sacrifice and
religious ceremonies. The suffixes Dn? and 0~ (to them, and
Digitized by
Google
116 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
them) refer to the things in heaven, etc., which are made into
pesel, symbols of Jehovah, as being the principal object of the
previous clause, and not to iTODroai. ?DB, although ?DS 13J> is
applied in P3. xcvii. 7 and 2 Bangs xvii. 41 to a rude idolatrous
worship, which identifies the image as the symbol of deity with
the deity itself. Still less do they refer to D^HK DWK in ver. 3.
The threat and promise, which follow in vers, bb and 6, relate
to the first two commandments, and not to the second alone ; be-
cause both of them, although forbidding two forms of idolatry,
viz. idolo-latry and ikono-latry, are combined in a higher unity,
by the fact, that whenever Jehovah, the God who cannot be
copied because He reveals His spiritual nature in no visible
form, is worshipped under some visible image, the glory of the
invisible God is changed, or Jehovah changed into a different
God from what He really is. Through either form of idolatry,
therefore, Israel would break its covenant with Jehovah. For
this reason God enforces the two commandments with the solemn
declaration : " I, Jehovah thy God, am WjJ 7K a jealous God;"
i.e. not only JfrXtanj?, a zealous avenger of sinners, but %rj\o-
TU7TO?, a jealous God, who will not transfer to another the
honour that is due to Himself (Isa. xlii. 8, xlviii. 11), nor tole-
rate the worship of any other god (chap, xxxiv. 14), but who
directs the warmth of His anger against those who hate Him
(Deut. vi. 15), with the same energy with which the warmth of
His love (Song of Sol. viii. 6) embraces those who love Him,
except that love in the form of grace reaches much further than
wrath. The sin of the fathers He visits (punishes) on the children
to the third and fourth generation. CEW third (sc. children)
are not grandchildren, but great-grandchildren, and E^?" 1 the
fourth generation. On the other hand He show3 mercy to the
thousandths, i.e. to the thousandth generation (cf. Deut. vii. 9,
where "rtl *!?£? stands for DWKp). The cardinal number is used
here for the ordinal, for which there was no special form in the
case of *|?K. The words 'SOB^ and ^nk^, in which the punish-
ment and grace are traced to their ultimate foundation, are of
great importance to a correct understanding of this utterance of
God. The ? before , wfe' does not take up the genitive with |°1P
again, as Knobel supposes, for no such use of 7 can be established
from Gen. vii. 11, xvi. 3, xiv. 18, xli. 12, or in fact in any way
whatever. In this instance ? signifies " at " or " in relation to ;"
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XX. 4-6. 117
and ^WB"?, from its very position, cannot refer to the fathers alone,
but to the fathers and children to the third and fourth generation.
If it referred to the fathers alone, it would necessarily stand after
rust. 'ui ^anto is to be taken in the same way. God punishes
the sin of the fathers in the children to the third and fourth
generation in relation to those who hate Him, and shows mercy
to the thousandth generation in relation to those who love Him. ,
The human race is a living organism, in which not only sin and !
wickedness are transmitted, but evil as the curse of the sin and \
the punishment of the wickedness. As children receive their '
nature from their parents, or those who beget them, so they have
also to bear and atone for their fathers' guilt. This truth forced
itself upon the minds even of thoughtful heathen from their own
varied experience (cf. Aeschyl. Sept. 744 ; Eurip. according to
Plutarch de sera num. vind. 12, 21 ; Cicero de not. deorum 3, 38 ; ^
and Baumgarten-Crusiu8, bibl. Theol. p. 208). Yet there is no
fate in the divine government of the world, no irresistible neces-
sity in the continuous results of good and evil ; but there reigns
in the world a righteous and gracious God, who not only restrains
the course of His penal judgments, as soon as the sinner is
brought to reflection by the punishment and hearkens to the
voice of God, but who also forgives the sin and iniquity of those
who love Him, keeping mercy to the thousandth generation
(chap, xxxiv. 7). The words neither affirm that sinning fathers
remain unpunished, nor that the sins of fathers are punished in
the children and grandchildren without any fault of their own :
they simply say nothing about whether and how the fathers
themselves are punished; and, in order to show the dreadful
severity of the penal righteousness of God, give prominence to
the fact, that punishment is not omitted, — that even when, in the
long-suffering of God, it is deferred, it is not therefore neglected,
but that the children have to bear the sins of their fathers, when-
ever, for example (as naturally follows from the connection of
children with their fathers, and, as Onhelos has added in his
paraphrase of the words), " the children fill up the sins of their
fathers," so that the descendants suffer punishment for both their
own and their forefathers' misdeeds (Lev. xxvi. 39 ; Isa. lxv. 7 ;
Amos vii. 17 ; Jer. xvi. 11 sqq. ; Dan. ix. 16). But when, on
the other hand, the hating ceases, when the children forsake
their fathers' evil ways, the warmth of the divine wrath is turned
Digitized by
Google
118 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
into the warmth of love, and God becomes ipn nfefy (" showing
mercy ") to them ; and this mercy endures not only to the third
and fourth generation, but to the thousandth generation, though
only in relation to those who love God, and manifest this love
by keeping His commandments. " If God continues for a long
time His visitation of sin, He continues to all eternity His mani-
festation of mercy, and we cannot have a better proof of this
than in the history of Israel itself" (Schultz). 1
Ver. 7. The Third Word, " Thou slialt not take the name
of Je/iovah thy God in vain" is closely connected with the former
two. Although there is no God beside Jehovah, the absolute
One, and His divine essence cannot be seen or conceived of
under any form, He had made known the glory of His nature
in His name (chap. iii. 14 sqq., vi. 2), and this was not to be
abused by His people. Dtp KtM does not mean to utter the name
(NtM never has this meaning), but in all the passages in which it
has been so rendered it retains its proper meaning, " to take up,
lift up, raise ;" e.g. to take up or raise (begin) a proverb (Num.
xxiii. 7 ; Job xxvii. 1), to lift up a song (Ps. lxxxi. 3), or a prayer
(Isa. xxxvii. 4). And it is evident from the parallel in Ps.
xxiv. 4, " to lift up his soul to vanity," that it does not mean
" to utter" here. Kit? does not signify a lie 05^), but according
to its etymon i"iKB>, to be waste, it denotes that which is waste
and in disorder, hence that which is empty, vain, and nugatory,
for which there is no occasion. This word prohibits all employ-
ment of the name of God for vain and unworthy objects, and
includes not only false swearing, which is condemned in Lev.
xix. 12 as a profanation of the name of Jehovah, but trivial
swearing in the ordinary intercourse of life, and every use of the
name of God in the service of untruth and lying, for impreca-
tion, witchcraft, or conjuring; whereas the true employment of
the name of God is confined to " invocation, prayer, praise, and
thanksgiving," which proceeds from a pure, believing heart.
The natural heart is very liable to transgress this command, and
therefore it is solemnly enforced by the threat, " for Jehovah
will not hold him guiltless" (leave him unpunished), etc.
1 On the visitation of the sins of the fathers upon the children, see also
Hengstenberg, Dissertations, vol. ii. p. 446 sqq.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XX. 8-11. 119
Vers. 8-11. The Fourth "Word, " Remember the Sabbath-
day, to keep it holy," presupposes an acquaintance with the Sab-
bath, as the expression " remember" is sufficient to show, but
not that the Sabbath had been kept before this. From the his-
tory of the creation that had been handed down, Israel must
have known, that after God had created the world in six days He
rested the seventh day, and by His resting sanctified the day
(Gen. ii. 3). But hitherto there had been no commandment
given to man to sanctify the day. This was given for the first
time to Israel at Sinai, after preparation had been made for it
by the fact that the manna did not fall on the seventh day of the
week (chap. xvi. 22). Here therefore the mode of sanctifying
it was established for the first time. The seventh day was to be
naB* (a festival-keeper, see chap. xvi.. 23), i.e. a day of rest be-
longing to the Lord r and to be consecrated to Him by the fact
that no work was performed upon it. The command not to do
any (fej) work applied to both man and beast without exception.
Those who were to rest are divided into two classes by the omis-
sion of the cop. 1 before T!?? (ver. 10) : viz. first, free Israelites
(" thou") and their children (" thy son and thy daughter") ; and
secondly, their slaves (man-servant and maid-servant), and cattle
(beasts of draught and burden), and their strangers, ue. foreign
labourers who had settled among the Israelites. " Within tliy
gates" is equivalent to in the cities, towns, and villages of thy
land, not in thy houses (cf. Deut. v. 14, xiv. 21, etc.). "W? (a
gate) is only applied to the entrances to towns, or large en-
closed courts and palaces, never to the entrances into ordinary
houses, huts, and tents. n 38?p work (cf. Gen. ii. 2), as distin-
guished From fn^g labour, is not so much a term denoting a
lighter kind of labour, as a general and comprehensive term ap-
plied to the performance of any task, whether easy or severe.
nib}? is the execution of a definite task, whether in field labour
(Ps. cjv. 23) and mechanical employment (chap, xxxix. 32) on
the one hand, or priestly service and the duties connected with
worship on the other (chap. xii. 25, 26 ; Num. iv. 47). On the
Sabbath (and also on the day of atonement, Lev. xxiii. 28, 31)
every occupation was to rest ; on the other feast-days only labo-
rious occupations (JTpP. n ? K ??, Lev. xxiii. 7 sqq.), i.e. such occu-
pations as came under the denomination of labour, business, or
industrial employment. Consequently, not only were ploughing
Digitized by
Google
120 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
and reaping (xxxiv. 21), pressing wine and carrying goods
(Neh. xiii. 15), bearing burdens (Jer. xvii. 21), carrying on
trade (Amos viii. 5), and holding markets (Neh. xiii. 15 sqq.)
prohibited, but collecting manna (xvi. 26 sqq.), gathering wood
(Num. xv. 32 sqq.), and kindling fire for the purpose of boiling
or baking (chap. xxxv. 3). The intention of this resting from
every occupation on the Sabbath is evident from the foundation
upon "which the commandment is based in ver. 11, viz. that at
the creation of the heaven and the earth Jehovah rested on the
seventh day, and therefore blessed the Sabbath-day and hallowed
it. This does not imply, however, that " Israel was to follow
the Lord by keeping the Sabbath, and, in imitation of His
example, to be active where the Lord was active, and rest
where the Lord rested ; to copy the Lord in accordance with
the lofty aim of man, who was created in His likeness, and make
the pulsation of the divine life in a certain sense his own"
(Schultz). For although a parallel is drawn, between the creation
of the world by God in six days and His resting upon the seventh
day on the one hand, and the labour of man for six days
and his resting upon the seventh on the other ; the reason for
the keeping of the Sabbath is not to be found in this parallel,
but in the fact that God blessed the seventh day and hallowed
it, because He rested upon it. The significance of the Sabbath,
therefore, is to be found in God's blessing and sanctifying the
seventh day of the week at the creation, i.e. in the fact, that after
the work of creation was finished on the seventh day, God
blessed and hallowed the created world, filling it with the powers
of peace arid good belonging to His own blessed rest, and rais-
ing it to a participation in the pure light of His holy nature (see
Gen. ii. 3). For this reason His people Israel were to keep
the Sabbath now, not for the purpose of imitating what God
had done, and enjoying the blessing of God by thus following
God Himself, but that on this day they also might rest from their
work ; and that all the more, because their work was no longer
the work appointed to man at the first, when he was created in the
likeness of God, work which did not interrupt his blessedness in
God (Gen. ii. 15), but that hard labour in the sweat of his brow
to which he had been condemned in consequence of the fall. In
order therefore that His people might rest from toil so oppres-
sive to both body and soul, and be refreshed, God prescribed the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XX. 8-11. 121
keeping of the Sabbath, that they might thus possess a day for
the repose and elevation of their spirits, and a foretaste of the
blessedness into which the people of God are at last to enter,
the blessedness of the eternal Karcnravav} atrb rmv epymv avrov
(Heb. iv. 10), the avdiravaw e/c r&v Komav (Rev. xiv. 13. See
my Archaeologie, § 77).
But instead of this objective ground for the sabbatical festi-
val, which furnished the true idea of the Sabbath, when Moses
recapitulated the decalogue, he adduced only the subjective
aspect of rest or refreshing (Deut. v. 14, 15), reminding the
people, just as in Ex. xxiii. 12, of their bondage in Egypt and
their deliverance from it by the strong arm of Jehovah, and
then adding, " therefore (that thou mightest remember this
deliverance from bondage) Jehovah commanded thee to keep
the Sabbath-day." This is not at variance with the reason
given in the present verse, but simply gives prominence to a
subjective aspect, which was peculiarly adapted to warm the
hearts of the people towards the observance of the Sabbath,
and to render the Sabbath rest dear to the people, since it
served to keep the Israelites constantly in mind of the rest which
Jehovah had procured for them from the slave labour of Egypt.
For resting from every work is the basis of the observance of the
Sabbath ; but this observance is an institution peculiar to the '•
Old Testament, and not to be met with in any other nation, '
though there are many among whom the division of weeks
occurs. The observance of the Sabbath, by being adopted into
the decalogue, was made the foundation of all the festal times
and observances of the Israelites, as they all culminated in
the Sabbath rest. At the same time, as an ivroXi) tov vofiov,
an ingredient in the Sinaitic law, it belonged to the u shadow
of (good) things to come" (Col. ii. 17, cf. Heb. x. 1), which
was to be done away when the " body" in Christ had come.
Christ is Lord of the Sabbath (Matt. xii. 8), and after the
completion of His work, He also rested on the Sabbath. But
He rose again on the Sunday ; and through His resurrection,
which is the pledge to the world of the fruit of His redeeming
work, He has made this day the KvpuiKr) r/fiipa (Lord's day)
for His Church, to be observed by it till the. Captain of its
salvation shall return, and having finished the judgment upon
all His foes to the very last shall lead it to the rest of that
Digitized by
Google
122 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
eternal Sabbath, which God prepared for the whole creation
through His own resting after the completion of the heaven
and the earth.
Ver. 12. The Fifth Word, " Honour thy father and thy
mother" does not refer to fellow-men, but to " those who are
the representatives (vicarii) of God. Therefore, as God is to be
served with honour and fear, His representatives are to be so
too" (Luther decern, prcec.). This is placed beyond all doubt by
Lev. xix. 3, where reverence towards parents is placed on an
equality with the observance of the Sabbath, and IfWi (fear) is
substituted for 13? (honour). It also follows from "133, which,
as Calvin correctly observes, nihil aliud est quam Deo et homi-
nibus, qui dignitate pollent, justum honorem deferre. Fellow-
men or neighbours (jn) are to be loved (Lev. xix. 18) : parents,
on the other hand, are to be honoured and feared ; reverence is
to be shown to them with heart, mouth, and hand — in thought,
word, and deed. But by father and mother we are not to un-
derstand merely the authors and preservers of our bodily life,
but also the founders, protectors, and promoters of our spiritual
life, such as prophets and teachers, to whom sometimes the name
of father is given (2 Kings ii. 12, xiii. 14), whilst at other times
paternity is ascribed to them by their scholars being called sons
and daughters (Ps. xxxiv. 12, xlv. 11 ; Prov. i. 8, 10, 15, etc.) ;
also the guardians of our bodily and spiritual life, the powers
ordained of God, to whom the names of father and mother
(Gen. xlv. 8 ; Judg. v. 7) may justly be applied, since all govern-
ment has grown out of the relation of father and child, and
draws its moral weight and stability, upon which the prosperity
and well-being of a nation depends, from the reverence of chil-
dren towards their parents. 1 And the promise, " that thy days
may be long (thou mayest live long) in the land which Jehovah
thy God giveth thee" also points to this. There is a double
promise here. So long as the nation rejoiced in the possession
of obedient children, it was assured of a long life or existence
in the land of Canaan ; but there is also included the promise
1 " In this demand for reverence to parents, the fifth commandment lays
the foundation for the sanctification of the whole social life, inasmuch as it
thereby teaches us to acknowledge a divine authority in the same" (Oehler,
•Dekalog, p. 322).
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XX. IS- 17. 123
of a long life, i.e. a great age, to individuals (cf. Deut. vi. 2,
xxii. 7), just as we find in 1 Kings iii. 14 a good old age
referred to as a special blessing from God. In Deut. v. 16, the
promise of long life is followed by the words, " and that it may
be well with thee," which do not alter the sense, but merely ex-
plain it more fully.
As the majesty of God was thus to be honoured and feared
in parents, so the image of God was to be kept sacred in all
men. This thought forms the transition to the rest of the com-
mandments.
Vers. 13-17. The other Five Words or commandments,
which determine the duties to one's neighbour, are summed up
in Lev. xix. 18 in the one word, " Love thy neighbour as thy-
self." The order in which they follow one another is the fol-
lowing : they first of all secure life, marriage, and property
against active invasion or attack, and then, proceeding from deed
to word and thought, they forbid false witness and coveting. 1
If, therefore, the first three commandments in this table refer
primarily to deeds ; the subsequent advance to the prohibition of
desire is a proof that the deed is not to be separated from the
disposition, and that " the fulfilment of the law is only com-
plete when the heart itself is sanctified" (Oehler). Accordingly,
in the command, " Thou shalt not kill," not only is the accom-
plished fact of murder condemned, whether it proceed from open
violence or stratagem (chap. xxi. 12, 14, 18), but every act that
endangers human life, whether it arise from carelessness (Deut.
xxii. 8) or wantonness (Lev. xix. 14), or from hatred, anger,
and revenge (Lev. xix. 17, 18). Life is placed at the head of
these commandments, not as being the highest earthly pos-
session, but because it is the basis of human existence, and in
the life the personality is attacked, and in that the image of God
(Gen. ix. 6). The omission of the object still remains to be
1 Luther has pointed out this mirum et aptum ordinem, and expounds
it thus : " Incipit prohibitio a majori usque ad minimum, nam maximum
damnum est occisio hominis, deinde proximum violatio conjugis, tertium
ablatio facultatis. Quod qui in iis nocere non possunt, saltern lingua
nocent, ideo quartum est lsesio famse. Quodsi in iis non prevalent omni-
bus, saltern corde l&dunt proximum, cupiendo qua ejus sunt, in quo et in-
vidia proprie consistit."
Digitized by
Google
124 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
noticed, as showing that the prohibition includes not only the
killing of a fellow-man, but the destruction of one's own life,
or suicide. — The two following commandments are couched in
equally general terms. Adultery, *1M, which is used in Lev.
xx. 10 of both man and woman, signifies (as distinguished from
mat to commit fornication) the sexual intercourse of a husband
with the wife of another, or of a wife with the husband of an-
other. This prohibition is not only directed against any assault
upon the husband's dearest possession, for the tenth command-
ment guards against that, but upholds the sacredness of marriage
as the divine appointment for the propagation and multiplication
of the human race ; and although addressed primarily to the
man, like all the commandments that were given to the whole
nation, applies quite as much to the woman as to the man, just
as we find in Lev. xx. 10 that adultery was to be punished with
death in the case of both the man and the woman. — Property
was to be equally inviolable. The command, " Thou shalt not
steal" prohibited not only the secret or open removal of another
person's property, but injury done to it, or fraudulent retention
of it, through carelessness or indifference (chap. xxi. 33, xxii. 13,
xxiii. 4, 5 ; Deut. xxii. 1—4). — But lest these commandments
should be understood as relating merely to the outward act as
such, as they were by the Pharisees, in opposition to whom
Christ set forth their true fulfilment (Matt. v. 21 sqq.), God
added the further prohibition, " Thou shalt not answer as a false
witness against thy neighbour," i.e. give false testimony against
him. rojf with 3 : to answer or give evidence against a person
(Gen. xxx. 33). ">}? is not evidence, but a witness. Instead of
"•^ "*$> a w i tness °f a lie, w ho consciously gives utterance to
falsehood, we find 8}^ iy in Deuteronomy, one who says what
is vain, worthless, unfounded (WB> VCE*, chap, xxiii. 1 ; on NIB*
see ver. 7). From this it is evident, that not only is lying pro-
hibited, but false and unfounded evidence in general ; and not
only evidence before a judge, but false evidence of every kind,
by which (according to the context) the life, married relation,
or property of a neighbour might be endangered (cf. chap,
xxiii. 1 ; Num. xxxv. 30 ; Deut. xvii. 6, xix. 1 5, xxii. 13 sqq.).
— The last or tenth commandment is directed against desiring
(coveting), as the root from which every sin against a neighbour
springs, whether it be in word or deed. The ion, imOvfielv
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XX. 18-21. 125
{LXX.), coveting, proceeds from the heart (Prov. vi. 25), and
brings forth sin, which " is finished" in the act (Jas. i. 14, 15).
The repetition of the words, " Thou shalt not covet," does not
prove that there are two different commandments, any more
than the substitution of fflNnn in Deut. v. 18 for the second
Ibnn. ion and fjKnn are synonyms, — the only difference between
them being, that " the former denotes the desire as founded
upon the perception of beauty, and therefore excited from with-
out ; the latter, desire originating at the very outset in the person
himself, and arising from his own want or inclination" (Schultz).
The repetition merely serves to strengthen and give the greater
emphasis to that which constitutes the very kernel of the com-
mand, and is just as much in harmony with the simple and
appropriate language of the law, as the employment of a
synonym in the place of the repetition of the same word is with
the rhetorical character of Deuteronomy. Moreover, the objects
of desire do not point to two different commandments. This is
evident at once from the transposition of the house and wife in
Deuteronomy. JV3 (the house) is not merely the dwelling, but
the entire household (as in Gen. xv. 2, Job viii. 15), either in-
cluding the wife, or exclusive of her. In the text before us she
is included ; in Deuteronomy she is not, but is placed first as the
crown of the man, and a possession more costly than pearls
(Prov. xii. 4, xxxi. 10). In this case, the idea of the " house"
is restricted to the other property belonging to the domestic
economy, which is classified in Deuteronomy as fields, servants,
cattle, and whatever else a man may have ; whereas in Exodus
the " house" is divided into wife, servants, cattle, and the rest
of the possessions.
Vers. 18-21 (cf. Deut. v. 19-33). The terrible phenomena,
amidst which the Lord displayed His majesty, made the intended
impression upon the people who were stationed by the mountain
below, so that they desired that God would not speak to them
any more, and entreated Moses through their elders to act as
mediator between them, promising at the same time that they
would hear him (cf. chap. xix. 9, 16-19). CN 4 ', perceiving :
njo to see being frequently used for perceiving, as being the
principle sense by which most of the impressions of the outer
world are received (e.g. Gen. xlii. 1 ; Isa. xliv. 16 ; Jer. xxxiii.
24). U?B?, fire-torches, are the vivid flashes of lightning (chap.
Digitized by
Google
126 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
xix. 16). " They trembled and stood afar off:" not daring to
come nearer to the mountain, or to ascend it. "And they said,"
viz. the heads of the tribes and elders : cf. Deut. v. 20, where
the words of the people are more fully given. "Lest we die : "
cf, Deut. v. 21-23. Though they had discovered that God
speaks with man, and yet man lives ; they felt so much that they
were "Nfa, flesh, i.e. powerless, frail, and alienated by sin from
the holy God, that they were afraid lest they should be con-
sumed by this great fire, if they listened any longer to the voice
of God. — Ver. 20. To direct the sinner's holy awe in the pre-
sence of the holy God, which was expressed in these words of the
people, into the proper course of healthy and enduring penitence,
Moses first of all took away the false fear of death by the en-
couraging answer, " Fear not," and then immediately added,
" for God is come to prove you." JtfBJ referred to the testing of
the state of the heart in relation to God, as it is explained in
the exegetical clause which follows : " that His fear maybe before
your faces, that ye sin not." By this terrible display of His
glory, God desired to inspire them with the true fear of Him-
self, that they might not sin through distrust, disobedience, or
resistance to His guidance and commands. — Ver, 21. " So the
people stood afar off" (as in ver 18), not " went far away," al-
though, according to Deut. v. 30, Moses was directed by God to
tell the people to return to their tents. This is passed over here,
and it is merely observed, for the purpose of closing the first act
in the, giving the law, and preparing the way for the second, that
the people remained afar off, whereas Moses (and Aaron, cf . xix.
24) drew near to the darkness where God was, to receive the
further commands of the Lord.
THE LEADING FEATURES IN THE COVENANT CONSTITUTION. —
CHAP. XX. 22-XXIV. 2.
These refer, first of all, to the general form of divine worship
in Israel (xx. 22-26) ; secondly, to the rights of the Israelites,
(a) in a civil or social point of view, i.e. so far as their relation
to one another was concerned (xxi. 1-xxiii. 13), and (b) in their
religious and theocratical relation to Jehovah (chap, xxiii. 14—
19) ; and thirdly, to the attitude which Jehovah would main-
tain towards Israel (chap, xxiii. 20-33).
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XX. 22-26. 127
Chap. xx. 22-26. The General Form op Divine Wor-
ship in Israel. — As Jehovah had spoken to the Israelites from
heaven, they were not to make gods of earthly materials, such
as silver and gold, by the side of Him, but simply to construct
an altar of earth or unhewn stones without steps, for the offer-
ing up of His sacrifices at the place where He would reveal
Himself. "From heaven" Jehovah came down upon Sinai en-
veloped in the darkness of a cloud ; and thereby He made known
to the people that His nature was heavenly, and could not be
imitated in any earthly material. " Ye shall not make with Me,"
place by the side of, or on a par with Me, "gods of silver and
gold," — that is to say, idols primarily intended to represent the
nature of God, and therefore meant as symbols of Jehovah, but
which became false gods from the very fact that they were in-
tended as representations of the purely spiritual God. — Ver. 24.
For the worship of Jehovah, the God of heaven, Israel needed
only an altar, on which to cause its sacrifices to ascend to God.
The altar, a» an elevation built up of earth or rough stones, was
a symbol of the elevation of man to God, who is enthroned on
high in the heaven ; and because man was to raise himself to
God in his sacrifices, Israel also was to make an altar, though
only of earth, or if of stones, not of hewn stones. " For if thou
swingest thy tool (3"in, lit. sharpness, then any edge tool) over it
(over the stone), thou defUest it" (ver. 25). " Of earth:" i.e.
not " of comparatively simple materials, such as befitted a re-
presentation of the creature " (Schultz on Deut. xii.) ; for the
altar was not to represent the creature, but to be the place to
which God came to receive man into His fellowship there. For
this reason the altar was to be made of the same material, which
formed the earthly soil for the kingdom of God, either of earth
or else of stones, just as they existed in their natural state ; not,
however, u because unpolished stones, which retain their true
and native condition, appear to be endowed with a certain native
purity, and therefore to be most in harmony with the sanctity of
an altar " (Spencer de legg. Hebr. rit. lib. ii. c. 6), for the " native
purity " of the earth does not agree with Gen. iii. 17 ; but because
the altar was to set forth the nature of the simple earthly soil,
unaltered by the hand of man. The earth, which has been in-
volved in the curse of sin, is to be renewed and glorified into the
kingdom of God, not by sinful men, but by the gracious hand
Digitized by
Google
128 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
of God alone. Moreover, Israel was not to erect the altar for
its sacrifices in any place that it might choose, but only in every
place in which Jehovah should bring His name to remembrance.
'U1 DB>T3?n does not mean "to make the name of the Lord re-
membered," i.e. to cause men to remember it ; but to establish a
memorial of His name, i.e. to make a glorious revelation of His
divine nature, and thereby to consecrate the place into a holy
soil (cf. iii. 5), upon which Jehovah would come to Israel and
bless it. Lastly, the command not to go up to the altar by steps
(ver. 26) is followed by the words, " that thy nakedness be not
discovered thereon." It was in the feeling of shame that the
consciousness of sin first manifested itself, and it was in the ,
shame that the sin was chiefly apparent (Gen. iii. 7) ; hence the
nakedness was a disclosure of sin, through which the altar of
God would be desecrated, and for this reason it was forbidden
to ascend to the altar by steps. These directions with reference
to the altar to be built do not refer merely to the altar, which
was built for the conclusion of the covenant, nor are they at
variance with the later instructions respecting the one altar at
the tabernacle, upon which all the sacrifices were to be presented
(Lev. xvii. 8, 9 ; Deut. xii. 5 sqq.), nor are they merely " pro-
visional;" but they lay the foundation for the future laws with
reference to the places of worship, though without restricting
them to one particular locality on the one hand, or allowing an
unlimited number of altars on the other. Hence "several
places and altars are referred to here, because, whilst the people
were wandering in the desert, there could be no fixed place for
the tabernacle " (Riehrri). But the erection of the altar is un-
questionably limited to every place which Jehovah appointed for
the purpose by a revelation. We are not to understand the
words, however, as referring merely to those places in which the
tabernacle and its altar were erected, and to the site of the
future temple (Sinai, Shiloh, and Jerusalem), but to all those
places also where altars were built and sacrifices offered on
extraordinary occasions, on account of God, — appearing there
such, for example, as Ebal (Josh. viii. 30 compared with Deut.
xxvii. 5), the rock in Ophrah (Judg. vi. 25, 26), and many other
places besides.
Chap. xxi. 1-xxiii. 13. Fundamental Rights of thh
Digitized by
Google
chap. xxi. i-ir. 129
Israelites in their Civil or Social Relations. — Chap.
xxi. 1-11. The mishpatim (ver. 1) are not the "laws, which
were to be in force and serve as rules of action," as Knobel
affirms, but the rights, by which the national life was formed
into a civil commonwealth and the political order secured.
These rights had reference first of all to the relation in which
the individuals stood one towards another. The personal rights
of dependants are placed at the head (vers. 2-11) ; and first
those of slaves (vers. 2-6), which are still more minutely ex-
plained in Deut. xv. 12-18, where the observance of them is
urged upon the hearts of the people on subjective grounds. —
Ver. 2. The Hebrew servant was to obtain his freedom without
paying compensation, after six years of service. According to
Deut. xv. 12, this rule applied to the Hebrew maid-servant as
well. The predicate ^y limits the rule to Israelitish servants,
in distinction from slaves of foreign extraction, to whom this
law did not apply (cf. Deut. xv. 12, " thy brother "). 1 An
Israelite might buy his own countryman, either when he was
sold by a court of justice on account of theft (chap. xxii. 1), or
when he was poor and sold himself (Lev. xxv. 39). The eman-
cipation in the seventh year of service was intimately connected
with the sabbatical year, though we are not to understand it as
taking place in that particular year. " He shall go out free, sc.
from his master's house, i.e. be set at liberty. D3n : without com-
pensation. In Deuteronomy the master is also commanded not
to let him go out empty, but to load him (P??? to put upon his
neck) from his flock, his threshing-floor, and his wine-press (i.e.
with corn and wine) ; that is to say, to give him as much as he
could carry away with him. The motive for this command is
drawn from their recollection of their own deliverance by
Jehovah from the bondage of Egypt. And in ver. 18 an addi-
tional reason is supplied, to incline the heart of the master to this
emancipation, viz. that " he has served thee for six years the
double of a labourer's wages," — that is to say, " he has served
and worked so much, that it would have cost twice as much, if it
had been necessary to hire a labourer in his place " (Schultz), —
and " Jehovah thy God hath blessed thee in all that thou doest,"
1 SaaUchittz is quite wrong in his supposition, that <"Oj; relates not to
Israelites, but to relations of the Israelites who had come over to them from
their original native land. (See my Archtiologie, § 112, Note 2.)
PENT. — VOL. II. I
Digitized by
Google
130 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
sc. through his service. — Vers. 3, 4. There were three different
circumstances possible, under which emancipation might take
place. The servant might have been unmarried and continued so
(teia : with his body, i.e. alone, single) : in that case, of course,
there was no one else to set at liberty. Or he might have
brought a wife with him ; and in that case his wife was to be
set at liberty as well. Or his master might have given him a
wife in his bondage, and she might have borne him children : in
that case the wife and children were to continue the property of
the master. This may appear oppressive, but it was an equitable
consequence of the possession of property in slaves at all. At
the same time, in order to modify the harshness of such a sepa-
ration of husband and wife, the option was given to the servant
to remain in his master's service, provided he was willing to re-
nounce his liberty for ever (vers. 5, 6). This would very likely
be the case as a general rule; for there were various legal arrange-
ments, which are mentioned in other places, by which the lot of
Hebrew slaves was greatly softened and placed almost on an
equality with that of hired labourers (cf. chap, xxiii. 12 ; Lev.
xxv. 6, 39, 43, 53 ; Deut. xii. 18, xvi. 11). In this case the master
was to take his servant D'wSn <>N, lit. to God, i.e., according to the
correct rendering of the LXX., -n-pbi to Kpn~qpu>v, to the place
where judgment was given in the name of God (Deut. i. 17 ; cf .
chap. xxii. 7, 8, and Deut. xix. 17), in order that he might make
a declaration there that he gave up his liberty. His ear was then
to be bored with an awl against the door or lintel of the house,
and by this sign, which was customary in many of the nations
of antiquity, to be fastened as it were to the house for ever.
That this was the meaning of the piercing of the ear against the
door of the house, is evident from the unusual expression in Deut.
xv. 17, " and put (the awl) into his ear and into the door, that he
may be thy servant for ever," where the ear and the door are
co-ordinates. "For ever," i.e. as long as he lives. Josephus and
the Kabbins would restrict the service to the time ending with
the year of jubilee, but without sufficient reason, and contrary
to the usage of the language, as D?V? is used in Lev. xxv. 46 to
denote service which did not terminate with the year of jubilee.
(See the remarks on Lev. xxv. 10 ; also my Archaologie.)
Vers. 7-11. The daughter of an Israelite, who had been sold
by her father as a maidservant ( n ??f), *'•«•, as the sequel shows,
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXI. 7-11. 131
as a housekeeper and concubine, stood in a different relation to
her master's house. She was not to go out like the men-ser-
vants, i.e. not to be sent away as free at the end of six years of
service; but the three following regulations, which are intro-
duced by DK (ver. 8), Dtfl (ver. 9), and DW (ver. 11), were to be
observed with regard to her. In the first place (ver. 8), " if she
please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall '
he let her be redeemed" The to before iTijr is one of the fifteen
cases in which to has been marked in the Masoretic text as
standing for r? ; and it cannot possibly signify not in the passage
before us. For if it were to be taken as a negative, u that he
do not appoint her," sc. as a concubine for himself, the pro-
noun tf> would certainly not be omitted. i^Bn (for Prnsn, see
Ges. § 53, Note 6), to let her be redeemed, i.e. to allow another
Israelite to buy her as a concubine ; for there can hardly have
been any thought of redemption on the part of the father, as it
would no doubt be poverty alone that caused him to sell his
daughter (Lev. xxv. 39). But " to sell her unto a strange nation
(i.e. to any one but a Hebrew), he shall have no power, if he acts
unfaithfully towards her" i.e. if he do not grant her the pro-
mised marriage. In the second place (vers. 9, 10), u if he ap-
point her as his son's wife, he shall act towards her according to
the rights of daughters," i.e. treat her as a daughter ; " and if he
take him (the son) anotlier (wife), — whether because the son was
no longer satisfied, or because the father gave the son another
wife in addition to her, — " lier food (" | KE>' flesh as the chief article
of food, instead of DH?, bread, because the lawgiver had persons
of property in his mind, who were in a position to keep concu-
bines), her raiment, and her duty of marriage he shall not diminish"
i.e. the claims which she had as a daughter for support, and as
his son's wife for conjugal rights, were not to be neglected ; he
was not to allow his son, therefore, to put her away or treat her
badly. With this explanation the difficulties connected with
every other are avoided. For instance, if we refer the words of
ver. 9 to the son, and understand them as meaning, " if the son
should take another wife," we introduce a change of subject
without anything to indicate it. If, on the other hand, we regard
them as meaning, " if the father (the purchaser) should take to
himself another wife," this ought to have come before ver. 9.
In the third place (ver. 11), "if he do not (do not grant) these three
Digitized by
Google
132 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
unto her, slie shall go out for nothing, without money" u These
three " are food, clothing, and conjugal rights, which are men-
tioned just before ; not " si earn non desponderit sibi nee filio, nee
redimi sit passus" (Rabbins and others), nor "if he did not
give her to his son as a concubine, but diminished her," as
Knobel explains it.
Vers. 12-17. Still higher than personal liberty, however, is
life itself, the right of existence and personality ; and the inflic-
tion of injury upon this was not only prohibited, but to be
followed by punishment corresponding to the crime. The prin-
ciple of retribution, jus talionis, which is the only one that
embodies the idea of justice, lies at the foundation of these
threats. — Vers. 12-14. A death-blow was to be punished with
death (cf. Gen. ix. 6 ; Lev. xxiv. 17). " He that smiteth a man
and (so that) he die (whether on the spot or directly afterwards
did not matter), he shall be put to death." This general rule is
still further defined by a distinction being drawn between acci-
dental and intentional killing. " But whoever has not lain in wait
(for another's fife), and God has caused it to come to his hand" (to
kill the other). ; i.e. not only if he did not intend to kill him, but
did not even cherish the intention of smiting him, or of doing
him harm from hatred and enmity (Num. xxxv. 16—23 ; Deut.
xix. 4, 5), and therefore did so quite unawares, according to a
dispensation of God, which is generally called an accident be-
cause it is above our comprehension. For such a man God
would appoint places of refuge, where he should be protected
against the avenger of blood. (On this point, see Num. xxxv.
9 sqq.) — Ver. 14. "But he who acts presumptuously against
his neighbour, to slay him with guile, thou sJialt take him from
Mine altar that he may die." These words are not to be under-
stood as meaning, that only intentional and treacherous killing
was to be punished with death; but, without restricting the
general rule in ver. 12, they are to be interpreted from then-
antithesis to ver. 13, as signifying that even the altar of
Jehovah was not to protect a man who had committed inten-
tional murder, and carried out his purpose with treachery.
(More on this point at Num. xxxv. 16 sqq.) By this regulation,
the idea, which was common to the Hebrews and many other
nations, that the altar as God's abode afforded protection to
any life that was in danger from men, was brought back to the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXI. 18-32. 133
true measure of ifs validity, and the place of expiation for sins
of weakness (cf. Lev. iv. 2, v. 15, 18 ; Num. xv. 27-31) was
prevented from being abused by being made a place of refuge
for criminals who were deserving of death. Maltreatment of a
father and mother through striking (ver. 15), man-stealing
(ver. 16), and cursing parents (ver. 17, cf. Lev. xx. 9), were all
to be placed on a par with murder, and punished in the same
way. By the " smiting " (p^n) of parents we are not to under-
stand smiting to death, for in that case HDJ would be added as
in ver. 12, but any kind of maltreatment. The murder of
parents is not mentioned at all, as not likely to occur and hardly
conceivable. The cursing (??p as in Gen. xii. 3) of parents is
placed on a par with smiting, because it proceeds from the same
disposition ; and both were to be punished with death, because the
majesty of God was violated in the persons of the parents (cf.
chap. xx. 12). Man-stealing was also no less a crime, being a sin
against the dignity of man, and a violation of the image of God.
For B*K " a man," we find in Deut. xxiv. 7, Cw « a soul," by
which both man and woman are intended, and the still more
definite limitation, " of his brethren of the children of Israel."
The crime remained the same whether he had sold him (the stolen
man), or whether he was still found in his hand. (For 1—1 as
a sign of an alternative in the linking together of short sentences,
see Prov. xxix. 9, and Ewald, § 361.) This is the rendering
adopted by most of the earlier translators, and we get no intelli-
gent sense if we divide the clauses thus : " and sell him so that
he is found in his hand."
Vers. 18—32. Fatal blows and the crimes placed on a par
with them are now followed in simple order by the laws relating
to bodily injuries. — Vers. 18, 19. If in the course of a quarrel
one man should hit another with a stone or with his fist, so that,
although he did not die, he " lay upon his bed," i.e. became bed-
ridden ; if the person struck should get up again and walk out
v with his staff, the other would be innocent, he should " only give
him his sitting and have him cured" i.e. compensate him for his
loss of time and the cost of recovery. This certainly implies, on
the one hand, that if the man died upon his bed, the injury was
to be punished with death, according to ver. 12 ; and on the
other hand, that if he died after getting up and going out, no
further punishment was to be inflicted for the injury done. —
Digitized by
Google
134 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
Vers. 20, 21. The case was different with regard to a slave. The
master had always the right to punish or " chasten" him with a
stick (Prov. x. 13, xiii. 24) ; this right was involved in the pa-
ternal authority of the master over the servants in his possession.
The law was therefore confined to the abuse of this authority in
outbursts of passion, in which case, " if the servant or the maid
should die under his hand (i.e. under his blows), he was to be
punished" (Dj53* Dpi : " vengeance shall surely be taken"). But
in what the Qpi was to consist is not explained ; certainly not in
slaying by the sword, as the Jewish commentators maintain.
The lawgiver would have expressed this by rW nto. No doubt
it was left to the authorities to determine this according to the
circumstances. The law in ver. 12 could hardly be applied to a
case of this description, although it was afterwards extended to
foreigners as well as natives (Lev. xxiv. 21, 22), for the simple
reason, that it is hardly conceivable that a master would inten-
tionally kill his slave, who was his possession and money. How
far the lawgiver was from presupposing any such intention here,
is evident from the law which follows in ver. 21, " Notwithstand-
ing, if he continue a day or two (i.e. remain alive), it shall not
be avenged, for he is his money." By the continuance of his
life, if only for a day or two, it would become perfectly evident
that the master did not wish to kill his servant ; and if never-
theless he died after this, the loss of the slave was punishment
enough for the master. There is no ground whatever for re-
stricting this regulation, as the Rabbins do, to slaves who were
not of Hebrew extraction. — Vers. 22-25. If men strove and
thrust against a woman with child, who had come near or be-
tween them for the purpose of making peace, so that her chil-
dren come out (come into the world), and no injury was done
either to the woman or the child that was born, 1 a pecuniary
1 The words n*l^ 1NS , 1 are rendered by the LXX. *«/ I2&0U to vxih'on
t vt: : i:
airms py iZuxoviaf&eiiov, and the corresponding clause JT!V ]iDN Dtfl by M»
W iZiixowfthoii fi ; consequently the translators have understood the words,
as meaning that the fruit, the premature birth of which was caused by the
blow, if not yet developed into a human form, was not to be regarded as in
any sense a human being, so that the giver of the blow was only required to
pay a pecuniary compensation, — as Philo expresses it, " on account of the
injury done to the woman, and because he prevented nature, which forms
and shapes a man into the most beautiful being, from bringing him forth
alive." But the arbitrary character of this explanation is apparent at once ;
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXI. 18-82. 135
compensation was to be paid, such as the husband of the woman
laid upon him, and he was to give it Dv?M by (by an appeal to)
arbitrators. A fine is imposed, because even if no injury had
been done to the woman and the fruit of her womb, such a blow
might have endangered life. (For N£ to go out of the womb,
see Gen. xxv. 25, 26.) The plural nn>j is employed for the
purpose of speaking indefinitely, because there might possibly be
more than one child in the womb; u But if injury occur (to the
mother or the child), thou shalt give soul for soul, eye for eye,
. . . wound for wound:" thus perfect retribution was to be made.
— Vers. 26, 27. But the lex talionis applied to the free Israelite
only, not to slaves. In the case of the latter, if the master
struck out an eye and destroyed it, i.e. blinded him with the
blow, or struck out a tooth, he was to let him go free, as a com-
pensation for the. loss of the member. Eye and tooth are indi-
vidual examples selected to denote all the members, from the
most important and indispensable down to the very least. —
Vers. 28—32. .The life of man is also protected against injury
from cattle (cf. Gen. ix. 5). " If an ox gore a man or a woman,
that they die, the ox shall be stoned, and its flesh shall not be
eaten;" because, as the stoning already shows, it was laden with
the guilt of murder, and therefore had become unclean (cf.
Num. xxxv. 33). The master or owner of the ox was innocent,
ec. if his ox had not been known to do so before. But if this
were the case, " if his master have been warned (lyV?? ^ n , lit.
testimony laid against its master), and notwithstanding this he
have not kept it in," then the master was to be put to death, be-
cause through his carelessness in keeping the ox he had caused
the death, and therefore shared the guilt. As this guilt, how-
ever, had not been incurred through an intentional crime, but
had arisen simply from carelessness, he was allowed to redeem
for 1t> only denotes a child, as a fully developed human being, and not the
fruit of the womb before it has assumed a human form. In a manner no
less arbitrary ]iDK has been rendered by Onkelos and the Rabbins HDSo,
death, and the clause is made to refer to the death of the mother alone, in
opposition to the penal sentence in vers. 23, 24, which not only demands life
for life, but eye for eye, etc., and therefore presupposes not death alone, but
injury done to particular members. The omission of fh, also, apparently
renders it impracticable to refer the words to injury done to the woman
alone.
Digitized by
Google
136 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
his forfeited life by the payment of expiation money (l?3, lit.
covering, expiation, cf. chap. xxx. 12), " according to all that was
laid upon him," sc. by the judge. — Vers. 31, 32. The death of a
son or a daughter through the goring of an ox was also to be
treated in the same way ; but that of a slave (man-servant or
maid-servant) was to be compensated by the payment of thirty
shekels of silver (i.e. probably the. ordinary price for the redemp-
tion of a slave, as the redemption price of a free Israelite was
fifty shekels, Lev. xxvii. 3) on the part of the owner of the ox ;
but the ox was to be killed in this case also. There are other
ancient nations in whose law books we find laws relating to the
punishment of animals for killing or wounding a man, but not
one of them had a law which made the owner of the animal
responsible as well, for they none of them looked upon human
life in its likeness of God.
Vers. 33-36. Passing from life to property, in connection
with the foregoing, the life of the animal, the most important
possession of the Israelites, is first of all secured against destruc-
tion through carelessness. If any one opened or dug a pit or
cistern, and did not close it up again, and another man's ox or
ass (mentioned, for the sake of example, as the most important
animals among the live stock of the Israelites) fell in and was
killed, the owner of the pit was to pay its full value, and the dead
animal to belong to him. If an ox that was not known to be
vicious gored another man's ox to death, the vicious animal was
to be sold, and its money (what it fetched) to be divided ; the
dead animal was also to be divided, so that both parties bore an
equal amount of damage. If, on the other hand, the ox had
been known to be vicious before, and had not been kept in, care-
fully secured, by its possessor, he was to compensate the owner
of the one that had been killed with the full value of an ox, but
to receive the dead one instead.
Chap. xxii. 1-4 (or ver. 37-chap. xxii. 3). With regard to
cattle-stealing, the law makes a distinction between what had
been killed or sold, and what was still alive and in the thief s
hand (or possession). In the latter case, the thief was to restore
piece for piece twofold (ver. 4) ; in the former, he was to re-
store an ox fivefold and a small animal (a sheep or a goat) four-
fold (ver. 1). The difference between the compensation for an
ox and a small animal is to be accounted for from the compara-
V
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXII. 2, 8. 137
tive worth of the cattle to the possessor, which determined the
magnitude of the theft and the amount of the compensation.
But the other distinctions of twofold, fourfold, and fivefold
restitution cannot be accounted for, either by supposing " that
the animal slain or sold was lost to its master, and might have
been of peculiar value to him " (Knobel), for such a considera-
tion of personal feelings would have been quite foreign to the
law, — not to mention the fact that an animal that had been sold
might be recovered by purchase ; or from the fact that " the
thief in this case had carried his crime still further " (Baum-
gdrten), for the main thing was still the theft, not the consump-
tion or -sale of the animal stolen. The reason can only have
lain in the educational purpose of the law : viz. in the inten-
tion to lead the thief to repent of his crime, to acknowledge his
guilt, and to restore what he had stolen. Now, as long as he
still retained the stolen animal in his own possession, having
neither consumed nor parted with it, this was always in his
power ; but the possibility was gone as soon as it had either
been consumed or sold (see my Archaeologie, § 154, Note 3). 1
Vers. 2, 3. Into the midst of the laws relating to theft, we
have one introduced here, prescribing what was to be done with
the thief. " If the thief be found breaking in (i.e. by night ac-
cording to ver. 3), and be smitten so that he die, there shall be no
blood to him (the person smiting him) ; if the sun has risen upon
him (the thief breaking in), there is blood to him:" i.e. in the
latter case the person killing him drew upon himself blood-guilti-
ness (D , o , J lit. drops of blood, blood shed), in the former case he
did not. " The reason for this disparity between a thief by night
and one in the day is, that the power and intention of a nightly
thief are uncertain, and whether he may not have come for the
purpose of committing murder ; and that by night, if thieves are
resisted, they often proceed to murder in their rage ; and also
that they can neither be recognised, nor resisted and appre-
hended with safety " (Calovius). In the latter case the slayer
contracted blood-guiltiness, because even the life of a thief was
1 Calvin gives the same explanation : Major in scelere obstinatiose prodit,
ubi res furtiva in quasslum conversa est, nee spes est uUa resipiscentix, atque
ita continuo progressu duplicatw malm Jidei crimen. Fieri potest ut fur
statim post delictum contremiscat : qui vero animal occidere ausus est, aut ven-
dere, prorsus in maleficio obduruit.
Digitized by
Google
138 THE SECOND BOOK OF HOSES.
to be spared, as he could be punished for his crime, and what
was stolen be restored according to the regulations laid down in
vers. 1 and 4. But if he had not sufficient to make retribution,
he was to be sold "for his stolen," i.e. for the value of what he
had stolen, that he might earn by his labour the compensation
to be paid.
Vers. 5, 6. Injury done to another marts field or corn was also
to be made good by compensation for the injury done. If any-
one should consume a field or a vineyard, and let loose his beast,
so that it fed in another man's field, he was to give the best of
his field and vineyard as restitution. These words do not refer to
wilful injury, for IW does not mean to drive in, but simply to let
loose, set at liberty ; they refer to injury done from carelessness,
when any one neglected to take proper care of a beast that was
feeding in his field, and it strayed in consequence, and began
grazing in another man's. Hence simple compensation was all
that was demanded ; though this was to be made " from the best
of his field," i.e. quicquid optimum habebit in agro vel vinea
(Jerome). 1 — Ver. 6 also relates to unintentional injury, arising
from want of proper care : " If fire break out and catch thorns
(thorn-hedges surrounding a corn-field, Isa. v. 5 ; Sir. xxviii. 24),
and sheaves, or tlie standing seed (n*?!?- the corn standing in the
straw), or the field be consumed, he that kindleth the fire shall
make compensation (for the damage done)."
Vers. 7-15. In cases of dishonesty, or the loss of property
entrusted, the following was to be the recognised right: If
money or articles (Dy?, n °t merely tools and furniture, but
clothes and ornaments, cf. Deut. xxii. 5 ; Isa. Ixi. 10) given to
a neighbour to keep should be stolen out of his house, the thief
was to restore double if he could be found ; but if he could not
be discovered, the master of the house was to go before the
judicial court (0 w£rr ?K, see chap. xxi. 6 ; ?K 3nj?3 to draw near
to), to see " whether he has not stretched out his hand to his neigh-
bour's goods." natyD : lit. employment, then something earned
by employment, a possession. Before the judicial court he was
1 The LXX. have expanded this law by interpolating AvoTiati ix, toS
eiypoii ainav xccr& to yiviwfcct aiirov' icLu is iravra. rou dypiv x«T«/3o«Mf<np
before 30*0. And the Samaritan does the same. But this expansion is
proved to be an arbitrary interpolation, by the simple fact that cravra ro»
dypiv forms no logical antithesis to dypiv inpon.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXII. 7-15. 139
to cleanse himself of the suspicion of having fraudulently appro-
priated what had Been entrusted to him ; and in most cases this
could probably be only done by an oath of purification. The
Sept. and Vulg. both point to this by interpolating xal o/ieirai,
etjurabit (" and he shall swear"), though we are not warranted
in supplying jntsh in consequence. For, apart from the fact
that WT3K is not to be regarded as a particle of adjuration
here, as Rosenmttller supposes, since this particle signifies
" truly " when employed in an oath, and therefore would make
the declaration affirmative, whereas the oath was unquestionably
to be taken as a release from the suspicion of fraudulent appro-
priation, and in case of confession an oath was not requisite at
all ; — apart from all this, if the lawgiver had intended to pre-
scribe an oath for such a case, he would have introduced it here,
just as he has done in ver. 11. If the man could free himself
before the court from the suspicion of unfaithfulness, he would
of course not have to make compensation for what was lost, but
the owner would have to bear the damage. This legal process
is still further extended in ver. 9 : J/B'B""l3' ! p3"i>y, " upon every
matter of trespass " (by which we are to understand, according to
the context, unfaithfulness with regard to, or unjust appropria-
tion of, the property of another man, not only when it had been
entrusted, but also if it had been found), " for ox, for ass, etc.,
or for any manner of lost thing, of which one says that it is this
("this," viz. the matter of trespass), the cause of both (the
parties contending about the right of possession) shall come to
the judicial court ; and he whom the court (Elohim) shall pro-
nounce guilty (of unjust appropriation) shall give double com-
pensation to his neighbour : only double as in vers. 4 and 7, not
four or fivefold as in ver. 1, because the object in dispute had
not been consumed. — Vers. 10 sqq. If an animal entrusted to a
neighbour to take care of had either died or hurt itself (">3^?,
broken a limb), or been driven away by robbers when out at
grass (1 Ohron. v. 21 ; 2 Chron. xiv. 14, cf. Job i. 15, 17),
without any one (else) seeing it, an oath was to be taken before
Jehovah between both (the owner and the keeper of it),
" whether he had not stretched out his hand to his neighbour's
property," i.e. either killed, or mutilated, or disposed of the
animal. This case differs from the previous one, not only in
the fact that the animal had either become useless to the owner
Digitized by
Google
140 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
or was altogether lost, but also in the fact that the keeper, if his
statement were true, had not been at all to blame in the matter.
The only way in which this could be decided, if there was
Dtp px, i.e. no other eye-witness present than the keeper him-
self at the time when the fact occurred, was by the keeper
taking an oath before Jehovah, that is to say, before the judicial
court. And if he took the oath, the master (owner) of it (the
animal that had perished, or been lost or injured) was to accept
(sc. the oath), and he (the accused) was not to make reparation.
"But if it had been stolen toVD from with him {i.e. from his
house or stable), he was to make it good," because he might
have prevented this with proper care (cf. Gen. xxxi. 39). On
the other hand, if it had been torn in pieces (viz. by a beast of
prey, while it was out at grass), he was not to make any com-
pensation, but only to furnish a proof that he had not been
wanting in proper care. "l$? ,fl ?*?* " let him bring it as a
witness," viz. the animal that had been torn in pieces, or a por-
tion of it, from which it might be seen that he had chased the
wild beast to recover its prey (cf. 1 Sam. xvii. 34, 35 ; Amos
iii. 12). — Vers. 14, 15. If any one borrowed an animal of his
neighbour (to use it for some kind of work), and it got injured
and died, he was to make compensation to the owner, unless
the latter were present at the time ; but not if he were. " For
either he would see that it could not have been averted by any
human care ; or if it could, seeing that he, the owner himself,
was present, and did not avert it, it would only be right that he
should suffer the consequence of his own neglect to afford assist-
ance" (Calovius). The words which follow, 'U1 1*3K> DK, cannot
have any other meaning than this, " if it was hired, it has come
upon his hire," i.e. he has to bear the injury or loss for the money
which he got for letting out the animal. The suggestion which
Knobel makes with a " perhaps," that fty refers to a hired
labourer, to whom the word is applied in other places, and that
the meaning is this, " if it is a labourer for hire, he goes into his
hire, — i.e. if the hirer is a daily labourer who has nothing with
which to make compensation, he is to enter into the service of
the person who let him the animal, for a sufficiently long time to
make up for the loss," — is not only opposed to the grammar (the
perfect N3 for which ttaj should be used), but is also at variance
with the context, " not make it good."
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXII. 18-81. 141
Vers. 16, 17. The seduction of a girl, who belonged to her
father as long as she was not betrothed (cf. chap. xxi. 7), was
also to be regarded as an attack upon the family possession.
Whoever persuaded a girl to let him lie with her, was to obtain
her for a wife by the payment of a dowry ("into see Gen. xxxiv.
12) ; and if her father refused to give her to him, he was to weigh
(pay) money equivalent to the dowry of maidens, i.e. to pay the
father just as much for the disgrace brought upon him by the
seduction of his daughter, as maidens would receive for a dowry
upon their marriage. The seduction of a girl who was be-
trothed, was punished much more severely (see Deut. xxii. 23, 24).
Vers. 18-31. The laws which follow, from ver. 18 onwards,
differ both in form and subject-matter from the determina-
tions of right which we have been studying hitherto: inform,
through the omission of the '3 with which the others were al-
most invariably introduced; in subject-matter, inasmuch as
they make demands upon Israel on the ground of its election to
be the holy nation of Jehovah, which go beyond the sphere of
natural right, not only prohibiting every inversion of the natural
order of things, but requiring the manifestation of love to the
infirm and needy out of regard to Jehovah. The transition
from the former series to the present one is made by the com-
mand in ver. 18, u Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live ;" witch-
craft being, on the one hand, "the vilest way of injuring
a neighbour in his property, or even in his body and life"
{Ranke), whilst, on the other hand, employment of powers of
darkness for the purpose of injuring a neighbour was a practical
denial of the divine vocation of Israel, as well as of Jehovah the
Holy One of Israel. The witch is mentioned instead of the
wizard, " not because witchcraft was not to be punished in the
case of men, but because the female sex was more addicted to
this crime" (Calovius). n»rjn t6 (shalt not suffer to live) is
chosen instead of the ordinary JW nto (shall surely die), which
is used in Lev. xx. 27 of wizards also, not " because the lawgiver
intended that the Hebrew witch should be put to death in any
case, and the foreigner only if she would not go when she was
banished" {Knobel), but because every Hebrew witch was not to
be put to death, but regard was to be had to the fact that witch-
craft is often nothing but jugglery, and only those witches were
to be put to death who would not give up their witchcraft when
Digitized by
Google
142 THE SECOND BOOK OF HOSES.
it was forbidden. Witchcraft is followed in ver. 19 by the un-
natural crime of lying with a beast ; and this is also threatened
with the punishment of death (see Lev. xviii. 23, and xx. 15,
16). — Ver. 20. Whoever offered sacrifice to strange gods instead
of to Jehovah alone, was liable to death. Dirv he shall be banned,
put under the ban (chererri), t.e. put to death, and by death de-
voted to the Lord, to whom he would not devote himself in life
(cf. Lev. xxvii. 29, and my Archdologie, § 70). — Ver. 21. The
Israelites were not to offer sacrifice to foreign deities; but a
foreigner himself they were not only to tolerate, but were not to
vex or oppress him, bearing in mind that they also had been
foreigners in Egypt (cf. chap, xxiii. 9, and Lev. xix. 33, 34). —
Whilst the foreigner, as having no rights, is thus commended to
the kindness of the people through their remembrance of what
they themselves had experienced in Egypt, those members of the
nation itself who were most in need of protection (viz. widows
and orphans) are secured from humiliation by an assurance of the
special care and watchfulness of Jehovah, under which such
forsaken ones stand, inasmuch as Jehovah Himself would take
their troubles upon Himself, and punish their oppressors with
just retribution. H3J? to humiliate, includes not only unjust
oppression, but every kind of cold and contemptuous treatment.
The suffix in ink (ver. 23) refers to both TOD^X and irinj, ac-
cording to the rule that when there are two or more subjects of
different genders, the masculine is employed (Ges. § 148, 2).
The '3 before ON expresses a strong assurance : " yea, if he cries
to Me, I will hearken to him" (see itwald, § 3306). "Killing
with the sword" points to wars, in which men and fathers of
f ainilies perish, and their wives and children are made widows
and orphans. — Vers. 25-27. If a man should lend to one of the
poor of his own people, he was not to oppress him by demanding
interest ; and if he gave his upper garment as a pledge, he was
to give it him back towards sunset, because it was his only
covering ; as the poorer classes in the East use the upper gar-
ment, consisting of a large square piece of cloth, to sleep in. " It
is his clothing for his skin:" i.e. it serves for a covering to his
body. " Wlierein shall he lie f" i.e. in what shall he wrap himself
to sleep? (cf. Deut. xxiv. 6, 10-13).— With vers. 28 sqq. God
directs Himself at once to the hearts of the Israelites, and at-
tacks the sins of selfishness and covetousness, against which the
X
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXII. 18-81. 143
precepts in vers. 21-27 were directed in their deepest root, for
the purpose of opposing all inward resistance to the promotion
of His commands. — Ver. 28. " Thou shalt not despise God, and
the prince among thy people thou shalt not curse." Elohim does
not mean either the gods of other nations, as Josephus, Philo,
and others, in their dead and work-holy monotheism, have ren
dered the word ; or the rulers, as Onkelos and others suppose ; bat
simply God, deity in general, whose majesty was despised in
every breach of the commandments of Jehovah, and who was to
be honoured in the persons of the rulers (cf. Prov. xxiv. 21 ; 1
Pet. ii. 17). Contempt of God consists not only in blasphemies
of Jehovah openly expressed, which were to be punished with
death (Lev. xxiv. 11 sqq.), but in disregard of His threats with
reference to the oppression of the poorer members of His people
(vers. 22-27), and in withholding from them what they ought
to receive (vers. 29-31). Understood in this way, the com-
mand is closely connected not only with what precedes, but also
with what follows. The prince (N*jW, lit. the elevated one) is
mentioned by the side of God, because in his exalted position
he has to administer the law of God among His people, and to
put a stop to what is wrong. — Vers. 29, 30. " Thy fulness and
thy flowing thou shalt not delay (to Me)." HK7D fulness, signifies
the produce of corn (Deut. xxii. 9) ; and J'D'n (lit. tear, flowing,
liquor stillans), which only occurs here, is a poetical epithet for
the produce of the press, both wine and oil (cf . Baxpvov r&v
BevBpav, LXX. ; arborum lacrimal, Plin. xi. 6). The meaning
is correctly given by the LXX. : cnrap%as 5Xmvo<; real Xtjvov gov.
That the command not to delay and not to withhold the fulness,
etc., relates to the offering of the first-fruits of the field and vine-
yard, as is more fully defined in chap, xxiii. 19 and Deut. xxvi.
2—11, is evident from what follows, in which the law given at
the exodus from Egypt, with reference to the sanctification of
the first-born of man and beast (xiii. 2, 12), is repeated and in-
corporated in the rights, of Israel, inasmuch as the adoption of
the first-born on the part of Jehovah was a perpetual guarantee
to the whole nation of the right of covenant fellowship. (On
the rule laid down in ver. 30, see Lev. xxii. 27.) — Ver. 31. As
the whole nation sanctified itself to the Lord in the sanctification
of the first-born, the Israelites were to show themselves to be
holy men unto the Lord by not eating " flesh torn to pieces in
Digitized by
Google
144 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
the field," i.e. the flesh of an animal that had been torn to pieces
by a wild beast in the field. Such flesh they were to throw to
the dogs, because eating it would defile (cf. Lev. xvii. 15).
Chap, xxiii. 1-13. — Vers. 1-9. Lastly, no one was to violate
another's rights. — Ver. 1. " Thou shalt not raise (bring out) an
empty report" KN? lfOg>, a report that has no foundation, and,
as the context shows, does injury to another, charges him with
wrongdoing, and involves him in legal proceedings. " Put not
thine hand with a wicked man (do not offer him thy hand, or
render him assistance), to be a witness of violence." This clause
is unquestionably connected with the preceding one, and implies
that raising a false report furnishes the wicked man with a pretext
for bringing the man, who is suspected of crime on account of
this false report, before a court of law ; in consequence of which
the originator or propagator of the empty report becomes a wit-
ness of injustice and violence. — Ver. 2. Just as little should a
man follow a multitude to pervert justice. " Thou shalt not be
behind many (follow the multitude) to evil things, nor answer
concerning a dispute to incline thyself after many (i.e. thou shalt
not give such testimony in connection with any dispute, in which
thou takest part with the great majority), so as to pervert" (lTttsnp) }
sc. justice. But, on the other hand, " neither shalt thou adorn
the poor man in his dispute" (ver. 3), i.e. show partiality to the
poor or weak man in an unjust cause, out of weak compassion
for him. (Compare Lev. xix. 15, a passage which, notwith-
standing the fact that Tin is applied to favour shown to the
great or mighty, overthrows KnobeVs conjecture, that Tftl should
be read for 711, inasmuch as it prohibits the showing of favour
to the one as much as to the other.) — Vers. 4, 5. Not only was
their conduct not to be determined by public opinion, the direc-
tion taken by the multitude, or by weak compassion for a poor
man ; but personal antipathy, enmity, and hatred were not to
lead them to injustice or churlish behaviour. On the contrary,
if the Israelite saw his enemy's beast straying, he was to bring
it back again ; and if he saw it lying down under the weight of
its burden, he was to help it up again (cf. Deut. xxii. 1-4).
The words 'U1 3te Wl™, " cease (desist) to leave it to him (thine
enemy) ; thou shalt loosen it (let it loose) with him" which have
been so variously explained, cannot have any other signification
than this : u beware of leaving an ass which has sunk down be-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIII. 10-12. 145
neath its burden in a helpless condition, even to thine enemy, to
try whether he can help it up alone ; rather help him to set it
loose from its burden, that it may get up again." This is evi-
dent from Deut. xxii. 4, where flDp)?nn t6, " withdraw not thy-
self," is substituted for afifl? $1$, and to? D*|?Fi D£n, " set up with
him," for " tej? 3f}OT aft. From this it is obvious that 3]V is used
in the first instance in the sense of leaving it alone, leaving it in
a helpless condition, and immediately afterwards in the sense of
undoing or letting loose. The peculiar turn given to the ex-
pression, " thou shalt cease from leaving," is chosen because the
ordinary course, which the natural man adopts, is to leave an
enemy to take care of his own affairs, without troubling about
either him or his difficulties. Such conduct as this the Israelite
was to give up, if he ever found his enemy in need of help. —
Vers. 6 sqq. The warning against unkindness towards an enemy
is followed by still further prohibitions of injustice in questions
of right : viz. in ver. 6, a warning against perverting the right
of the poor in his cause ; in ver. 7, a general command to keep
far away from a false matter, and not to slay the innocent and
righteous, i.e. not to be guilty of judicial murder, together with the
threat that God would not justify the sinner ; and in ver. 8, the
command no^to accept presents, i.e. to be bribed by gifts, because
" the gift makes seeing men (D*n?B open eyes) blind, and perverts
the causes of the just" The rendering "words of the righteous"
is not correct ; for even if we are to understand the expression
" seeing men" as referring to judges, the " righteous" can only
refer to those who stand at the bar, and have right on their side,
which judges who accept of bribes may turn into wrong. — Ver.
9. The warning against oppressing the foreigner, which is re-
peated from chap. xxii. 20, is not tautological, as Beriheau affirms
for the purpose of throwing suspicion upon this verse, but refers
to the oppression of a stranger in judicial matters by the refusal
of justice, or by harsh and unjust treatment in court (Deut.
xxiv. 17, xxvii. 19). " For ye know the soul (animus, the soul as
the seat of feeling) of the stranger," i.e. ye know from your own
experience in Egypt how a foreigner feels.
Vers. 10-12. Here follow directions respecting the year of
rest and day of rest, the first of which lays the foundation for
the keeping of the sabbatical and jubilee years, which are after-
wards institutedin Lev. xxv., whilst the latter gives prominence to
PENT. — VOL. II. K
Digitized by
Google
146 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
the element of rest and refreshment involved in the Sabbath,
which had been already instituted (chap. xx. 9-11), and presses
it in favour of beasts of burden, slaves, and foreigners. Neither of
these instructions is to be regarded as laying down laws for the
feasts ; so that they are not to be included among the rights of
Israel, which commence at ver. 14. On the contrary, as they are
separated from these by ver. 13, they are to be reckoned
as forming part of the laws relating to their mutual obliga-
tions one towards another. This is evident from the fact, that
in both of them the care of the poor stands in the foreground.
From this characteristic and design, which are common to both,
we may explain the fact, that there is no allusion to the keeping
of a Sabbath unto the Lord, as in chap. xx. 10 and Lev. xxv.
2, in connection with either the seventh year or seventh day :
all that is mentioned being their sowing and reaping for six
years, and working for six days, and then letting the land lie
fallow in the seventh year, and their ceasing or resting from
labour on the seventh day. " The seventh year thou shalt let
(thy land) loose (BOE> to leave unemployed), and let it lie; and
Hie poor of thy people sliall eat (the produce which grows of itself),
and their remainder (what they leave) shall the beast of the field
eat." E*Mn : lit. to breathe one's self, to draw breath, i.e. to refresh
one's self (cf. chap. xxxi. 17 ; 2 Sam. xvi. 14)^ — With ver. 13a
the laws relating to the rights of the people, in their relations to
one another, are concluded with the formula enforcing their ob-
servance, a And in all that I say to you, take heed," viz. that ye
carefully maintain all the rights which I have given you. There
is then attached to this, in ver. 136, a warning, which forms the
transition to the relation of Israel to Jehovah : " Make no men-
tion of the name of other gods, neither let it be heard out of thy
mouth." This forms a very fitting boundary line between the
two series of mishpatim, inasmuch as the observance and main-
tenance of both of them depended upon the attitude in which
Israel stood towards Jehovah.
Chap, xxiii. 14-19. The Fundamental Eights of Israel
IN ITS RELIGIOUS AND THEOCRATICAL RELATION TO JEHOVAH.
— As the observance of the Sabbath and sabbatical year is not
instituted in vers. 10-12, so vers. 14-19 do not contain either
the original or earliest appointment of the feasts, or a complete
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIII. 14-19. 147
law concerning the yearly feasts. They simply command the
observance of three feasts during the year, and the appearance
of the people three times iu the year before the Lord ; that is
to say, the holding of three national assemblies to keep a feast
before the Lord, or three annual pilgrimages to the sanctuary
of Jehovah. The leading points are clearly set forth in vers.
14 and 17, to which the other verses are subordinate. These
leading points are D'BBB'D or rights, conferred upon the people of
Israel in their relation to Jehovah ; for keeping a feast to the
Lord, and appearing before Him, were both of them privileges
bestowed by Jehovah upon His covenant people. Even in it-
self the festal rejoicing was a blessing in the midst of this life
of labour, toil, and trouble; but when accompanied with the
right of appearing before the Lord their God and Redeemer,
to whom they were indebted for everything they had and were,
it was one that no other nation enjoyed. For though they had
their joyous festivals, these festivals bore the same relation to
those of Israel, as the dead and worthless gods of the heathen to
the living and almighty God of Israel.
Of the three feasts at which Israel was to appear before
Jehovah, the feast of Mazzoih, or unleavened bread, is referred to
as already instituted, by the words " as I have commanded thee"
and "at the appointed time of the earing month" which point
back to chaps, xii. and xiii.; and all that is added here is, a ye
shall not appear before My face empty." "Not empty :" i.e. not
with empty hands, but with sacrificial gifts, answering to the
blessing given by the Lord (Deut. xvi. 16,' 17). These gifts
were devoted partly to the general sacrifices of the feast, and
partly to the burnt and peace-offerings which were brought by
different individuals to the. feasts, and applied to the sacrificial
meals (Num. xxviii. and xxix.). This command, which related
to all the feasts, and therefore is mentioned at the very outset in
connection with the feast of unleavened bread, did indeed impose
a duty upon Israel, but such a duty as became a source of
blessing to all who performed it. The gifts demanded by God
were the tribute, it is true, which the Israelites paid to their
God-King, just as all Eastern nations are required to bring pre-
sents when appearing in the presence of their kings ; but they
were only gifts from God's own blessing, a portion of that which
He had bestowed in rich abundance, and they were offered to
Digitized by
Google
148 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
God in such a way that the offerer was thereby more and more
confirmed in the rights of covenant fellowship. The other two
festivals are mentioned here for the first time, and the details
are more particularly determined afterwards in Lev. xxiii. 15
sqq., and Num. xxviii. 26 sqq. One was called the feast of
Harvest, " of the first-fruits of thy labours which thou hast sown
in the field," i.e. of thy field-labour. According to the subse-
quent arrangements, the first of the field-produce was to be
offered to God, not the first grains of the ripe corn, but the first
loaves of bread of white or wheaten flour made from the new
corn (Lev. xxiii. 17 sqq.). In chap, xxxiv. 22 it is called the
"feast of Weeks," because, according to Lev. xxiii. 15, 16,
Deut. xvi. 9, it was to be kept seven weeks after the feast of
Mazzoih ; and the " feast of the first-fruits of wheat harvest,"
because the loaves of first-fruits to be offered were to be made
of wheaten flour. The other of these feasts, i.e. the third in
the year, is called u the feast of Ingathering, at the end of the
year, in the gathering in of thy labours out of the field." This
general and indefinite allusion to time was quite sufficient for
the preliminary institution of the feast. In the more minute
directions respecting the feasts given in Lev. xxiii. 34, Num.
xxix. 12, it is fixed for the fifteenth day of the seventh month,
and placed on an equality with the feast of Mazzoth as a seven/
days' festival, lUBff? HKV3 does not mean after the close of the
year, finito anno, any more than the corresponding expression in
chap, xxxiv. 22, •"UB'ri JiMpn, signifies at the turning of the year.
The year referred to here was the so-called civil year, which
began with the preparation of the ground for the harvest-sowing,
and ended when all the fruits of the field and garden had been
gathered in. No particular day was fixed for its commence-
ment, nor was there any new year's festival ; and even after the
beginning of the earing month had been fixed upon for the
commencement of the year (chap. xii. 2), this still remained in
force, so far as all civil matters connected with the sowing and
harvest were concerned; though there is no evidence that a
double reckoning was carried on at the same time, or that a
civil reckoning existed side by side with the religious. ^BDKa.
does not mean, "when thou hast gathered," postqaam eollegisti;
for 3 does not stand for ">ns, nor has the infinitive the force of
the preterite. On the contrary, the expression " at thy gailiering
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIII. 18, 19. 149
in," i.e. when thou gatherest in, is kept indefinite both here and
in Lev. xxiii. 39, where the month and days in which this feast
was to he kept are distinctly pointed out; and also in Deut.
xvi. 13, in order that the time for the feast might not be made
absolutely dependent upon the complete termination of the
gathering in, although as a rule it would be almost over. The
gathering in of "thy labours out of the field" is not to be re-
stricted to the vintage and gathering of fruits : this is evident
not only from the expression " out of the field," which points
to field-produce, but also from the clause in Deut. xvi. 13,
"gathering of the floor and wine-press," which shows clearly
that the words refer to the gathering in of the whole of the
year's produce of corn, fruit, oil, and wine. — Ver. 17. " Three
times in the year" (i.e., according to ver. 14 and Deut. xvi. 16,
at the three feasts just mentioned) " all thy males shall appear
be/ore the face of the Lord Jehovah." The command to appear,
i.e. to make a pilgrimage to the sanctuary, was restricted to the
male members of the nation, probably to those above 20 years
of age, who had been included in the census (Num. i. 3). But
this did not prohibit the inclusion of women and boys (cf. 1
Sam. i. 3 sqq., and Luke ii. 41 sqq.).
Vers. 18, 19. The blessing attending their appearing before
the Lord was dependent upon the feasts being kept in the proper
way, by the observance of the three rules laid down in vers. 18
and 19. " Thou shalt not offer the blood of My sacrifice upon
leavened bread" ?? upon, as in chap. xii. 8, denoting the basis
upon which the sacrifice was offered. The meaning has been
correctly given by the early commentators, viz. " as long as there
is any leavened bread in your houses," or " until the leaven has
been entirely removed from your houses." The reference made
here to the removal of leaven, and the expression "blood of
My sacrifice," both point to the paschal lamb, which was re-
garded as the sacrifice of Jehovah /car' Qoyfiv, on account of its
great importance. Onkelos gives this explanation : " My Pass-
over" for "My sacrifice." — ''Neither shall the fat of My feast
remain (Jy 1 to pass the night) until the morning." " The fat of
My feast" does not mean the fat of My festal sacrifice, for Jn } a
feast, is not used for the sacrifice offered at the feast ; it signi-
fies rather the best of My feast, i.e. the paschal sacrifice, as we
may see from chap, xxxiv. 25, where " the sacrifice of the feast
Digitized by
Google
150 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
of the Passover " is given as the explanation of " the fat of My
feast." As the paschal sacrifice was the sacrifice of Jehovah
par excellence, so the feast of the Passover was the feast of Je-
hovah par excellence. The expression " fat of My feast " is not
to be understood as referring at all to the fat of the lamb, which
was burned upon the altar in the case of the expiatory and
whole offerings ; for there could have been no necessity for the
injunction not to keep this till the morning, inasmuch as those
parts of every sacrifice which were set apart for the altar were
burned immediately after the sprinkling of the blood. The
allusion is to the flesh of the paschal lamb, which was eaten in
the night before daybreak, after which anything that remained
was to be burned. "i£3""»J? (without the article) till morning, has
the same meaning as ">i?3? "for the (following) morning" in chap,
xxxiv. 25. — The next command in ver. 19a nas reference to the
feast of Harvest, or feast of Weeks. In " the first-fruits of thy
land " there is an unmistakeable allusion to " the first-fruits of
thy labours" in ver. 16. It is true the words, "the first of the
first-fruits of thy land thou shalt bring into the house of the
Lord thy God," are so general in their character, that we can
hardly restrict them to the wave-loaves to be offered as first-
fruits at the feast of Weeks, but must interpret them as referring
to all the first-fruits, which they had already been commanded
"not to delay to offer (chap. xxii. 29), and the presentation of
which is minutely prescribed in Num. xviii. 12, 13, and Deut.
xxvi. 2-11, — including therefore the sheaf of barley to be offered
in the second day of the feast of unleavened bread (Lev. xxiii.
9 sqq.). At the same time the reference to the feast of Weeks
is certainly to be retained, inasmuch as this feast was an express
admonition to Israel, to offer the first of the fruits of the Lord.
In the expression ^SS JV'B'&n, the latter might be understood as
explanatory of the former and in apposition to it, since they are
both of them applied to the first>fruits of the soil (vid. Deut.
xxvi. 2, 10, and Num. xviii. 13). But as 'VB'K'i could hardly
need any explanation in this connection, the partitive sense is to
be preferred ; though it is difficult to decide whether " the first
of the first-fruits " signifies the first selection from the fruits that
had grown, ripened, and been gathered first, — that is to say, not
merely of the entire harvest, but of every separate production of
the field and soil, according to the rendering of the LXX.aTro/^ay
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIII. 18-19. 151
t&v irpanoyewrj/iaTov Trj<} <yi}?, — or whether the word TWhQ is used
figuratively, and signifies the best of the first-fruits. There is no
force in the objection offered to the former view, that " in no
other case in which the offering of first-fruits generally is spoken
of, is one particular portion represented as holy to Jehovah, but
the first-fruits themselves are that portion of the entire harvest
which was holy to Jehovah." For, apart from Num. xviii. 12,
where a different rendering is sometimes given to rwto, the ex-
pression n'E'tno in Deut. xxvi. 2 shows unmistakeably that only
a portion of the first of all the fruit of the ground had to be
offered to the Lord. On the other hand, this view is consider-
ably strengthened by the fact, that whilst ^33, D^sa signify those
fruits which ripened first, i.e. earliest, JWS"T! is used to denote the
airapxQ, the first portion or first selection from the whole, not
only in Deut. xxvi. 2, 10, but also in Lev. xxiii. 10, and most
probably in Num. xviii. 12 as well. — Now if these directions do
not refer either exclusively or specially to the loaves of first-fruits
of the feast of Weeks, the opinion which has prevailed from the
time of Abarbanel to that of Knobel, that the following command,
" Thou shalt not seethe a kid in his mother's milk," refers to the
feast of Ingathering, is deprived of its principal support. And
any such allusion is rendered very questionable by the fact, that
in Deut. xiv. 21, where this command is repeated, it is appended
to the prohibition against eating the flesh of an animal that had
been torn to pieces. Very different explanations have been given
to the command. In the Targum, Mishnah, etc., it is regarded
as a general prohibition against eating flesh prepared with milk.
Luther and others suppose it to refer to the cooking of the kid,
before it has been weaned from its mother's milk. But the
actual reference is to the cooking of a kid in the milk of its own
mother, as indicating a contempt of the relation which God has
established and sanctified between parent and young, and thus
subverting the divine ordinances. As kids were a very favourite
food (Gen. xxvii. 9, 14 ; Judg. vi. 19, xiii. 15 ; 1 Sam. xvi. 20),
it is very likely that by way of improving the flavour they
were sometimes cooked in milk. According to A ben Ezra and
Abarbanel, this was a custom adopted by the Ishmaelites ; and
at the present day the Arabs are in the habit of cooking lamb in
sour milk. A restriction is placed upon this custom in the pro-
hibition before us, but there is no intention to prevent the intro-
Digitized by
Google
[/
152 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
duction of a superstitious usage customary at the sacrificial meals
of other nations, which Spencer and Knobel have sought to
establish as at all events probable, though without any definite
historical proofs, and for the most part on the strength of far-
fetched analogies.
Chap, xxiii. 20-33. Relation op Jehovah to Israel.
— The declaration of the rights conferred by Jehovah upon His
people is closed by promises, through which, on the one hand,
God insured to the nation the gifts and benefits involved in their
rights, and, on the other hand, sought to promote that willing-
ness and love which were indispensable to the fulfilment of the
duties incumbent upon every individual in consequence of the
rights conferred upon them. These promises secured to the
people not only the protection and help of God during their
journey through the desert, and in the conquest of Canaan, but
also preservation and prosperity when they had taken possession
of the land. — Ver. 20. Jehovah would send an angel before
them, who should guard them on the way from injury and de-
struction, and bring them to the place prepared for them, i.e. to
Canaan. The name of Jehovah was in this angel (ver. 21),
that is to say, Jehovah revealed Himself in him ; and hence he
is called in chap, xxxiii. 15, 16, the face of Jehovah, because
the essential nature of Jehovah was manifested in him. This
angel was not a created spirit, therefore, but the manifestation
of Jehovah Himself, who went before them in the pillar of
cloud and fire, to guide and to defend them (chap. xiii. 21).
But because it was Jehovah who was guiding His people in the
person of the angel, He demanded unconditional obedience (ver.
21), and if they provoked Him ("IBR for "lt?n, see chap. xiii. 18)
by disobedience, He would not pardon their transgression ; but
if they followed Him and hearkened to His voice, He would be
-an enemy to their enemies, and an adversary to their adversa-
ries (ver. 22). And when the angel of the Lord had brought
them to the Canaanites and exterminated the latter, Israel was
still to yield the same obedience, by not serving the gods of the
Canaanites, or doing after their works, i.e. by not making any
idolatrous images, but destroying them (these works), and smit-
ing to pieces the pillars of their idolatrous worship (nhsjo does
not mean statues erected as idols, but memorial stones or columns
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIU. 20-88. 153
dedicated to idols : see my comm. on 1 Kings xiv. 23), and
serving Jehovah alone. Then would He bless them in the land
with bountiful provision, health, fruitfulness, and length of life
(vers. 23-26). u Bread and water" are named, as being the
provisions which are indispensable to the maintenance of life, as
in Isa. iii. 1, xxx. 20, xxxiii. 16. The taking.away of " sick-
ness" (cf. xv. 26) implied the removal of everything that could
endanger life. The absence of anything that miscarried, or was '
barren, insured the continuance and increase of the nation ; and
the promise that their days should be fulfilled, i.e. that they
should not be liable to a premature death (cf . Isa. lxv. 20), was
a pledge of their well-being. — Vers. 27 sqq. But the most
important thing of all for Israel was the previous conquest of
the promised land. And in this God gave it a special promise
of His almighty aid. - " I will send My fear before thee." This
fear was to be the result of the terrible acts of God performed
on behalf of Israel, the rumour of which would spread before
them and fill their enemies with fear and trembling (cf. chap,
xv. 14 sqq. ; Deut. ii. 25 ; and Josh. ii. 11, where the beginning
of the fulfilment is described), throwing into confusion and
putting to flight every people against whom (DH3 — "IBW) Israel
came. *)"})> 3*K~nK }TO to give the enemy to the neck, i.e. to
cause him to turn his back, or flee (cf. Ps. xviii. 41, xxi. 13 ;
Josh. vii. 8, 12). T?K : in the direction towards thee. — Ver. 28.
In addition to the fear of God, hornets (njnitn construed as a
generic word with the collective article), a very large species
of wasp, that was greatly dreaded both by man and beast on
account of the acuteness of its sting, should come and drive out
the Canaanites, of whom three tribes are mentioned instar
omnium, from before the Israelites. Although it is true that
^Elian (hist. anim. . 11, 28) relates that the Fhaselians, who
dwelt near the Solymites, and therefore probably belonged to
the Canaanites, were driven out of their country by wasps, and
Bochart (Hieroz. iii. pp. 409 sqq.) has collected together accounts
of different tribes that have been frightened away from their
possessions by frogs, mice, and other vermin, " the sending of
hornets before the Israelites" is hardly to be taken literally, not
only because there is not a word in the book of Joshua about the
Canaanites being overcome and exterminated in any such way,
but chiefly on account of Josh. xxiv. 12, where Joshua says that
Digitized by
Google
154 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
God sent the hornet before them, and drove out the two kings of
the Amorites, referring thereby to their defeat and destruction
by the Israelites through the miraculous interposition of God,
and thus placing the figurative use of the term hornet beyond
the possibility of doubt. These hornets, however, which are
very aptly described in Wisdom xii. 8, on the basis of this pas-
sage, as TrpoBpofwvs, the pioneers of the army of Jehovah, do not
denote merely varii generis mala, as Rosenmuller supposes, but
acerrimos timoris aculeos, quibus quodammodo volantibus rumori-
bus pungebantur, ut fugerent (Augustine, qucest. 27 in Jos.). If
the fear of God which fell upon the Canaanites threw them into
such confusion and helpless despair, that they could not stand
before Israel, but turned their backs towards them, the stings of
alarm which followed this fear would completely drive them
away. Nevertheless God would not drive them away at once,
" in one year," lest the land should become a desert for want of
men to cultivate it, and the wild beasts should multiply against
Israel ; in other words, lest the beasts of prey should gain the
upper hand and endanger the lives of man and beast (Lev. xxvi.
22 ; Ezek. xiv. 15, 21), which actually was the case after the
carrying away of the ten tribes (2 Kings xvii. 25, 26). He
would drive them out by degrees (BJfO BJJD, only used here and
in Deut. vii. 22), until Israel was sufficiently increased to take
possession of the land, i.e. to occupy the whole of the country.
This promise was so far fulfilled, according to the books of
Joshua and Judges, that after the subjugation of the Canaanites
in the south and north of the land, when all the kings who
fought against Israel had been smitten and slain and their cities
captured, the entire land was divided among the tribes of Israel,
in order that they might exterminate the remaining Canaanites,
and take possession of those portions of the land that had not
yet been conquered (Josh. xiii. 1-7). But the different tribes
soon became weary of the task of exterminating the Canaanites,
and began to enter into alliance with them, and were led astray
by them to the worship of idols ; whereupon God punished them
by withdrawing His assistance, and they were oppressed and
humiliated by the Canaanites because of their apostasy from the
Lord (Judg. i. and ii.).
Vers. 31 sqq. The divine promise closes with a general in-
dication of the boundaries of the land, whose inhabitants Je-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIV. 1, 2. 155
hovah would give up to the Israelites to drive them out, and
with a warning against forming alliances with them and their
gods, lest they should lead Israel astray to sin, and thus become
a snare to it. On the basis of the promise in Gen. xv. 18,
certain grand and prominent points are mentioned, as consti-
tuting the boundaries towards both the east and west. On the
west the boundary extended from the Red Sea (see chap. xiii.
18) to the sea of the Philistines, or Mediterranean Sea, the
south-eastern shore of which was inhabited by the Philistines ;
and on the east from the desert, i.e. } according to Deut. xi. 24,
the desert of Arabia, to the river (Euphrates). The poetic
suffix to affixed to neha answers to the elevated oratorical style.
Making a covenant with them and their gods would imply the
recognition and toleration of them, and, with the sinful ten-
dencies of Israel, would be inevitably followed by the worship
of idols. The first '3 in ver. 33 signifies if; the second, imo,
verily, and serves as an energetic introduction to the apodosis.
E>i?to, a snare (vid. chap. x. 7) ; here a cause of destruction, inas-
much as apostasy from God is invariably followed by punish-
ment (Judg. ii. 3).
Chap. xxiv. 1, 2. These two verses form part of the address
of God in chap. xx. 22-xxiii. 33'; for 1DK fiBto Sw (" but to
Moses He said") cannot be the commencement of a fresh ad-
dress, which would necessarily require 'D ?K ">0&ta (cf. ver. 12,
chap. xix. 21, xx. 22). The turn given to the expression 'D 7tO
presupposes that God had already spoken to others, or that what
had been said before related not to Moses himself, but to other
persons. But this cannot be affirmed of the decalogue, which
applied to Moses quite as much as to the entire nation (a suffi-
cient refutation of KnobeVs assertion, that these verses are a
continuation of chap. xix. 20-25, and are linked on to the deca-
logue), but only of the address concerning the mishpatim, or
" rights," which commences with chap. xx. 22, and, according
to chap. xx. 22 and xxi. 1, was intended for the nation, and
addressed to it, even though it was through the medium of Moses.
What God said to the people as establishing its rights, is here
followed by what He said to Moses himself, namely, that he was
to go up to Jehovah, along with Aaron, Nadab, Abihu, and
seventy elders. At the same time, it is of course implied that
Moses, who had ascended the mountain with Aaron alone (chap.
Digitized by
Google
156 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
xx. 21), was first of all to go down again and repeat to the people
the " rights" which God had communicated to him, and only
when this had been done, to ascend again with the persons
named. According to vers. 3 and 12 (? 9), this is what Moses
really did. But Moses alone was to go near to Jehovah : the
others were to worship afar off, and the people were not to come
up at all.
CONCLUSION OP THE COVENANT. — CHAP. XXIV. 8-18.
The ceremony described in vers. 3-11 is called " the cove-
nant which Jehovah made with Israel" (ver. 8). It was opened
by Moses, who recited to the people " all the words of Jehovah"
(i.e. not the decalogue, for the people had heard this directly
from the mouth of God Himself, but the words in chap. xx.
22-26), and " all the rights" (chap, xxi.-xxiii.) ; whereupon the
people answered unanimously (in« 7ip) } u All the words which
Jehovah hath spoken will we do" This constituted the prepara-
tion for the conclusion of the covenant. It was necessary that
the people should not only know what the Lord imposed upon
them in the covenant about to be made with them, and what He
promised them, but that they should also declare their willing-
ness to perform what was imposed upon them. The covenant
itself was commenced by Moses writing all the words of Jehovah
in " the book of the covenant" (vers. 4 and 7), for the purpose of
preserving them in an official record. The nexrday, early in
the morning, he built an altar at the foot of the mountain, and
erected twelve boundary-stones or pillars for the twelve tribes,
most likely round about the altar and at some distance from it,
so as to prepare the soil upon which Jehovah was about to enter
into union with the twelve tribes. As the altar indicated the
presence of Jehovah, being the place where the Lord would
come to His people to bless them (chap. xx. 24), so the twelve
pillars, or boundary-stones, did not serve as mere memorials of
the conclusion of the covenant, but were to indicate the place of
the twelve tribes, and represent their presence also. — Ver. 5.
After the foundation and soil had been thus prepared in the
place of sacrifice, for the fellowship which Jehovah was about
to establish with His people ; Moses sent young men of the chil-
dren of Israel to prepare the sacrifices, and directed them to offer
burnt-offering and sacrifice slain-offerings, viz. Dw, " peace-
X
Digitized by VjOOQIG
CHAP. XXIV. 3-18. . 157
offerings (see at Lev. iii. 1) for Jehovah" for which purpose D^iB,
bullocks, or young oxen, were used. The young men were not
first-born sons, who had officiated as priests previous to the
institution of the Levitical priesthood, according to the natural
right of primogeniture, as Onkelos supposes ; nor were they the
sons of. Aaron, as Augustine maintains : they simply acted as
servants of Moses ; and the priestly duty of sprinkling the blood
was performed by him as the mediator of the covenant. It is
merely as young men, therefore, i.e. as strong and active, that
they are introduced in this place, and not as representatives of
the nation, " by whom the sacrifice was presented, and whose
attitude resembled that of a youth just ready to enter upon his
course" {Kurtz, O. C. iii. 143). For, as Oehler says, " this
was not a sacrifice presented by the nation on its own account.
The primary object was to establish that fellowship, by virtue of
which it could draw near to Jehovah in sacrifice. Moreover,
according to vers. 1 and 9, the nation possessed its proper repre-
sentatives in the seventy elders" (Herzog's Cyclopsedia). But
even though these sacrifices were not offered by the representa-
tives of the nation, and for this very reason Moses selected
young men from among the people to act as servants at this
ceremony, they had so far a substitutionary position, that in
their persons the nation was received into fellowship with God
by means of the sprinkling of the blood, which was performed
in a peculiar manner, to suit the unique design of this sacrificial
ceremony. — Vers. 6-8. The blood was divided into two parts.
One half was swung by Moses upon the altar (pit to swing,
shake, or pour out of the vessel, in distinction from njn to
sprinkle) ; the other half he put into basins, and after he had
read the book of the covenant to the people, and they had pro-
mised to do and follow all the words of Jehovah, he sprinkled
it upon the people with these words : " Behold the blood of the
covenant, which Jehovah has made with you over all these words"
As several animals were slaughtered, and all of them young
oxen, there must have been a considerable quantity of blood
obtained, so that the one half would fill several basins, and many
persons might be sprinkled with it as it was being swung about.
The division of the blood had reference to the two parties to
the covenant, who were to be brought by the covenant into a
living unity ; but it had no connection whatever with the heathen
Digitized by
Google
158 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
customs adduced by Bahr and Knobel, in which the parties to a
treaty mixed their own blood together. For this was not a mix-
ture of different kinds of blood, but it was a division of one
bloodj and that sacrificial blood, in which animal life was offered
instead of human life, making expiation as a pure life for sinful
man, and by virtue of this expiation restoring the fellowship
between God and man which had been destroyed by sin. But
the sacrificial blood itself only acquired this signification through
the sprinkling or swinging upon the altar, by virtue of which
the human soul was received, in the soul of the animal sacrificed
for man, into the fellowship of the divine grace manifested upon
the altar, in order that, through the power of this sin-forgiving
and sin-destroying grace, it might be sanctified to a new and
holy life. In this way the sacrificial blood acquired the signi-
fication of a vital principle endued with the power of divine
grace ; and this was communicated to the people by means of
the sprinkling of the blood. As the only reason for dividing
the sacrificial blood into two parts was, that the blood sprinkled
upon the altar could not be taken off again and sprinkled upon
the people ; the two halves of the blood are to be regarded as one
blood, which was first of all sprinkled upon the altar, and then
upon the people. In the blood sprinkled upon the altar, the
natural life of the people was given up to God, as a life that
had passed through death, to be pervaded by His grace ; and
then through the sprinkling upon the people it was restored to
them again, as a life renewed by the grace of God. In this way
the blood not only became a bond of union between Jehovah and
His people, but as the blood of the covenant, it became a vital
power, holy and divine, uniting Israel and its God ; and the
sprinkling of the people with this blood was an actual renewal
of life, a transposition of Israel into the kingdom of God, in
which it was filled with the powers of God's spirit of grace, and
sanctified into a kingdom of priests, a holy nation of Jehovah
(chap. xix. 6). And this covenant was made " upon all 'the
words" which Jehovah had spoken, and the people had promised
to observe. Consequently it had for its foundation the divine
law and right, as the rule of life for Israel.
Vers. 9-11. Through their consecration with the blood of the
covenant, the Israelites were qualified to ascend the mountain,
and there behold the God of Israel and celebrate the covenant
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIV. 9-U. 159
meal : of course, not the whole of the people, for that would
have been impracticable on physical grounds, but the nation in the
persons of its representatives, viz. the seventy elders, with Aaron
and his two eldest sons. The fact that the latter were summoned
along with the elders had reference to their future election to
the priesthood, the bearers of which were to occupy the position
of mediators between Jehovah and the nation, an office for which
this was a preparation. The reason for choosing seventy out of
the whole body of elders (ver. 3) is to be found in the historical
and symbolical significance of this number (see vol. i. p. 374).
" They saw the God of Israel" This title is very appropriately
given to Jehovah here, because He, the God of the fathers, had
become in truth the God of Israel through the covenant just
made. We must not go beyond the limits drawn in chap, xxxiii.
20-23 in our conceptions of what constituted the sight (njn, ver.
11) of God; at the same time we must regard it as a vision of
God in some form of manifestation which rendered the divine
nature discernible to the human eye. Nothing is said as to the
form in which God manifested Himself. This silence, bowever,
is not intended " to indicate the imperfection of their sight of
God," as Baumgarten affirms, nor is it to be explained, as Hof-
mann supposes, on the ground that "what they saw differed
from what the people had constantly before their eyes simply in
this respect, that after they had entered the darkness, which en-
veloped the mountain that burned as it were with fire at its
summit, the fiery sign separated from the cloud, and assumed a
shape, beneath which it was bright and clear, as an image of
untroubled bliss." The words are evidently intended to affirm
something more than, that they saw the fiery form in which God
manifested Himself to the people, and that whilst the fire was
ordinarily enveloped in a cloud, they saw it upon the mountain
without the cloud. For, since Moses saw the form (fMOTi) of
Jehovah (Num. xii. 8), we may fairly conclude, notwithstanding
the fact that, according to ver. 2, the representatives of the na-
tion were not to draw near to Jehovah, and without any danger
of contradicting Deut. iv. 12 and 15, that they also saw a form
of God. Only this form is not described, in order that no en-
couragement might be given to the inclination of the people to
make likenesses of Jehovah. Thus we find that Isaiah gives no
description of the form in which he saw the Lord sitting upon a
Digitized by
Google
160 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
high and lofty throne (Isa. vi. 1). Ezekiel is the first to describe
the form of Jehovah which he saw in the vision, " a*s the appear-
ance of a man" (Ezek. i. 26 ; compare Dan. vii. 9 and 13).
" And there was under His feet as it were work of clear sapphire
(run?, from >133? whiteness, clearness, not from T\y±> a brick 1 ),
and as the material (ffitf body, substance) of heaven in bril-
liancy" — to indicate that the God of Israel was enthroned above
the heaven in super-terrestrial glory and undisturbed blessedness.
And God was willing that His people should share in this bless-
edness, for " He laid not His hand upon the nobles of Israel" i.e.
did not attack them. " They saw God, and did eat and drink," i.e.
they celebrated thus near to Him the sacrificial meal of the peace-
offerings, which had been sacrificed at the conclusion of the cove-
nant, and received in this covenant meal a foretaste of the precious
and glorious gifts with which God would endow and refresh His
redeemed people in His kingdom. As the promise in chap. xix.
5, 6, with which God opened the way for the covenant at Sinai,
set clearly before the nation that had been rescued from Egypt
the ultimate goal of its divine calling ; so this termination of the
ceremony was intended to give to the nation, in the persons of its
representatives, a tangible pledge of the glory of the goal that
was set before it. The sight of the God of Israel was a fore-
taste of the blessedness of the sight of God in eternity, and the
covenant meal upon the mountain before the face of God was a
type of the marriage supper of the Lamb, to which the Lord
will call, and at which He will present His perfected Church in
the day of the full revelation of His glory (Rev. xix. 7-9).
Vers. 12-18 prepare the way for the subsequent revelation
recorded in chap, xxv.-xxxi., which Moses received concerning
the erection of the sanctuary. At the conclusion of the cove-
nant meal, the representatives of the nation left the mountain
along with Moses. This is not expressly stated, indeed ; since it
followed as a matter of course that they returned to the camp,
when the festival for which God had called them up was con-
cluded. A command was then issued again to Moses to ascend
the mountain, and remain there (Mhwn), for He was about to
give him the tables of stone, with (1 as in Gen. hi. 24) the law
and commandments, which He had written for their instruction
1 This is the derivation adopted by the English translators in their ren-
dering "paved work." — Te.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXV.-XXXI. 161
(cf. xxxi. 18). — Vers. 13, 14: When Moses was preparing to
ascend the mountain with his servant Joshua (vid. xvii. 9), he
ordered the elders to remain in the camp (nta, t.e. where they
were) till their return, and appointed Aaron and Hur (vid.
xvii. 10) as administrators of justice in case of any disputes
occurring among the people. D^l ???" , 1? : whoever has matters,
matters of dispute (on this meaning of ??3 see Gen. xxxvii. 19).
— Vers. 15—17. When he ascended the mountain, upon which
the glory of Jehovah dwelt, it was covered for six days with the
cloud, and the glory itself appeared to the Israelites in the camp
below like devouring fire (cf. xix. 16) ; and on the seventh day
He called Moses into the cloud. Whether Joshua followed him
we are not told; but it is evident from chap, xxxii. 17 that he
was with him on the mountain, though, judging from ver. 2 and
chap, xxxiii. 11, he would not go into the immediate presence
of God. — Ver. 18. " And Moses was on the mountain forty
days and forty nights," including the six days of waiting, — the
whole time without eating and drinking (Deut. ix. 9). The
number forty was certainly significant, since it was not only re-
peated on the occasion of his second protracted stay upon Mount
Sinai (xxxiv. 28 ; Deut. ix. 18), but occurred again in the forty
days of Elijah's journey to Horeb the mount of God in the
strength of the food received from the angel (1 Kings xix. 8),
and in the fasting of Jesus at the time of His temptation (Matt.
iv. 2 ; Luke iv. 2), and even appears to have been significant in
the forty years of Israel's wandering in the desert (Deut. viii. 2).
In all these cases the number refers to a period of temptation,
of the trial of faith, as well as to a period of the strengthening
of faith through the miraculous support bestowed by God.
DIRECTIONS CONCERNING THE SANCTUARY AND PRIEST-
HOOD. — CHAP. XXV.-XXXI.
To give a definite external form to the covenant concluded
with His people, and construct a visible bond of fellowship in
which He might manifest Himself to the people and they might
draw near to Him as their God, Jehovah told Moses that the
Israelites were to erect Him a sanctuary, that He might dwell
in the midst of them (chap. xxv. 8). The construction and ar-
rangement of this sanctuary were determined in all respects by
PENT. — VOL. II. L
Digitized by
Google
162 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
God Himself, who showed to Moses, when upon the mountain, a
pattern of the dwelling and its furniture, and prescribed with
great minuteness both the form and materials of all the different
parts of the sanctuary and all the things required for the sacred
service. If the sanctuary was to answer its purpose, the erec-
tion of it could not be left to the inventive faculty of auy man
whatever, but must proceed from Him, who was there to manifest
Himself to the nation, as the Holy One, in righteousness and
grace. The people could only carry out what God appointed,
and could only fulfil their covenant duty, by the readiness with
which they supplied the materials required for the erection of
the sanctuary and completed the work with their own hands.
The divine directions extended to all the details, because they
were all of importance in relation to the design of God. The
account therefore is so elaborate, that it contains a description
not only of the directions of God with reference to the whole
and every separate part (chap, xxv.-xxxi.), but also of the exe-
cution of the work in all its details (chap, xxxv.-xl.);
The following is the plan upon which this section is arranged.
After the command of God to the people to offer gifts for the
sanctuary about to be erected, which forms the introduction to
the whole (chap. xxv. 1-9), the further directions commence with
a description of the ark of the covenant, which Jehovah had ap-
pointed as His throne in the sanctuary, that is to say, as it were,
with the sanctuary in the sanctuary (chap. xxv. 10-22). Then
follow— (1) the table of shew-bread and the golden candlestick
(vers. 23-40), as the two things by means of which the con-
tinual communion of Israel with Jehovah was to be maintained ;
(2) the construction of the dwelling, with an account of the
position to be occupied by the three things already named
(chap, xxvi.) ; (3) the altar of burnt-offering, together with the
court which was to surround the holy dwelling (chap, xxvii.
1-19). This is immediately followed by the command respect-
ing the management of the candlestick (vers. 20, 21), which
prepares the way for an account of the institution of the priest-
hood, and the investiture and consecration of the priests (chap,
xxviii. and xxix.), and by the directions as to the altar of incense,
and the service to be performed at it (chap. xxx. 1-10) ; after
which, there only remain a few subordinate instructions to com-
plete the whole (chap. xxx. 11-xxxi. 17). "The description
^\
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXV. 1-9. 163
of the entire sanctuary commences, therefore," as Ranke has
aptly observed, " with the ark of the law, the place of the mani-
festation of Jehovah, and terminates with the altar of incense,
which stood immediately in front of it." The dwelling was
erected round Jehovah's seat, and round this the court. The
priests first of all presented the sacrifices upon the altar of burnt-
offering, and then proceeded into the holy place and drew near
to Jehovah. The highest act in the daily service of the priests was
evidently this standing before Jehovah at the altar of incense,
which was only separated by the curtain from the most holy place.
Chap. xxv. 1-9 (cf. chap. xxxv. 1-9). The Israelites were
to bring to. the Lord a heave-offering (n DVUi, from twn, a gift
lifted, or heaved by a man from his own property to present
to the Lord ; see at Lev. ii. 9), u on the part of every one whom
Ms heart drove" i.e. whose heart was willing (cf . to? 3^.3 chap.
xxxv. 5, 22) : viz. gold, silver, brass, etc. — Ver. 4. "£>*}, vatcivdos,
purple of a dark blue shade, approaching black rather than
bright blue, joai.t*, irop<f>vpa (Chald. 1J3"IK, 2 Chron. ii. 6 ; Dan.
v. 7, 16; — Sanskrit, rdgaman or rdgavan, colore rubro prce-
ditus), true purple of a dark red colour. ^ njwn, literally the
crimson prepared from the dead bodies and nests of the glow-
worm, 1 then the scarlet-red purple, or crimson. K'B', /9tWo?,
from tW# to be white, a fine white cotton fabric, not linen,
muslin, or net. My goats, here goats' hair (t/ji%«? atyeiai,
LXX.).— Ver. 5. DWKQ D'P'K rfty rams' skins reddened, i.e.
dyed red. t^nn is either the seal, phoca, or else, as this is not
known to exist in the Arabian Gulf, the <f>&Ko<i = (fxoicaiva of
the ancients, as Knobel supposes, or kjJto? Qakaaawv o/jloiop
SeXQivi, the sea-cow (Manati, Halicora), which is found in the
Red Sea, and has a skin that is admirably adapted for sandals.
Hesychius supposes it to have been the latter, which is probably
the same as the large fish Tun or Atum, that is caught in the
Red Sea, and belongs to the same species as the Halieora (Robin-
son, Pal. i. p. 170); as its skin is also used by the Bedouin
Arabs for making sandals (Burckhardt, Syr. p. 861). In the
Manati the upper skin differs from the under ; the former being
larger, thicker, and coarser than the latter, which is only two
1 Glanzwurm: "the Linnean name is coccus ilicis. It frequents the
boughs of a species of ilex ; on these it lays its eggs in groups, which be-
come covered with a kind of down." Smith's Dictionary, Art. Colours. — Th.
Digitized by
Google
164 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
lines in thickness and very tough, so that the skin would be well
adapted either for the thick covering of tents or for the finer
kinds of ornamental sandals (Ezek. xvi. 10). W®& ^ acacia-
wood. flBB' for •HM'?, the true acacia (acacia vera),, which
grows in Egypt and on the Arabian peninsula into a tree of the
size of a nut-tree, or even larger; 1 the only tree in Arabia
deserta from which planks could be cut, and the wood of which
is very light and yet very durable. — Ver. 6. Oil for the candle-
stick (see at chap, xxvii. 20). D^pba perfumes, spices for the
anointing oil (see at chap. xxx. 22 sqq.), and for the incense
(D^Otpri, Ut the scents, because the materials of which it was com-
posed were not all of them fragrant ; see at chap. xxx. 34 sqq.).
— Ver. 7. Lastly, precious stones, Dn^ 'J^K probably beryls (see
at Gen. ii. 12), for the ephod (chap, xxviii. 9), and t^N^D V>.?K,
lit. stones of filling, i.e. jewels that are set (see chap, xxviii. 16
sqq.). On ephod C 16 ?*), see at chap, xxviii. 6 ; and on IETI, at chap,
xxviii. 15. The precious stones were presented by the princes
of the congregation (chap. xxxv. 27).
Vers. 8, 9. With these freewill-offerings they were to make
the Lord a sanctuary, that He might dwell in the midst of them
(see at ver. 22). " According to all that I let thee see (show thee),
the pattern of the dwelling and the pattern of all its furniture, so
shall ye make it" The participle fWt"}D does not refer to the past;
and there is nothing to indicate that it does, either in ver. 40,
1 See Abdallatif's Merkwiirdigkeiten Aegyptens, and RosenmiiUer, Althk.
iv. i. pp. 278-9. This genuine acacia, Sont, must not he confounded, accord-
ing to Robinson (Pal. 2, 850), with the Acacia gumnifera (Talk). Seetzen
also makes a distinction between the ThoUhh, the Szont of the Egyptians,
and the Szeial, and between an acacia which produces gum and one which
does not ; but he also observes that the same tree is called both ThoUhh
and Szeial in different places. He then goes on to Bay that he did not find a '
single tree large enough to furnish planks of ten cubits in length and one
and a half in breadth for the construction of the ark (he means, of the
tabernacle), and he therefore conjectures that the Israelites may have gone
to Egypt for the materials with which to build the tabernacle. But he has
overlooked the fact, that it is. not stated in the text of the Bible that the
boards of the tabernacle, which were a cubit and a half in breadth, were cut
from one plank of the breadth named ; and also that the trees in the valleys
of the peninsula of Sinai are being more and more sacrificed to the char-
coal trade of the Bedouin Arabs (see p. 71), and therefore that no conclu-
sion can be drawn from the present condition of the trees as to what they
were in the far distant antiquity.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXV. 8, 9. 165
where " in the mount " occurs, or in the use of the preterite in
chap. xxvi. 30, xxvii. 8. It does not follow from the expression,
" which is showed thee in the mount" that Moses had already left
the mountain and returned to the camp ; and the use of the pre-
terite in the passages last named may be simply explained, either
on the supposition that the sight of the pattern or model of the
whole building and its component parts preceded the descrip-
tion of the different things required for the completion of the
building, or that the instructions to make the different parts in
such and such a way, pointed to a time when the sight of the
model really belonged to the past. On the other hand, the
model for the building could not well be shown to Moses, before
he had been told that the gifts to be made by the people were
to be devoted to the building of a sanctuary, rwan, from H33
to build, lit. a building, then a figure of anything, a copy or
representation of different things, Deut. iv. 17 sqq.; a drawing
or sketch, 2 Kings xvi. 10 : ,it never means the original, not
even in Ps. cxliv. 12, as Delitzsch supposes (see his Com. on
Heb. viii. 5). In such passages as 1 Chron. xxviii. 11, 12, 19,
where it may be rendered plan, it does not signify an ori-
ginal, but simply means a model or drawing, founded upon an
idea, or taken from some existing object, according to which a
building was to be constructed. Still less can the object con-
nected with JVJ2TI in the genitive be understood as referring to
the original, from which the IVJan was taken ; so that we cannot
follow the Rabbins in their interpretation of this passage, as
affirming that the heavenly originals of the tabernacle and its
furniture had been shown to Moses in a vision upon the moun-
tain. What was shown to him was simply a picture or model
of the earthly tabernacle and its furniture, which were to be
made by him. Both Acts vii. 44 and Heb. viii. 5 are perfectly
reconcilable with this interpretation of our verse, which is the
only one that can be grammatically sustained. The words of
Stephen, that Moses was to make the tabernacle xarh rbv tvttov
bv ecapdicei, " according to the fashion that he had seen," are so
indefinite, that the text of Exodus must be adduced to explain
them. And when the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews cites
the words, " See that thou make all things xarh, rbv tvttov rbv
Seixdevra trot iv r$ opei" (according to the pattern showed to
thee in the mount), from ver. 40 of this chapter, as a proof the
Digitized by
Google
166 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES. . v
Levitical priests only served the type and shadow of heavenly
things (t&v eirovpavlav) ; it is true, his words may be understood
as showing that he regarded the earthly tabernacle with all its
arrangements as only the counterpart and copy of a heavenly
original. But this interpretation is neither necessary nor well
founded. For although the author, by following the Sept., in
which DrMana is rendered /caret top tvttov, the suffix being
dropped, leaves it just a possible thing to understand the two?
shown to Moses as denoting a heavenly tabernacle (or temple) ;
yet he has shown very clearly that this was not his own view,
when he explains the " patterns of things in the heavens " (yiro-
Sely/mra t&v iv ovpavoli) and " the true " thing3 (ra d\i)0iva) of
both the tabernacle and its furniture as denoting the " heaven "
(pvpavos) into which Christ had entered, and not any temple in
heaven. If the eirovpdvia are heaven itself, the two? showed
to Moses cannot have been a temple in heaven, but either heaven
itself, or, more probably still, as there could be no necessity for
this to be shown to Moses in a pictorial representation, a picture
of heavenly things or divine realities, which was shown to Moses
that he might copy and embody it in the earthly tabernacle. 1
If we understand the verse before \is in this sense, it merely
expresses what is already implied in the fact itself. If God
showed Moses a picture or model of the tabernacle, and in-
1 The conclusion drawn by Delitzsch (Hebraerbrief, p. 837), that because
the author does not refer to anything between the imvpuvict and their
tlirrhvwct (chap. ix. 24), the rvires can only have consisted of the Wovp&n*
themselves, is a mistake., All that the premises preclude, is the intervention
of any objective reality, or third material object, but not the introduction
of a pictorial representation, through which Moses was shown how to copy
the heavenly realities and embody them in an earthly form. The earthly
tent would no more be a copy of the copy of a heavenly original in this
case, than a palace built according to a model is a copy of that model.
Moreover, Delitzsch himself thinks i t is " not conceivable that, when Moses was
favoured with a view of the heavenly world, it was left to him to embody
what he saw in a material form, to bring it within the limits of space."
He therefore assumes, both for the reason assigned, and because " no mortal
has ever looked directly at heavenly things," that " inasmuch as what was
seen could not be directly reflected in the mirror of his mind, not to mention
the retina of his eye, it was set before him in a visible form, and according
to the operation of God who showed it, in a manner adapted to serve as a
model of the earthly sanctuary to be erected." Thus he admits that it is
true that Moses did not see the heavenly world itself, but only a copy of it
that was shown to him by God.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXV. 10-22. 167
structed him to make everything exactly according to this
pattern, we most assume that in the tabernacle and its furniture
heavenly realities were to be expressed in earthly fftrms ; or, to
put it more clearly, that the thoughts of God concerning salva-
tion and His kingdom, which the earthly building was to em-
body and display, were visibly set forth in the pattern shown.
The symbolical and typical significance of the whole building
necessarily follows from this, though without our being obliged
to imitate the Rabbins, and seek in the tabernacle the counter-
part or copy of a heavenly temple. What these divine thoughts
were that were embodied in the tabernacle, can only be gathered
from the arrangement and purpose of the whole building and
its separate parts; and upon this point the description furnishes
so much information, that when read in the light of the whole
of the covenant revelation, it gives to all the leading points pre-
cisely the clearness that we require.
Vers. 10-22. The Ark op the Covenant (cf . chap, xxxvii.
1—9). — They were to make an ark (tf*iK) of acacia-wood, two
cubits and a half long, one and a half broad, and one and
a half high, and to plate it with pure gold both within and
without. Round about it they were to construct a golden IT, i.e.
probably a golden rim, encircling it like an ornamental wreath.
They were also to cast four golden rings and fasten them to the
four feet (nto)® walking feet, feet bent as if for walking) of the
ark, two on either side ; and to cut four poles of acacia-wood
and plate them with gold, and put them through the rings for
carrying the ark. The poles were to remain in the rings, with-
out moving from them, i.e. without being drawn out, that the
bearers might not touch the ark itself (Num. iv. 15). — Ver. 16.
Into this ark Moses was to put " the testimony" (rnj?n ; cf . chap,
xl. 20). This is the name given to the two tables of stone,
upon which the ten words spoken by God to the whole nation
were written, and which Moses was to receive from God (chap.
xxiv. 12). Because these ten words were the declaration of God
upon the basis of which the covenant was concluded (chap,
xxxiv. 27, 28 ; Deut. iv. 13, x. 1, 2), these tables were called
the tables of testimony (chap. xxxi. 18, xxxiv. 29), or tables of
the covenant (Deut. ix. 9, xi. 15). — Vers. 17 sqq. In addition
to this, Moses was to make a capporeth (puurrijpiov eirldefia,
j^i^ii::
168 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
LXX. -^ propitiatorium, Vulg.), an atoning covering. The
meaning operculum, lid (6re».), cannot be sustained, notwith-
standing the fact that the capporeth was placed upon the ark
(ver. 21) and covered the tables laid within it ; for the verb nea
has not the literal signification of covering or covering up either
in Kal or Piel. In Kal it only occurs in Gen. vi. 14, where it
means to pitch or tar ; in Piel it is only used in the figurative
sense of covering up sin or guilt, i.e. of making atonement.
1 Chron. xxviii. 11 is decisive on this point, where the holy of
holies, in which the capporeth was, is called rnk?- n % which
cannot possibly mean the covering-house, but must signify the
house of atonement. The force of this passage is not weakened
by the remark made by Delitzsch and others, to the effect that
it was only in the later usage of the language that the idea
of covering gave place to that of the covering up or expiation of
sin ; for neither in the earlier nor earliest usage of the language
can the supposed primary meaning of the word be anywhere dis-
covered. KnobeTs remark has still less force, viz. that the ark
must have had a lid, and it must have been called a lid. For if
from the very commencement this lid had a more important
purpose than that of a simple covering, it might also have re-
ceived its name from this special purpose, even though this was
not fully explained to the Israelites till a later period in the giv-
ing of the law (Lev. xvi. 15, 16). It must, however, have been
obvious to every one, that it was to be something more than the
mere lid of the ark, from the simple fact that it was not to be
made, like the ark, of wood plated with gold, but to be made of
pure gold, and to have two golden cherubs upon the top. The
cliervbim (see vol. i. p. 107) were to be made of gold WpD (from
nB'iJ to turn), i.e., literally, turned work (cf. Isa. iii. 24), here,
according to Onkelos, VM opus ductile, work beaten with the ham-
mer and rounded, so that the figures were not solid but hollow
(see Bahr, i. p. 380). — Ver. 19. " Out of the capporeth shall ye
make the cherubs at its two ends," i.e. so as to form one whole
with the capporeth itself, and be inseparable from it.^-Ver. 20.
" And let the cherubs be stretching out wings on high, screening
(D'aa'D, <rvaiaa%ovTe<;) with their wings above the capporeth, and
their faces (turned) one to the other; towards the capporeth let
the faces of the cherubs be" That is to say, the cherubs were to
spread out their wings in such a manner as to form a screen
v
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXV. 1<H22. 169
over the capporeth, with their faces turned towards one another,
but inclining or stooping towards the capporeth. The reason
for this is given in ver. 22. There — viz. above the capporeth
that was placed npon the ark containing the testimony — Jehovah
would present Himself to Moses ("Wfo, from 1JT to appoint, to
present one's self to a person at an appointed place, to meet with
him), and talk with him "from above the capporeth, out from
between the two cherubs upon the ark of testimony, all that I
shall command thee for the sons of Israel" (cf. chap. xxix. 42).
Through this divine promise and the fulfilment of it (chap. xl.
35 ; Lev. i. 1 ; Num. i. 1, xvii. 19), the ark of the covenant to-
gether with the capporeth became the throne of Jehovah in the
midst of His chosen people, the footstool of the God of Israel
(1 Chron. xxviii. 2, cf. Ps. cxxxii. 7, xcix. 5 ; Lam. ii. 1). The
ark, with the tables of the covenant as the self-attestation of God,
formed the foundation of this throne, to show that the kingdom
of grace which was established in Israel through the medium of
the covenant, was founded in justice and righteousness (Ps.
lxxxix. 15, xcvii. 2). The gold plate upon the ark formed the
footstool of the throne for Him, who caused His name, i,e. the
real presence of His being, to dwell in a cloud between the two
cherubim above their outspread wings ; and there He not only
made known His will to His people in laws and commandments,
but revealed Himself as the jealous God who visited sin and
showed mercy (chap. xx. 5, 6, xxxiv. 6, 7), — the latter more
especially on the great day of atonement, when, through the
medium of the blood of the sin-offering sprinkled upon and in
front of the capporeth, He granted reconciliation to His people for
all their transgressions in all their sins (Lev. xvi. 14 sqq.). Thus
the footstool of God became a throne of grace (Heb. iv. 16, cf.
ix. 5), which received its name capporeth or IXaar^piov from the
fact that the highest and most perfect act of atonement under the
Old Testament was performed upon it. Jehovah, who betrothed
His people to Himself in grace and mercy for an everlasting
covenant (Hos. ii. 2), was enthroned upon it, above the wings of
the two cherubim, which stood on either side of His throne ; and
hence He is represented as " dwelling (between) the cherubim"
DW3S1 36* (1 Sam. iv. 4 ; 2 Sam. vi. 2 ; Ps. lxxx. 2, etc.). The
cherubs were not combinations of animal forms, taken from man,
the lion, the ox, and the eagle, as many have inferred from Ezek.
Digitized by
Google
170 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
i. and x., for even the composite beings which Ezekiel saw with
four faces had a human figure (Ezek. i. 5) ; but they are to be
regarded as figures made in a human form, and not in a kneel-
ing posture, but, according to the analogy of 2 Chron. iii. 13,
standing upright. Consequently, as the union of four faces in
one cherub is peculiar to Ezekiel, and the cherubs of the ark of
the covenant, like those of Solomon's temple, had but one face
each, not only did the human type form the general basis of
these figures, but in every respect, with the exception of the wings,
they were made in the likeness of men. And this is the only
form which would answer the purpose for which they were in-
tended, viz. to represent the cherubim, or heavenly spirits, who
were stationed to prevent the return of the first man to the
garden of Eden after his expulsion thence, and keep the way to
the tree of life (see vol. i. p. • 107). Standing upon the capporeth
of the ark of the covenant, the typical foundation of the throne
of Jehovah, which Ezekiel saw in the vision as yip"} JNOT " the
likeness of a firmament" (Ezek. i. 22, 25), with their wings
outspread and faces lowered, they represented the spirits of
heaven, who surround Jehovah, the heavenly King, when seated
upon His throne, as His most exalted servants and the witnesses
of His sovereign and saving glory ; so that Jehovah enthroned
above the wings of the cherubim was set forth as the God of
Hosts who is exalted above all the angels, surrounded by the
assembly or council of the holy ones (Ps. lxxxix. 6-9), who bow
their faces towards the capporeth, studying the secrets of the
divine counsels of love(l Pet. i. 12), and worshipping Him that
liveth for ever and ever (Rev. iv. 10).
Vers. 23-30. The Table op Shew-bread (cf. chap, xxxvii.
10-16). — The table for the shew-bread (ver. 30) was to be made
of acacia-wood, two cubits long, one broad, and one and a half
high, and to be plated with pure gold, having a golden wreath
round, and a "finish (rnjDD) of a hand-breadth round about"
i.e. a border of a hand-breadth in depth surrounding and en-
closing the four sides, upon which the top of the table was laid,
and into the four corners of which the feet of the table were
inserted. A golden wreath was to be placed round this rim.
As there is no article attached to 3riJ >T in ver. 25 (cf. xxxvii. 12),
so as to connect it with the "it in ver. 24, we must conclude that
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXV. 81-40. 171
there were two such ornamental wreaths, one round the slah of
the table, the other round the rim which was under the slah.
At the four corners of the four feet, near the point at which
they joined the rim, four rings were to be fastened -for D ,J ?3,
i.e. to hold the poles with which the table was carried, as in
the case of the ark. — Ver. 29. Vessels of pure gold were also
to be made, to stand upon the table (cf. xxxvii. 16). r ' S) ?? ) rh
revflXia (LXX.), large deep plates, in which the shew-bread
was not only brought to the table, but placed upon it. These
plates cannot have been small, for the silver ^JJi?, presented by
Nahshon the tribe prince, weighed 130 shekels (Num. vii. 13).
nfe?, from *)? a hollow hand, small scoops, according to Num.
vii. 14, only ten shekels in weight, used to put out the incense
belonging to the shew-bread upon the table (cf. Lev. xxiv. 7
and Num. vii. 14) : LXX. Ovtaicrj, i.e., according to the Etymol.
Magn., aiccupr) f) t& Ovfiara Bexp/ievrj. There were also two vessels
" to pour out," sc. the drink-offering, or libation of wine : viz.
rvibj?, <nrovSeia (LXX.), sacrificial spoons to make the libation
of wine with, and 1 5 i?3D, fcvadot, (LXX.), goblets into which the
wine was poured, and in which it was placed upon the table.
(See chap, xxxvii. 16 and Num. iv. 7, where the goblets are
mentioned before the sacrificial spoons.) — Ver. 30. Bread of the
face ( D, ?3 D D.?)> the mode of preparing and placing which is
described in Lev. xxiv. 5 sqq., was to lie continually before Q)f?)
Jehovah. These loaves were called " bread of the face " (shew-
bread), because they were to lie before the face of Jehovah as a
meat-offering presented by the children of Israel (Lev. xxiv. 8),
not as food for Jehovah, but as a symbol of the spiritual food
which Israel was to prepare (John vi. 27, cf. iv. 32, 34), a
figurative representation of the calling it had received from
God ; so that bread and wine, which stood upon the table by the
side of the loaves, as the fruit of the labour bestowed by Israel
upon the soil of its inheritance, were a symbol of its spiritual
labour in the kingdom of God, the spiritual vineyard of its
Lord.
Vers. 31-40 (cf. xxxvii. 17-24). The Candlestick was
to be made of pure gold; " beaten work." DE'po : see ver 18.
For the form HB^Fi instead of ne>ypi (which is probably the
work of a copyist, who thought the reading should be f byri in
Digitized by
Google
172 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
the Niphal, as the * is wanting in many MSS.), see Gesenius,
Lehrgeb. p. 52, and Ewald, § 83 b. " Of it shall be (i.e. there
shall issue from it so as to form one complete whole) its ^V "
(lit. the loins, the npper part of the thigh, which is attached to
the body, and from which the feet proceed, — in this case the
base or pedestal, upon which the candelabrum stood) ; its ruf, or
reed, i.e.i the hollow stem of the candelabrum rising up from the
pedestal ; — " its D*jP3J," cups, resembling the calix of a flower ; —
D^iftM, knobs, in a spherical shape (cf. Amos ix. 1, Zeph. ii. 14) ;
— " and B'nTB," flowers, ornaments in the form of buds just burst-
ing. — Ver. 32. From the sides of the candlestick, i.e. of the up-
right stem in the middle, there were to be six branches, three on
either side. — Vers. 33-34. On each of these branches (the repe-
tition of the same words expresses the distributive sense) there
were to be " three cups in the form of an almond-flower, (with)
knob and flower," and on the shaft of the candlestick, of" central
stem, " four cups in the form of almond-flowers, its knobs and its
flowers." As both mjM iriM (ver. 33) and rpmw rnhB3 (ver.
34) are connected with the previous words without a copula,
Knobel and Thenius regard these words as standing in explanatory
apposition to the preceding ones^ and suppose the meaning to
be that the flower-cups were to consist of knobs with flowers
issuing from them. But apart from the singular idea of calling
a knob or bulb with a flower bursting from it a flower-cup, ver.
31 decidedly precludes any such explanation ; for cups, knobs,
and flowers are mentioned there in connection with the base and
stem, as three separate things which were quite as' distinct the
one from the other as the base and the stem. The words in
question are appended in both verses to D^i^P D^aa in the
sense of subordination ; 1 is generally used in such cases, but
it is omitted here before "U1B3, probably to avoid ambiguity, as
the two words to be subordinated are brought into closer associa-
tion as one idea by the use of this copula. And if *>nB3 and rns
are to be distinguished from JP3J, the objection made by Thenius
to our rendering li'B'p " almond-blossom-shaped," namely, that
neither the almond nor the almond-blossom has at all the shape
of a basin, falls entirely to the ground ; and there is all the less
reason to question this rendering, on account of the unanimity
with which it has been adopted in the ancient versions, whereas
the rendering proposed by Thenius, " wakened up, i.e. a burst or
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXV. 31-40. 173
opened calix," has neither foundation nor probability. — Ver. 35.
" And every pipe under the two branches shall be out from them
(be connected with them) for the six (side) pipes going out from
the candlestick ;" i.e. at the point where the three pairs of the six
side pipes or arms branched off from the main pipe or stem of
the candlestick, a knob should be so placed that the arms should
proceed from the knob, or from the main stem immediately
above the knob. — Ver. 36. " Their knobs and their pipes (i.e.
the knobs and pipes of the three pairs of arms) shall be of it
(the candlestick, i.e. combined with it «o as to form one whole),
all one (one kind of) beaten work, pure gold" From all this we
get the following idea of the candlestick : Upon the base there
rose an upright central pipe, from which three side pipes branched
out one above another on either side, and curved upwards in the
form of a quadrant to the level of the central stem. On this
stem a calk and a knob and blossom were introduced four sepa-
rate times, and in such a manner that there was a knob wher-
ever the side pipes branched off from the main stem, evidently
immediately below the branches; and the fourth knob, we'may
suppose, was higher up between the top branches and the end of
the stem. As there were thus four calices with a knob and
blossom in the main stem, so again there were three in each of
the branches, which were no doubt placed at equal distances
from one another. With regard to the relative position of the
calix, the knob, and the blossom, we may suppose that the
spherical knob was underneath the calix, and that the blossom
sprang from the upper edge of the latter, as if bursting out of
it. The candlestick had thus seven arms, and seven lights or
lamps were to be made and placed upon them (n?yn). " And
they (all the lamps) are to give light upon the opposite side of its
front" (ver. 37) : i.e. the lamp was to throw its light upon the
side that was opposite to the front of the candlestick. The
D'JB of the candlestick (ver. 37 and Num. viii. 2) was the front
shown by the seven arms, as they formed a straight line with
their seven points; and 133? does not mean the side, but the oppo-
site side, as is evident from Num. viii. 2, where we find 7^» ?N
instead. As the place assigned to the candlestick was on the
south side of the dwelling-place, we are to understand by this
opposite side the north, and imagine the lamp to be so placed
that the line of lamps formed by the seven arms ran from front
Digitized by
Google
174 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
to back, by which arrangement the holy place would be better
lighted, than if the candlestick had stood with the line of lamps
from sonth to north, and so had turned all its seven lamps
towards the person entering the holy place. The lamps were
the receptacles for the wick and oil, which were placed on the
top of the arms, and could be taken down to be cleaned. The
hole from which the wick projected was not made in the middle,
but at the edge, so that the light was thrown upon one side. —
Ver. 38. The other things belonging to the candlestick were
°? l 3?r 1 ? tongs (Isa. vi. 6), i.e. snuffers, and ninnD snuff-dishes,
i.e. dishes to receive the snuff when taken from the wicks ; else-
where the word signifies an ash-pan, or vessel used for taking
away the coal from the fire (chap, xxvii. 3; Lev. xvi. 12; Num.
xvii. 3 sqq.).— Ver. 39. " Of a talent of pure gold (i.e. 822,000
Parisian grains) shall he make it (the candlestick) and all these
vessels," i.e., according to chap, xxxvii. 24, all the vessels belong-
ing to the candlestick. From this quantity of gold it was pos-
sible to make a candlestick of very considerable size. The size
is not given anywhere in the Old Testament, but, according to
Bdhr's conjecture, it corresponded to the height of the table of
shew-bread, namely, a cubit and a half in height and the same
in breadth, or a cubit and a half between the two outside lamps.
The signification of the seven-armed candlestick is. apparent
from its purpose, viz. to carry seven lamps, which were trimmed
and filled with oil every morning, and lighted every evening,
and were to burn throughout the night (chap, xxvii. 20, 21,
xxx. 7, 8 ; Lev. xxiv. 3, 4). As the Israelites were to prepare
spiritual food in the shew-bread in the presence of Jehovah,
and to offer continually the fruit of their labour in the field of
the kingdom of God, as a spiritual offering to the Lord ; so also
were they to present themselves continually to Jehovah in the
burning lamps, as the vehicles and media of light, as a nation
letting its light shine in the darkness of this world (cf. Matt. v.
14, 16; Luke xii. 35; Phil. ii. 15). The oil, through which the
lamps burned and shone, was, according to its peculiar virtue
in imparting strength to the body and restoring vital power, a
representation of the Godlike spirit, the source of all the vital
power of man ; whilst the oil, as offered by the congregation of
Israel, and devoted to sacred purposes according to the com-
mand of God, is throughout the Scriptures a symbol of the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVI. 175
Spirit of God, by which the congregation of God was filled with
higher light and life. By the power of this Spirit, Israel, in
covenant with the Lord, was to let its light shine, the light of its
knowledge of God and spiritual illumination, before all the
nations of the earth. In its seven arms the stamp of the cove-
nant relationship was impressed upon the candlestick ; and the
almond-blossom with which it was ornamented represented the
seasonable offering of the flowers and fruits of the Spirit, the
almond-tree deriving its name "l£B> from the fact that it is the
earliest of all the trees in both its blossom and its fruit (cf. Jer.
i. 11, 12). The symbolical character of the candlestick is clearly
indicated in the Scriptures. The prophet Zecbariah (chap, iv.)
sees a golden candlestick with seven lamps and two olive-trees,
one on either side, from which the oil- vessel is supplied; and the
angel who is talking with him informs him that the olive-trees are
the two sons of oil, that is to say, the representatives of the king-
dom and priesthood, the divinely appointed organs through which
the Spirit of God was communicated to the covenant nation.
And in Rev. i. 20, the seven churches, which represent the new
people of God, i.e. the Christian Church, are shown to the holy
seer in the form of seven candlesticks standing before the throne
of God. — On ver. 40, see at ver. 9.
Chap. xxvi. (cf. xxxvi. 8-38). The Dwelling-Plaoe. —
This was to be formed of a framework of wood, and of tapestry
and curtains. The description commences with the tapestry or
tent-cloth (vers. 1-14), which made the framework (vers.
15-30) into a dwelling. The inner lining is mentioned first
(vers. 1-6), because this made the dwelling into a tent (taber-
nacle). This inner tent-cloth was to consist of ten curtains
(Tljyn!, avKaiai), or, as Luther has more aptly rendered it,
Teppiche, pieces of tapestry, i.e. of cloth composed of byssus
yarn, hyacinth, purple, and scarlet. "ttlpD twisted, signifies yarn
composed of various colours twisted together, from which the
finer kinds of byssus, for which the Egyptians were so cele-
brated, were made (vid. Hengstenberg, Egypt, pp. 139 sqq.).
The byssus yarn was of a clear white, and this was woven into
mixed cloth by combination with dark blue, and dark and fiery
red. It was not to be in simple stripes or checks, however ; but
the variegated yarn was to be woven (embroidered) into the
Digitized by
Google
176 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
white byssus, so as to form artistic figures of cherubim (" cheru-
bim, work of the artistic weaver, shalt thou make it "). n^yo
3#n (lit. work or labour of the thinker) is applied to artistic
weaving, in which either figures or gold threads (chap, xxviii.
6, 8, 15) are worked into the cloth, and which is to be dis-
tinguished from Dp*! 'TtygO variegated weaving (ver. 36). — Vers.
2, 3. The length of each piece was to be 28 cubits, and the breadth
4 cubits, one measure for all ; and five of these pieces were to be
"joined together one to another," i.e. joined or sewed together into
a piece of 28 cubits in length and 20 in breadth, and the same
with the other five. — Vers. 4, 5. They were also to make 50
hyacinth loops " on the border of the one piece of tapestry, from
the end in the join," i.e. on the extreme edge of the five pieces
that were sewed together ; and the same " on the border of the
last piece in the second joined tapestry? Thus there were to be
fifty loops in each of the two large pieces, and these loops were
to be WapD " taking up the loops one the other ; " that is to
say, they were to be so made that the loops in the two pieces
should exactly meet. — Ver. 6. Fifty golden clasps were also to
be made, to fasten the pieces of drapery (the two halves of the
tent-cloth) together, " that it might be a dwelling-place." This
necessarily leads to Bdhr's conclusion, that the tent-cloth, which
consisted of two halves fastened together with the loops and
clasps, answering to the two compartments of the dwelling-
place (ver. 33), enclosed the whole of the interior, not only
covering the open framework above, but the side walls also, and
therefore that it hung down inside the walls, and that it was not
spread out upon the wooden framework so as to form the ceiling,
but hung down on the walls on the outside of the wooden beams,
so that the gilded beams were left uncovered in the inside. For
if this splendid tent-cloth had been intended for the ceiling only,
and therefore only 30 cubits had been visible out of the 40 cubits
of its breadth, and only 10 out of the 28 of its length, — that is to
say, if not much more than a third of the whole had been seen
and used for the inner lining of the dwelling, — it would not have
been called "the dwelling" so constantly as it is (cf. chap,
xxxvi. 8, xl. 18), nor would the goats'-hair covering which was
placed above it have been just as constantly called the " tent
above the dwelling" (ver. 7, chap, xxxvi. 14, xl. 19). This
inner tent-cloth was so spread out, that whilst it was fastened to
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVI. 7-13. 177
the upper ends of the beams in a way that is not explained in
the text, it formed the ceiling of the whole, and -the joining came
just above the curtain which divided the dwelling into two com-
partments. One half therefore, viz. the front half, formed the
ceiling of the holy place with its entire breadth of 20 cubits
and 10 cubits of its length, and the remaining 18 cubits of its
length hung down over the two side walls, 9 cubits down each
wall, — the planks that formed the walls being left uncovered,
therefore, to the height of 1 cubit from the ground. In a
similar manner the other half covered the holy of holies, 10
cubits of both length and breadth forming the ceiling, and the
10 cubits that remained of the entire length covering the end
wall; whilst the folds in the corners that arose from the 9
cubits that hung down on either side, were no doubt so adjusted
that the walls appeared to be perfectly smooth. (For further
remarks, see chap, xxxix. 33.)
Vers. 7-13. The outer tent-cloth, "for the tent over the
dwelling," was to consist of eleven lengths of goats' hair, i.e. of
cloth made of goats' hair ; * each piece being thirty cubits long
and four broad. — Ver. 9. Five of these were to be connected
(sewed together) by themselves (13?), and the other six in the
same manner ; and the sixth piece was to be made double, i.e.
folded together, towards the front of the tent, so as to form a
kind of gable, as Josephus has also explained the passage (Ant.
iii. 6, 4). — Vers. 10, 11. Fifty loops and clasps were to be made
to join the two halves together, as in the case of the inner tapes-
try, only the clasps were to be of brass or copper. — Vers. 12, 13.
This tent-cloth was two cubits longer than the inner one, as each
piece was 30 cubits long instead of 28 ; it was also two cubits
broader, as it was composed of 11 pieces, the eleventh only reckon-
ing as two cubits, as it was to be laid double. Consequently
there was an excess (^iVl? that which is over) of two cubits each
way; and according to vers. 12 and 13 this was to be disposed
of in the following manner : u As for the spreading out of the
excess in the tent-cloths, the half of the cloth in excess shall spread
out over the back of the dwelling; and the cubit from here and
from there in tlie excess in the length of the tent-cloths (i.e. the
1 The coverings of the tents of the Bedouin Arabs are still made of
cloth woven from black goats' hair, which the women spin and weave (see
LyncVs Expedition of the United States to the Jordan and Dead Sea).
PENT. — VOL. II. M
Digitized by
Google
178 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
cubit over in the length in each of the cloths) shall be spread out
on the sides of the dwelling from here and from there to cover it."
Now since, according to this, one half of the two cubits of the
sixth piece which was laid double was to hang down the back of
the tabernacle, there only remained one cubit for the gable of
the front. It follows, therefore, that the joining of the two
halves with loops and clasps would come a cubit farther back,
than the place where the curtain of the holy of holies divided
the dwelling. But in consequence of the cloth being a cubit
longer in every direction, it nearly reached the ground on all
three sides, the thickness of the wooden framework alone pre-
venting it from reaching it altogether.
Ver. 14. Two other coverings were placed on the top of this
tent : one made of rams' skins dyed red, " as a covering for the
tent," and another upon the top of this, made of the skins of the
sea-cow (D'E'nn, see at chap. xxv. 5).
Vers. 15-30. The wooden framework. — Vers. 15, 16. The
boards for the dwelling were to be made "of acacia-wood
standing," i.e. so that they could stand upright ; each ten cubits
long and one and a half broad. The thickness is not given ;
and if, on the one hand, we are not to imagine them too thin,
as Josephus does, for example, who says they were only four
fingers thick (Ant. iii. 6, 3), we have still less reason for follow-
ing Rashi, Lund, Bdhr and others, who suppose them to have
been a cubit in thickness, thus making simple boards into colossal
blocks, such as could neither have been cut from acacia-trees,
nor carried upon desert roads. 1 To obtain boards of the required
breadth, two or three planks were no doubt joined together ac-
cording to the size of the trees.— Ver. 17. Every board was to
have two rf*P (lit. hands or holders) to hold them upright, pegs
1 Kamphausen (Stud, und Krit. 1859, p. 117) appeals to Bohr's Symbolik
1, p. 261-2, and Knobel, Exod. p. 261, in support of the opinion, that at any
rate formerly there were genuine acacias of such size and strength, that
beams could have been cut from them a cubit and a half broad and a cubit
thick ; but we look in vain to either of these writings for such authority as
will establish this fact. Expressions like those of Jerome and ffasselquist,
viz. grandes arbores and arbor ingens ramosissima, are far too indefinite. It
is true that, according to Abdullatif, the Sont is " a very large tree," but he
gives a quotation from Dinuri, in which it is merely spoken of as "a tree
of the size of a nut-tree." See the passages cited in Rosenmiiller's bibl.
Althk. iv. 1, p. 278, Not. 7, where we find the following remark of Westing
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVI. 15-80. 179
therefore; and they were to be "bound to one another" (Sf^fy from
37B> in Chald. to connect, hence D^ptf in 1 Kings vii. 28, the
corner plates that hold together the four sides of a chest), not
" F^gg^ mto one another," but joined together by a fastening
dovetailed into the pegs, by which the latter were fastened still
more firmly to the boards, and therefore had greater holding
power than if each one had been simply sunk into the edge of
the board. — Vers. 18-21. Twenty of these boards were to be
prepared for the side of the dwelling that was turned towards
the south, and forty sockets (Q'fJ? foundations, Job xxxviii. 6)
or bases for the pegs, i.e. to put the pegs of the boards into, that
the boards might stand upright ; and the same number of boards
and sockets for the north side. n JD' i n, "southward," is added to
rou TlRDp in ver. 18, to give a clearer definition of negeb, which
primarily means the dry, and then the country to the south ; an
evident proof that at that time negeb was not established as a
geographical term for the south, and therefore that it was not
written here by a Palestinian, as Knobel supposes, but by Moses
in the desert. The form of the " sockets " is not explained, and
even in chap, xxxviii. 27, in the summing up of the gifts pre-
sented for the work, it is merely stated that a talent of silver
(about 93 lb.) was applied to every socket. — Vers. 22-24. Six
boards were to be made for the back of the dwelling westwards
(p&), and two boards " for the corners or angles of the dwelling
at the two outermost (hinder) sides." rtyJfiW (for cornered), from
J«i?D, equivalent to VfrpD an angle (ver. 24; Ezek. xlvi. 21, 22),
from VV\> to cut off, lit. a section, something cut off, hence an
angle, or corner-piece. These corner boards (ver. 24) were to
be " doubled (OBNh) from below, and whole (E^, integri, form-
ing a whole) at its head (or towards its head, cf. <>K chap, xxxvi.
on Prosper. Alpin. de plantis Mg.: Caudicem non raro ampliorem depre-
hendi, quam ut brachio meo circumdari possit. Even the statement of Theo-
phrast {hist, plant. 4, 8), to the effect that rafters are cut from these trees 12
cubits long (itHutAmtjevf iptyiftot #*>>), is no proof that they were beams a
cubit and a half broad and a cubit thick. And even if there had been trees
of this size in the peninsula of Sinai in Moses' time, a beam of such dimen-
sions, according to Kamphausen's calculation, which is by no means too high,
■would have weighed more than twelve cwt. And certainly the Israelites
could never have carried beams of this weight with them through the
desert ; for the waggons needed would have been such as could never be
used where there are no beaten roads.
Digitized by
Google
180 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
29) with regard to the one ring, so shall it be to both of them (so
shall they both be made) ; to the two corners shall they be " (i.e.
designed for the two hinder corners). The meaning of these
words, which are very obscure in some .points, can only be the
following : the two corner beams at the back were to consist of
two pieces joined together at a right angle, so as to form as
double boards one single whole from the bottom to the top.
The expressions "from below" and "up to its head" are
divided between the two predicates "doubled" (D^DKit) and
" whole" (£Wi), but they belong to both of them. Each of the
corner beams was to be double from the bottom to the top, and
still to form one whole. There is more difficulty in the words
nriKn njaerOK in ver. 24. It is impossible to attach any intelli-
gible meaning to the rendering " to the first ring," so that even
Knobel, who proposed it, has left it unexplained. There is hardly
any other way of explaining it, than to take the word ?N in the
sense of "having regard to a thing," and to understand the
words as meaning, that the corner beams were to form one whole,
from the fact that each received only one ring, probably at the
corner, and not two, viz. one on each side. This one ring was
placed half-way up the upright beam in the corner or angle, in
such a manner that the central bolt, which stretched along the en-
tire length of the walls (ver. 28), might fasten into it from both
the side and back. — Ver. 25. Sixteen sockets were to be made for
these eight boards, two for each. — Vers. 26-29. To fasten the
boards, that they might not separate from one another, bars of
acacia-wood were to be made and covered with gold, five for each
of the three sides of the dwelling ; and though it is not expressly
stated, yet the reference to rings in ver. 29 as holders of the bars
(D'rnalJ cna) is a sufficient indication that they were passed
through golden rings fastened into the boards. — Ver. 28. "And
the middle bar in the midst of the boards (i.e. at an equal distance
from both top and bottom) shall be fastening (n v }3?) from one
end to the other" As it thus expressly stated with reference to
the middle bar, that it was to fasten, i.e. to reach along the walls
from one end to the bther, we necessarily conclude, with Rashi
and others, that the other four bars on every side were not to
reach the whole length of the walls, and may therefore suppose
that they were only half as long as the middle one, so that there
were only three rows of bars on each wall, the upper and lower
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVI. 81-37. 181
being composed of two bars each. — Ver. 30. "And set up the
dwelling according to its right, as was shown thee upon the moun-
tain" (cf. chap. xxv. 9). Even the setting up and position of
the dwelling were not left to human judgment, but were to be
carried out toBBto, i.e. according to the direction corresponding
to its meaning and purpose. From the description which is
given of the separate portions, it is evident that the dwelling was
to be set up in the direction of the four quarters of the heavens,
the back being towards the west, and the entrance to the east;
whilst the whole of the dwelling formed an oblong of thirty
cubits long, ten broad, and ten high. The length we obtain
from the twenty boards of a cubit and a half in breadth ; and
the breadth, by adding to the nine cubits covered by the six
boards at the back, half a cubit as the inner thickness of each of
the corner beams. The thickness of the corner beams is not
given, but we may conjecture that on the outside which formed
part of the back they were three-quarters of a cubit thick, and
that half a cubit is to be taken as the thickness towards the side.
In this case, on the supposition that the side beams were a quar-
ter of a cubit thick, the inner space would be exactly ten cubits
broad and thirty and a quarter long ; but the surplus quarter
would be taken up by the thickness of the pillars upon which the
inner curtain was hung, so that the room at the back would form
a perfect cube, and the one at the front an oblong of exactly
twenty cubits in length, ten in breadth, and ten in height.
Vers. 31—37. To divide the dwelling into two rooms, a cur-
tain was to be made, of the same material, and woven in the
same artistic manner as the inner covering of the walls (ver. 1).
This was called n^* 13 , lit. division, separation, from ^B to divide,
or ;]DD ro*iB (chap. xxxv. 12, xxxix. 34, xl. 21) division of the
covering, i.e. the covering separation, or veil. They were to put
(P?)> *•*• *° hang this " upon four pillars of gilded acacia-wood
and their golden hooks, (standing) upon four silver sockets," under
the loops (tf'D'ij?) which held the two halves of the inner cover-
ing together (ver. 6). Thus the curtain divided the dwelling
into two compartments, the one occupying ten cubits and the
other twenty of its entire length. — Ver. 33. " Thither (where
the curtain hangs under the loops) within the curtain shalt thou
bring the ark of testimony (chap. xxv. 16-22), and the curtain
shall divide unto you between the holy place and the most holy"
Digitized by
Google
182 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
(D*Erjj?n eh'p the holy f holies). The inner compartment was
made into the most holy place through the ark of the covenant
with the throne of grace upon it. — Ver. 35. The two other
things (already described) were to be placed outside the curtain,
viz. in the holy place ; the candlestick opposite to the table, the
former on the south side of the dwelling, the latter towards the
north. — Vers. 36, 37. For the entrance to the tent they were
also to make a curtain ("HDO, lit. a covering, from ^I?p to cover)
of the same material as the inner curtain, but of work in
mixed colours, i.e. not woven with figures upon it, but simply
in stripes or checks. DJ? 4 ! nfc»yp does not mean coloured needle-
work, with figures or flowers embroidered with the needle upon
the woven fabric (as I asserted in my Archdologie, in common
with the Rabbins, Gesenius, Bdkr, and others) ; for in the only
other passage in which 0p"\ occurs, viz. Ps. cxxxix. 15, it does
not mean to embroider, but to weave, and in the Arabic it sig-
nifies to make points, stripes, or lines, to work in mixed colours
(see Hartmann die Hebr&erinn am Putztisch iii. 138 sqq.). This
curtain was to hang on five gilded pillars of acacia-wood with
golden hooks, and for these they were to cast sockets of brass.
In the account of the execution of this work in chap, xxxvi. 38,
it is still further stated, that the architect covered the heads
(capitals) of the pillars and their girders (O^n, see chap, xxvii.
10) with gold. From this it follows, that the pillars were not
entirely gilded, but only the capitals, and that they were fastened
together with gilded girders. These girders were either placed
upon the hooks that were fastened to the tops of the pillars, or,
what I think more probable, formed a kind of architrave above
the pillars, in which case the covering as well as the inner cur-
tain merely hung upon the hooks of the columns. But if the
pillars were not gilded all over, we must necessarily imagine the
curtain as hung upon that side of the pillars which was turned
towards the holy place, so that none of the white wood was to
be seen inside the holy place ; and the gilding of the capitals and
architrave merely served to impress upon the forefront of the
tabernacle the glory of a house of God.
If we endeavour to understand the reason for building the
dwelling in this manner, there can be no doubt that the design
of the wooden walls was simply to give stability to the taber-
nacle. Acacia-wood was chosen, because the acacia was the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVI. 31-87. 183
only tree to be found in the desert of Arabia from which planks
and beams could be cut, whilst the lightness and durability of
this wood rendered it peculiarly suitable for a portable temple.
The wooden framework was covered both within and without
with hangings of drapery and other coverings, to give it the
character of a tent, which is the term really applied to it in chap,
xxvii. 21, and in most instances afterwards. The sanctuary of
Jehovah in the midst of His people was to be a tent, because,
so long as the people were wandering about and dwelt in tents,
the dwelling of their God in the midst of them must be a tent
also. The division of the dwelling into two parts corresponded
to the design of the tabernacle, where Jehovah desired not to
dwell alone by Himself, but to come and meet with His people
(chap. xxv. 22). The most holy place was the true dwelling of
Jehovah, where He was enthroned in a cloud, the visible symbol
of His presence, above the cherubim, upon the capporeth of the
ark of the covenant (see p. 169). The holy place, on the other
hand, was the place where His people were to appear before
Him, and draw near to Him with their gifts, the fruits of their
earthly vocation, and their prayers, and to rejoice before His
face in the blessings of His covenant grace. By the establish-
ment of the covenant of Jehovah with the people of Israel, the
separation of man from God, of which the fall of the progeni-
tors of our race had been the cause, was to be brought to an
end ; an institution was to be set up, pointing to the reunion of
man and God, to true and full vital communion with Him ; and
by this the kingdom of God was to be founded on earth in a
local and temporal form. This kingdom of God, which was
founded in Israel, was to be embodied in the tabernacle, and
shadowed forth in its earthly and visible form as confined
within the limits of time and space. This meaning was indi-
cated not only in the instructions to set up the dwelling accord-
ing to the four quarters of the globe and heavens, with the
entrance towards sunrise and the holy of holies towards the
west, but also in the quadrangular form of the building, the
dwelling as a whole assuming the form of an oblong of thirty
cubits in length, and ten in breadth and height, whilst the most
holy place was a cube of ten cubits in every direction. In the
symbolism of antiquity, the square was a symbol of the universe
or cosmos ; and thus, too, in the symbolism of the Scriptures it
Digitized by
Google
184 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
is a type of the world as the scene of divine revelation, the
sphere of the kingdom of God, for which the world from the
very first had been intended by God, and to which, notwith-
standing the fall of man, who was created lord of the earth, it
was to be once more renewed and glorified. Hence the seal of
the kingdom of God was impressed upon the sanctuary of God
in Israel through the quadrangular form that was given to its
separate rooms. And whilst the direction in which it was set up,
towards the four quarters of the heavens, showed that the king-
dom of God that was planted in Israel was intended to embrace
the entire world, the oblong shape given to the whole building set
forth the idea of the present incompleteness of the kingdom, and
the cubic form of the most holy place its ideal and ultimate perfec-
tion. 1 Yet even in its temporal form, it was perfect of its kind,
and therefore the component parts of the quadrangular building
were regulated by the number ten, the stamp of completeness.
The splendour of the building, as the earthly reflection of
the glory of the kingdom of God, was also in harmony with this
explanation of its meaning. In the dwelling itself everything
was either overlaid with gold or made of pure gold, with the
exception of the foundations or sockets of the boards and inner
pillars, for which silver was used. In the gold, with its glorious,
yea, godlike splendour (Job xxxvii. 22), the glory of the dwelling-
1 The significant character of these different quadrangular forms is placed
beyond all doubt, when we compare the tabernacle and Solomon's temple,
which was built according to the same proportions, with the prophetic de-
scription of the temple 'and holy city in Ezek. xl.-xlviii., and that of the
heavenly Jerusalem in Rev. xxi. and xxii. Just as in both the tabernacle
and Solomon's temple the most holy place was in the form of a perfect cube
(of 10 and 20 cubits respectively), so John saw the city of God, which came
down from God out of heaven, in the form of a perfect cube. " The length,
and the breadth, and the height of it were equal," viz. 12,000 furlongs on
every side (Rev. xxi. 16), a symbolical representation of the idea, that the
holy of holies in the temple will be seen in its perfected form in the
heavenly Jerusalem, and God will dwell in it for ever, along with the just
made perfect. This city of God is " the tabernacle of God with men ;" it
has no longer a temple, but the Lord God of Hosts and the Lamb are the
temple of it (ver. 22), and those who dwell therein see the face of God and
the Lamb (chap. xxii. 4). The square comes next to the cube, and the
regular oblong next to this. The tabernacle was in the form of an oblong :
the dwelling was 30 cubits long and 10 broad, and the court 100 cubits
long and 50 broad. Solomon's temple, when regarded as a whole, was in
the same form ; it was 60 cubits long and 20 cubits broad, apart from the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVI. 81-37. 185
place of God was reflected ; whilst the silver, as the symbol of
moral purity, shadowed forth the holiness of the foundation of
the house or kingdom of God. The four colours, and the figures
upon the drapery and curtains of the temple, were equally sig-
nificant. Whilst the four colours, like the same number of
coverings, showed their general purpose as connected with the
building of the kingdom of God, the brilliant white of the byssus
stands prominently out among the rest of the colours as the
ground of the woven fabrics, and the colour which is invariably
mentioned first. The splendid white byssus represented the
holiness of the building ; the hyacinth, a dark blue approaching
black rather than bright blue, but the true colour of the sky
in southern countries, its heavenly origin and character; the
purple, a dark rich red, its royal glory ; whilst the crimson, a
light brilliant red, the colour of blood and vigorous life, set forth
the strength of imperishable life in the abode and kingdom of
the holy and glorious God-King. Lastly, through the figures of
cherubim woven into these fabrics the dwelling became a sym-
bolical representation of the kingdom of glory, in which the
heavenly spirits surround the throne of God, the heavenly
Jerusalem with its myriads of angels, the city of the living
God, to which the people of God will come when their heavenly
calling is fulfilled (Heb. xii. 22, 23).
porch and side buildings. In Ezekiel's vision not only is the sanctuary a
square of 500 reeds (Ezek. xlii. 15-20, xlv. 2), but the inner court (chap.
zL 23, 27, 47), the paved space in the outer court (xl. 19), and other parts
also, are all in the form of squares. The city opposite to the temple was a
square of 4500 reeds (chap, xlviii. 16), and the suburbs a square of 250
reeds on every side (rer. 17). The idea thus symbolically expressed is, that
the temple and city, and in fact the whole of the holy ground, already ap-
proximate to the form of the most holy place. Both the city and temple
are still distinct from one another, although they both stand upon holy
ground in the midst of the land (chap, xlvii. and xlviii.) ; and in the temple
itself the distinction between the holy place and the most holy is still main-
tained, although the most holy place is no longer separated by a curtain
from the holy place ; and in the same manner the distinction is still main-
tained between the temple-building and the courts, though the latter have
acquired much greater importance than in Solomon's temple, and are very
minutely described, whereas they are only very briefly referred to in the case
of Solomon's temple. The sanctuary which Ezekiel saw, however, was only
a symbol of the renewed and glorified kingdom of God, not of the per-
fected kingdom. This was first shown to the holy seer in Patmos, in the
vision of the heavenly Jerusalem, as it appeared in a perfect cubical form.
Digitized by
Google
186 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
Chap, xxvii. 1-8. -The Altae op Burnt-offering (cf.
chap, xxxviii. 1-7).—" Make the altar (the altar of burnt-offer-
ing, according to chap, xxxviii. 1) of acacia-wood, five cubits long,
and five cubits broad (W3"i " f oared," i.e. four-sided or quadran-
gular), and three cubits high. At its four corners shall its horns be
from (out of) it" i.e. not removable, but as if growing out of it.
These horns were projections at the corners of the altar, formed
to imitate in all probability the horns of oxen, and in these the
whole force of the altar was concentrated. The blood of the sin-
offering was therefore smeared upon them (Lev. iv. 7), and
those who fled to the altar to save their lives laid hold of them
(yid. chap. xxi. 14, and 1 Kings i. 50 ; also my commentary on
lie passage). The altar was to be covered with copper or brass,
and all the things used in connection with it were to be made of
brass. These were, — (1) the pans, to cleanse it of the ashes of
the fat (ver. 8 : $F\, a denom. verb from |£*J the ashes of fat,
that is to say, the ashes that arose from burning the flesh of
the sacrifice upon the altar, has a privative meaning, and signi-
fies " to ash away," i.e. to cleanse from ashes) ; (2) CJ^ slwvels,
from njp to take away (Isa. xxviii. 17) ; (3) rrtpntD, things used
for sprinkling the blood, from P}t- to sprinkle ; (4) niJPTD forks,
flesh-hooks (cf. 3?TO 1 Sam. ii. 13) ; (5) nhno coal-scoops (cf. xxv.
38). '«1 vfe-W> :' either "for all the vessels thereof thou shalt
make brass," or " as for all its vessels, thou shalt make (them) of
brass." — Ver. 4. The altar was to have 1330 a grating, Jien n^jro
net-work, i.e. a covering of brass made in the form of a net, of
larger dimensions than the sides of the altar, for this grating was
to be under the " compass" (33"i3) of the altar from beneath, and
to reach to the half of it (half-way up, ver. 5) ; and in it, i.e. at
the four ends (or corners) of it, four brass rings were to be fas-
tened, for the poles to carry it with. 3313 (from 33"}3 circum-
dedit) only occurs here and in chap, xxxviii. 4, and signifies a
border (N33D Targums), i.e. a projecting, framework or bench
running round the four sides of the altar, about half a cubit or
a cubit broad, nailed to the walls (of the altar) on the outside,
and fastened more firmly to them by the copper covering which
was common to both. The copper grating was below this bench,
and on the outside. The bench rested upon it, or rather it hung
from the outer edge of the bench and rested upon the ground,
like the inner chest, which it surrounded on all four sides, and in
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVII. 9-19. 187
which there were no perforations. It formed with the bench or
earcob a projecting footing, which caused the lower half of the
altar to look broader than the upper on every side. The priest
stood upon this earcob or bench when offering sacrifice, or when
placing the wood, or doing anything else upon the altar. This
explains Aaron's coming down (TV) from the altar (Lev. ix. 22) :
and there is no necessity to suppose that there were steps to the
altar, as Knobel does in opposition to chap. xx. 26. For even if
the height of the altar, viz. three cubits, would be so great
that a bench half-way up would be too high for any one
to step up to, the earth could be slightly raised on one side
so as to make the ascent perfectly easy; and when the priest
was standing upon the bench, he could perform all that was
necessary upon the top of the altar without any difficulty. —
Vers. 6, 7. The poles were to be made of acacia-wood, and
covered with brass, and to be placed in the rings that were fixed
in the two sides for the purpose of carrying the altar. The addi-
tional instructions in ver. 8, " hollow with tables shalt thou make
it, as it was showed thee in the mount" (cf. xxv. 9), refer appa-
rently, if we judge from chap. xx. 24, 25, simply to the wooden
framework of the altar, which was covered with brass, and which
was filled with earth, or gravel and stones, when the altar was
about to be used, the whole being levelled so as to form a hearth.
The shape thus given to the altar of burnt-offering corresponded
to the other objects in the sanctuary. It could also be carried
about with ease, and fixed in any place, and could be used for
burning the sacrifices without the wooden walls being injured by
the fire.
Vers. 9-19 (cf. chap, xxxviii. 9-20). The COURT of the
dwelling was to consist of &*?$ " hangings" of spun byssus, and
pillars with brass (copper) sockets, and hooks and fastenings for
the pillars of silver. The pillars were of course made of acacia-
wood ; they were five cubits high, with silvered capitals (chap,
xxxviii. 17, 19), and carried the hangings, which were fastened
to them by means of the hooks and fastenings. There were
twenty of them on both the southern and northern sides, and
the length of the drapery on each of these sides was 100 cubits
(nsK3 n«p, 100 (sc. measured) by the cubit), so that the court
was a hundred cubits long (ver. 18). — Vers. 12, 13. " As for tlie
Digitized by
Google
188 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
breadth of the court on the west side, (there shall be) curtains fifty
cubits ; their pillars twenty ; and the breadth of the court towards
the front, on the east side, fifty cubits." The front is divided in
rers. 14-16 into two ira, lit. shoulders, i.e. sides or side-pieces,
each consisting of 15 cubits of hangings and three pillars with
their sockets, and a doorway ("W?'), naturally in the middle,
which was covered by a curtain (^199) formed of the same mate-
rial as the covering at the entrance to the dwelling, of 20 cubits
in length, with four pillars and the same number of sockets.
The pillars were therefore equidistant from one another, viz. 5
cubits apart. Their total number was 60 (not 56), which was
the number required, at the distance mentioned, to surround a
quadrangular space of 100 cubits long and 50 cubits broad. 1 —
Ver. 17. All the pillars of the court round aboid (shall be) bound
with connecting rods of silver." As the rods connecting, the pillars
of the court were of silver, and those connecting the pillars at
the entrance to the dwelling were of wood overlaid with gold,
the former must have been intended for a different purpose from
the latter, simply serving as rods to which to fasten the hangings,
whereas those at the door of the dwelling formed an architrave.
The height of the hangings of the court and the covering of the
door is given in chap, xxxviii. 18 as 5 cubits, corresponding to
the height of the pillars given in ver. 18 of the chapter before
1 Although any one may easily convince himself of the correctness of
these numbers by drawing a figure, Knobel has revived Philo's erroneous
statement about 56 pillars and the double reckoning of the pillars in the
corner. And the statement in vers. 14-16, that three pillars were to be
made in front to carry the hangings on either side of the door, and four to
carry the curtain which covered the entrance, may be easily shown to be
correct, notwithstanding the fact that, as every drawing shows, four pillars
would be required, and not three only, to carry 15 cubits of hangings,
and five (not four) to carry a curtain 20 cubits broad, if the pillars were to
be placed 5 cubits apart ; for the corner pillars, as belonging to both sides,
and the pillars which stood between the hangings, and the curtain on either
side, could only be reckoned as halves in connection with each side or each
post; and in reckoning the number of pillars according to the method
adopted in every other case, the pillar from which you start would not be
reckoned at all. Now, if you count the pillars of the eastern side upon this
principle (starting from a corner pillar, which is not reckoned, because it is
the starting-point and is the last pillar of the side wall), you have 1, 2, 3,
then 1, 2, 3, 4, and then again 1, 2, 3 ; that is to say, 3 pillars for each
wing and 4 for the curtain, although the hangings of each wing would really
be supported by 4 pillars, and the curtain in the middle by 5.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVII. 9-19. 189
us ; bat the expression in chap, xxxviii. 18, " the height in the
breadth," is a singular one, and srn is probably to be understood
in the sense of 3rn door-place or door-way, — the meaning of
the passage being, "the height of the covering in the door-
way." In ver. 18, u 50 everywhere," -iremqieopTa iirl trevT^Koma
(LXX.), lit. 50 by 50, is to be understood as relating to the ex-
tent towards the north and south ; and the reading of the Sama-
ritan text, viz. 71BK3 for D^Btoro, is merely the result of an arbi-
trary attempt to bring the text into conformity with the previous
ns«a riKp, whilst the LXX., on the other hand, by an equally
arbitrary change, have rendered the passage exarbv i<f>' Ikwtov, —
Ver. 19. " All the vessels of the dwelling in all the work thereof
(i.e. all the tools needed for the tabernacle), and all its pegs, and
all the pegs of the court, (shall be of) brass or copper." The
vessels of the dwelling are not the things required for the per-
formance of worship, but the tools used in setting up the taber-
nacle and taking it down again.
If we inquire still further into the design and meaning of
the court, the erection of a court surrounding the dwelling on
all four sides is to be traced to the same circumstance as that
which rendered it necessary to divide the dwelling itself into two
parts, viz. to the fact, that on account of the unholiness of the
nation, it could not come directly into the presence of Jehovah,
until the sin which separates unholy man from the holy God
had been atoned for. Although, by virtue of their election as
the children of Jehovah, or their adoption as the nation of God,
it was intended that the Israelites should be received by the
Lord into His house, and dwell as a son in his father's house ;
yet under the economy of the law, which only produced the
knowledge of sin, uncleanness, and unholiness, their fellow-
ship with Jehovah, the Holy One, could only be sustained
through mediators appointed and sanctified by God : viz. at the
institution of the covenant, through His servant Moses; and
daring the existence of this covenant, through the chosen priests
of the family of Aaron. It was through them that the Lord was
to be approached, and the nation to be brought near to Him.
Every day, therefore, they entered the holy place of the dwell-
ing, to offer to the Lord the sacrifices of prayer and the fruits
of the people's earthly vocation. But even they were not allowed
to go into the immediate presence of the holy God. The most
Digitized by
Google
190 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
holy place, where God was enthroned, was hidden from them
by the curtain, and only once a year was the high priest per-
mitted, as the head of the whole congregation, which was called
to be the holy nation of God, to lift this curtain and appear
before God with the atoning blood of the sacrifice and the cloud
of incense (Lev. xvi.). The access of the nation to its God was
restricted to the court. There it could receive from the Lord,
through the medium of the sacrifices which it offered upon the
altar of burnt-offering, the expiation of its sins, His grace and
blessing, and strength to live anew. Whilst the dwelling itself
represented the bouse of God, the dwelling-place of Jehovah in
the midst of His people (chap, xxiii. 19 ; Josh. vi. 24 ; 1 Sam.
i. 7, 24, etc.), the palace of the God-King, in which the priestly
nation drew near to Him (1 Sam. i. 9, iii. 3 ; Ps. v. 8, xxvii. 4,
6) ; the court which surrounded the dwelling represented the
kingdom of the God-King, the covenant land or dwelling-place
of Israel in the kingdom of its God. In accordance with this
purpose, the court was in the form of an oblong, to exhibit its
character as part of the kingdom of God. But its pillars and
hangings were only five cubits high, i.e. half the height of the
dwelling, to set forth the character of incompleteness, or of the
threshold to the sanctuary of God. All its vessels were of
copper-brass, which, being allied to the earth in both colour and
material, was a symbolical representation of the earthly side of
the kingdom of God ; whereas the silver of the capitals of the
pillars, and of the hooks and rods which sustained the hangings,
as well as the white colour of the byssus-hangings, might point
to the holiness of this site for the kingdom of God. On the
other hand, in the gilding of the capitals of the pillars at the
entrance to the dwelling, and the brass of their sockets, we find
gold and silver combined, to set forth the union of the court
with the sanctuary, i.e. the union of the dwelling-place of Israel
with the dwelling-place of its God, which is realized in the
kingdom of God.
The design and significance of the court culminated in the
altar of burnt-offering, the principal object in the court ; and
upon this the burnt-offerings and slain-offerings, in which the
covenant nation consecrated itself as a possession to its God,
were burnt. The heart of this altar was of earth or unhewn
stones, having the character of earth, not only on account of its
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVII. 20, 21. 191
being appointed as the place of sacrifice and as the hearth for
the offerings, but because the earth itself formed the real or
material sphere for the kingdom of God in the Old Testament
stage of its development. This heart of earth was elevated by
the square copper covering into a vessel of the sanctuary, a place
where Jehovah would record His name, and come to Israel and
bless them (chap. xx. 24, cf. xxix. 42, 44), and was consecrated
as a place of sacrifice, by means of which Israel could raise itself
to the Lord, and ascend to Him in the sacrifice. And this sig-
nificance of the altar culminated in its horns, upon which the
blood of the sin-offering was smeared. Just as, in the case of
the horned animals, their strength and beauty are concentrated
in the horns, and the horn has become in consequence a symbol
of strength, or of fulness of vital energy ; so the significance of
the altar as a place of the saving and life-giving power of God,
which the Lord bestows upon His people in His kingdom, was
concentrated in the horns of the altar.
Vers. 20 and 21. The instructions concerning the Oil FOB
the Candlestick, and the daily trimming of the lamps by the
priests, form a transition from the fitting up of the sanctuary to
the installation of its servants. — Ver. 20. The sons of Israel
were to bring to Moses (lit. fetch to thee) olive oil, pure (i.e. pre-
pared from olives " which had been cleansed from leaves, twigs,
dust, etc., before they were crushed "), beaten, i.e., obtained not
by crushing in oil-presses, but by beating, when the oil which
flows out by itself is of the finest quality and a white colour.
This oil was to be " for the candlestick to set up a continual
light." — Ver. 21. Aaron and his sons were to prepare this light
in the tabernacle outside the curtain, which was .over the testi-
mony (i.e. which covered or concealed it), from evening to
morning, before Jehovah. " The tabernacle of the congrega-
tion," lit. tent of assembly: thi3 expression is applied to the
sanctuary for the first time in the present passage, but it after-
wards became the usual appellation, and accords both with its
structure and design, as it was a tent in style, and was set apart
as the place where Jehovah would meet with the Israelites and
commune with them (chap. xxv. 22). The ordering of the light
from evening to morning consisted, according to chap. xxx. 7, 8,
and Lev. xxiv. 3, 4, in placing the lamps upon the candlestick in
Digitized by
Google
192 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
the evening and lighting them, that they might give light through
the night, and then cleaning them in the morning and filling
them with fresh oil. The words " a statute for ever unto their
generations (see at chap. xii. 14) on the part of the children of
Israel," are to he understood as referring not merely to the gift
of oil to be made by the Israelites for all time, but to the pre-
paration of the light, which was to be regarded as of perpetual
obligation and worth. " For ever," in the same sense as in
Gen. xvii. 7 and 13 (see vol. i. p. 227).
Chap, xxviii. (cf.xxxix. 1-31). Appointment and Cloth-
ing OP the Priests. — Vers. 1, 5. " Let Aaron thy brother draw
near to thee from among the children of Israel, and his sons with
him, that he may be a priest to Me? Moses is distinguished from
the people as the mediator of the covenant. Hence he was to
cause Aaron and his sons to come to him, i.e. to- separate them
from the people, and install them as priests, or perpetual media-
tors between Jehovah and His people. The primary meaning
of cohen, the priest, has been retained in the Arabic, where it
signifies administrator alieni negotii, viz. to act as a mediator for
a person, or as his plenipotentiary, from which it came to be
employed chiefly in connection with priestly acts. Among the
heathen Arabs it is used " maxime de hariolis vatibusque ;" by the
Hebrews it was mostly applied to the priests of Jehovah ; and
there are only a few places in which it is used in connection
with the higher officers of state, who stood next to the king, and
acted as it were as mediators between the king and the nation
(thus 2 Sam. viii. 18, xx. 26 ; 1 Kings iv. 5). For the duties of
their office the priests were to receive " holy garments for glory
and for honour." Before they could draw near to Jehovah
the Holy One (Lev. xi. 45), it was necessary that their unholi-
ness should be covered over with holy clothes, which were to be
made by men endowed with wisdom, whom Jehovah had filled
'with the spirit of wisdom. " Wise-hearted," i.e. gifted with
understanding and judgment ; the heart being regarded as the
birth-place of the thoughts. In the Old Testament wisdom is
constantly used for practical intelligence in the affairs of life ;
here, for example, it is equivalent to artistic skill surpassing
man's natural ability, which is therefore described as being
filled with the divine spirit of wisdom. These clothes were to
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVIII. 6-14. 193
be used " to sanctify him (Aaron and his sons), that he might be
a priest to Jehovah." Sanctification, as the indispensable con-
dition of priestly service, was not merely the removal of the
uncleanness which flowed from sin, but, as it were, the trans-
formation of the natural into the glory of the image of God.
In this sense the holy clothing served the priest for glory and
ornament. The different portions of the priest's state-dress
mentioned in ver. 4 are described more fully afterwards. For
making them, the skilled artists were to take the gold, the hya-
cinth, etc. The definite article is used before gold and the fol-
lowing words, because the particular materials, which would be
presented by the people, are here referred to.
Vers. 6-14. Theirs* part mentioned of Aaron's holy dress,
i.e. of the official dress of v the high priest, is the ephod. The
etymology of this word is uncertain; the Sept. rendering is
eira/ik ( Vulg. superhumerale, shoulder-dress ; JLuther, " body-
coat"). It was to be made of gold, hyacinth, etc., artistically
woven, — of the same material, therefore, as the inner.drapery
and curtain of the tabernacle ; but instead of having the figures
of cherubim woven into it, it was to be worked throughout with
gold, i.e. with gold thread. According to chap, xxxix. 3, the
gold plates used for the purpose were beaten out, and then
threads were cut (from them), to be worked into the hyacinth,
purple, scarlet, and byssus. It follows from this, that gold
threads were taken for every one of these four yarns, and woven
with them. 1 — Ver. 7. " Two connecting shoulder-pieces shall it
have for its two ends, that it may be bound together." If we
compare the statement in chap, xxxix. 4, — " shoulder-pieces they
made for it, connecting ; at its two ends was it connected," — there
can hardly be any doubt that the ephod consisted of two pieces,
which were connected together at the top upon (over) the
shoulders ; and that Knobel is wrong in supposing that it con-
sisted of a single piece, with a hole cut on each side for the arms
to be put through. If it had been a compact garment, which
had to be drawn over the head like the robe (vers. 31, 32), the
1 The art of weaving fabrics with gold thread (cf. Plin. h. n. 33, c. 3, s.
19, " aurum netur ac texitur lanm modo et sine lana "), wag known in ancient
Egypt. " Among the coloured Egyptian costumes which are represented
upon the monuments, there are some that are probably woven with gold
thread." — Wilkinson 3, 131. Hengstenberg, Egypt, etc., p. 140.
PENT. — VOL. II. N
Digitized by
Google
194 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
opening for the head would certainly have been mentioned, as it
is in the case of the latter (ver. 32). The words of the text point
most decidedly to the rabbinical idea, that it consisted of two
pieces reaching to about the hip, one hanging over the breast,
the other down the back, and that it was constructed with two
shoulder-pieces which joined the two together. These shoulder-
pieces were not made separate, however, and then sewed upon
one of the pieces ; but they were woven along with the front
piece, and that not merely at the top, so as to cover the
shoulders when the ephod was worn, but according to ver. 25
(? 27), reaching down on both sides from the shoulders to the
girdle (ver. 8). — Ver. 8. "And the girdle of its putting on which
(is) upon it, shall be of it, like its work, gold, etc." There was to
be a girdle upon the ephod, of the same material and the same
artistic work as the ephod, and joined to it, not separated from
it. The SK'n mentioned along with the ephod cannot mean
vtjxuTfia, textura (LXX., Cler., etc.), but is to be traced to 3?Tl =
Eton to bind, to fasten, and to be understood in the sense of
cingulum, a girdle (compare chap. xxix. 5 with Lev. viii. 7, " he
girded him with the girdle of the ephod "). fTnBK is no doubt to
be derived from "ISK, and signifies the putting on of the ephod.
In Isa. xxx. 22 it is applied to the covering of a statue ; at the
same time, this does not warrant us in attributing to the verb, as
used in chap. ix. 5 and Lev. viii. 7, the meaning, to put on or
clothe. This girdle, by which the two parts of the ephod were
fastened tightly to the body, so as not to hang loose, was attached
to the lower part or extremity of the ephod, so that it was fastened
round the body below the breastplate (cf. vers. 27, 28, chap,
xxxix. 20, 21). — Vers. 9-12. Upon the shoulder-piece of the
ephod two beryls (precious stones) were to be placed, one upon
each shoulder ; and upon these the names of the sons of Israel
were to be engraved, six names upon each " according to their
generations," i.e. according to their respective ages, or, as
Josephus has correctly explained it, so that the names of the
six elder sons were engraved upon the precious stone on the
right shoulder, and those of the six younger sons upon that on
the left. — Ver. 11. " Work of the engraver in stone, of seal-
cutting shalt thou engrave the two stones according to the names
of the sons of Israel." The engraver in stpne : lit. one who
works stones ; here, one who cuts and polishes precious stones.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVIII. 6-14. 195
The meaning is, that just as precious stones are cut, and seals
engraved upon them, so these two stones were to be engraved
according to the names of the sons of Israel, i.e., so that the
engraving should answer to their names, or their names be cut
into the stones. " Surrounded by gold-twist shalt thou make it."
ant nte3B>D, from fy& to twist, is used in ver. 39 (cf. Ps. xlv.
14) for a texture woven in checks; and here it denotes not
merely a simple gold-setting, but, according to ver. 13, gold-
twists or ornaments representing plaits, which surrounded the
golden setting in which the stones were fixed, and not only
served to fasten the stones upon the woven fabric, but formed
at the same time clasps or brooches, by which the two parts of
the ephod were fastened together. Thus Josephus says (Ant.
iii. 7, 5) there were two sardonyxes upon the shoulders, to be
used for clasps. — Ver. 12. The precious stones were to be upon
the shoulder-pieces of the ephod, stones of memorial for the sons
of Israel ; and Aaron was to bear their names before Jehovah
upon his two shoulders for a memorial, i.e. that Jehovah might
remember the sons of Israel when Aaron appeared before Him
clothed with the ephod (cf. ver. 29). As a shoulder-dress, the
ephod was par excellence the official dress of the high priest.
The burden of the office rested upon the shoulder, and the in-
signia of the office were also worn upon it (Isa. xxii. 22). The
duty of the high priest was to enter into the presence of God
and make atonement for the people as their mediator. To
show that as mediator he brought the nation to God, the names
of the twelve tribes were engraved upon precious stones on the
shoulders of the ephod. The precious stones, with their rich-
ness and brilliancy, formed the most suitable earthly substratum
to represent the glory into which Israel was to be transformed
as the possession of Jehovah (xix. 5) ; whilst the colours and
material of the ephod, answering to the colours and texture of
the hangings of the sanctuary, indicated the service performed
in the sanctuary by the person clothed with the ephod, and the
gold with which the coloured fabric was worked, the glory of
that service. — Vers. 13, 14. There were also to be made for
the ephod two (see ver. 25) golden plaits, golden borders (pro-
bably small plaits in the form of rosettes), and two small chains
of pure gold : u close shalt thou make them, corded" (lit. work of
cords or strings), i.e. not formed of links, but of gold thread
Digitized by
Google
196 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
twisted into cords, which were to be placed upon the golden
plaits or fastened to them. As these chains served to fasten
the choshen to the ephod, a description of them forms a fitting
introduction to the account of this most important ornament
upon the state dress-of the high priest.
Vers. 15-30. The second ornament consisted of the choshen
or breastplate. Choshen mishpat, Twyeiov twv Kpiaeasv (LXX.),
rationale judicii (Vulg.). ?t?n probably signifies an ornament
{Arab, pulcher fuit ; Ges.) ; and the appended word mishpat,
right, decision of right, points to its purpose (see at ver. 30).
This breastplate was to be a woven fabric of the same material
and the same kind of work as the ephod. " Foured shall it be,
doubled (laid together), a span (half a cubit) its length, and a
span its breadth." The woven cloth was to be laid together
double like a kind of pocket, of the length and breadth of half
a cubit, i.e. the quarter of a square cubit. — Ver. 17. "And Jill
thereon (put on it) a stone-setting, four rows of stones," i.e. fix
four rows of set jewels upon it. The stones, so far as their
names can be determined with the help of the ancient versions,
the researches of L. de Dim (animadv. ad Ex. xxviii.) and
Braun (vestit. ii. c. 8-10), and other sources pointed out in
Winer's R. W. (s. v. Edelsteine), were the following : — In the
first or upper row, odem (a-apBuxs), i.e. our cornelian, of a blood-
red colour ; pitdah, T<nrd£iov, the golden topaz ; bareketh, lit. the
flashing, o~(idpary$o<t, the emerald, of a brilliant green. In the
second row, nophek, avOpag, carbunculus, the ruby or carbuncle,
a fire-coloured stone ; sappir, the sapphire, of a sky-blue colour;
jahalom, tacnrv; according to the LXX., but this is rather to be
found in the jaspeh, — according to the Grcec, Ven., and Pers., to
Aben Ezra, etc., the diamond, and according to others the onyx,
a kind of chalcedony, of the same colour as the nail upon the
human finger through which the flesh is visible. In the third
row, leshem, \tryvpiov, ligurius, i.e., according to Braun and others,
a kind of hyacinth, a transparent stone chiefly of an orange
colour, but running sometimes into a reddish brown, at other
times into a brownish or pale red, and sometimes into an ap-
proach to a pistachio green ; shevo, d')(drn<;, a composite stone
formed of quartz, chalcedony, cornelian, flint, jasper, etc., and
therefore glittering with different colours ; and achlamah, a/xe-
0varo<;, amethyst, a stone for the most part of a violet colour.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVIII. 16-80. 197
In the fourth row, tarshish, xpv<r6\i8os, chrysolite, a brilliant
stone of a golden colour, not like what is now called a chrysolite,
which is of a pale green with a double refraction ; shoham, beryl
(see at Gen. ii. 12) ; and jaspeh, no doubt the jasper, an opaque
stone, for the most part of a dull red, often with cloudy and flame-
like shadings, but sometimes yellow, red, brown, or some other
colour. — Ver. 20. " Gold borders shall be on their settings " (see
at vers. 11 and 13). The golden capsules, in which the stones
were "filled? i.e. set, were to be surrounded by golden orna-
ments, which not only surrounded and ornamented the stones,
but in all probability helped to fix them more firmly and yet
more easily upon the woven fabric. — Ver. 21. "And the stones
shall be according to the names of the sons of Israel, twelve accord-
ing to their names; seal-engraving according to each one's name
shall be for the twelve tribes." (On E*K before toeH>g see at
Gen. xv. 10.) — Vers. 22-25. To bind the choshen to the ephod
there were to be two close, corded chains of pure gold, which are
described here in precisely the same manner as in ver. 14 ; so
that ver. 22 is to be regarded as a simple repetition of ver. 14,
not merely because these chains are only mentioned once in the
account of the execution of the work (chap, xxxix. 15), but be-
cause, according to ver. 25, these chains were to be fastened upon
the rosettes noticed in ver. 14, exactly like those described in ver.
13. These chains, which are called cords or strings at ver. 24,
were to be attached to two golden rings at the two (upper) ends
of the choshen, and the two ends of the chains were to be put, i.e.
bound firmly to the golden settings of the shoulder-pieces of the
ephod (ver. 13), upon the front of it (see at chap. xxvi. 9 and
xxv. 37). — Ver. 26. Two other golden rings were to be "put
at the two ends of the choshen, at its edge, which is on the opposite
side (see at chap. xxv. 37) of the ephod inwards," i.e. at the two
ends or corners of the lower border of the choshen, upon the
inner side — the side turned towards the ephod. — Vers. 27, 28.
Two golden rings were also to be put " upon the shoulder-pieces
of the ephod underneath, toward the fore-part thereof, near the
joining above the girdle of it," and to fasten the choshen from its
(lower) rings to the (lower) rings of the ephod with threads of
hyacinth, that it might be over the girdle (above it), and not
move away (W Niphal of nnj } in Arabic removit), i.e. that it
might keep its place above the girdle and against the ephod
Digitized by
Google
198 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
without shifting. — Ver. 29. In this way Aaron was to bear
upon his breast the names of the sons of Israel engraved upon
this breastplate, as a memorial before Jehovah, whenever he went
into the sanctuary. — Ver. 30. Into this choshen Moses was to put
the Urim and Thummirn, that they might be upon his heart when
he came before Jehovah, and that he might thus constantly bear
the right (mishpat) of the children of Israel upon his heart before
Jehovah. It is evident at once from this, that the Urim and
Thummirn were to bring the right of the children of Israel before
the Lord, and that the breastplate was called choslien mishpat
because the Urim and Thummirn were in it. Moreover it also
follows from the expression ?N WO, both here and in Lev. viii. 8,
that the Urim and Thummirn were not only distinct from the
choshen, but were placed in it, and not merely suspended upon
it, as Knobel supposes. For although the LXX. have adopted
the rendering iwiTidevai hrl, the phrase is constantly used to
denote putting or laying one thing into another, and never (not
even in 1 Sam. vi. 8 and 2 Sam. xi. 16) merely placing one thing
upon or against another. For this, ?? ?Cj3 is the expression in-
variably used in the account before us (cf. vers. 14 and 23 sqq.).
What the Urim and Thummirn really were, cannot be de-
termined with certainty, either from the names themselves,
or from any other circumstances connected with them. 1 The
LXX. render the words S^Xokti? (or &7X0?) icaX aXyOeia, i.e.
revelation and truth. This expresses with tolerable accuracy
the meaning of Urim (D*"fiK light, illumination), but Tliummim
(D'tsri) means integritas, inviolability, perfection, and not dXijBeca.
The rendering given by Symm. and Theod., viz. (jxortafwl koI
Te\e«»o-et5, illumination and completion, is much better; and
there is no good ground for giving up this rendering in favour
of that of the LXX., since the analogy between the Urim an<J
Thummirn and the ayaK/w, of sapphire-stonesj or the £i»8ww of
precious stones, which was worn by the Egyptian high priest
suspended by a golden chain, and called aKrideia (Aelian. var.
hist. 14, 34 ; Diod. Sic. i. 48, 75), sufficiently explains the ren-
dering aXrjdeui, which the LXX. have given to Thummirn, but
it by no means warrants KnobeVs conclusion, that the Hebrews
had adopted the Egyptian names along with the thing itself.
1 The leading opinions and the most important writings upon the sub-
ject are given in my Bib. Archxol. § 39, note 9.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVIII. 15-80. 199
The words are therefore to be explained from the Coptic. The
Urim and Thummim are analogous, it is true, to the elic&v tjJ?
aXydela?, which the Egyptian ap%iZucatrrri<; hung round his neck,
but they are by no means identical with it, or to be regarded as
two figures which were a symbolical representation of revela-
tion and truth. If Aaron was to bring the right of the children
of Israel before Jehovah in the breastplate that was placed upon
his breast with the Urim and Thummim, the latter, if they were
intended to represent anything, could only be symbolical of the
right or rightful condition of Israel. But the words do not
warrant any such conclusion. If the Urim and Thummim had
been intended to represent any really existing thing, their nature,
or the mode of preparing them, would certainly have been de-
scribed. Now, if we refer to Num. xxvii. 21, where Joshua as
the commander of the nation is instructed to go to the high
priest Eleazar, that the latter may inquire before Jehovah,
through the right of Urim, how the whole congregation should
walk and act, we can draw no other conclusion, than that the
Urim and Thummim are to be regarded as a certain medium,
given by the Lord to His people, through which, whenever the
congregation required divine illumination to guide its actions,
that illumination was guaranteed, and by means of which the
rights of Israel, when called in question or endangered, were to*
be restored, and that this medium was bound up with the offi-
cial dress of the high priest, though its precise character can no
longer be determined. Consequently the Urim and Thummim
did not represent the illumination and right of Israel, but were
merely a promise of these, a pledge that the Lord would main-
tain the rights of His people, and give them through the high
priest the illumination requisite for their protection. Aaron
was to bear the children of Israel upon his heart, in the precious
stones to be worn upon his breast with the names of the twelve
tribes. The heart, according to the biblical view, is the centre
of the spiritual life, — not merely of the willing, desiring, thinking
life, but of the emotional life, as the seat of the feelings and
affections (see Delitzsch bibl. Psychologie, pp. 203 sqq.). Hence
to bear upon the heart does not merely mean to bear in mind,
but denotes " that personal intertwining with the life of another,
by virtue of which the high priest, as Philo expresses it, was tow
ov/vTravTo? e0vowovyyevr]$ km d^to-rev? koivo? (*Spec. leg. ii. 321),
Digitized by
Google
200 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
and so stood in the deepest sympathy with those for whom he inter-
ceded" (Oehler in Herzog's Cycl.). As he entered the holy place
with this feeling, and in this attitude, of which the choshen was the
symbol, he brought Israel into remembrance before Jehovah that
the Lord might accept His people ; and when furnished with the
Urim and Thummim, he appeared before Jehovah as the advocate
of the people's rights, that he might receive for the congregation
the illumination required to protect and uphold those rights.
Vers. 31-35. The third portion of Aaron's official dress was
the robe. To the ephod there also belonged a TV? (from 7?0 to
cover or envelope), an upper garment, called the robe of the
ephod, the robe belonging to the ephod, " all of dark-blue purple"
(hyacinth), by which we are not to imagine a cloak or mantle,
but a long, closely-fitting coat ; not reaching to the feet, how-
ever, as the Alex, rendering woS^pni might lead us to suppose,
but only to the knees, so as to show the coat (ver. 39) which was
underneath. — Ver. 32. " And the opening of the head thereof
shall be in the middle of it;" i.e. there was to be an opening in
the middle of it to put the head through when it was put on ; —
" a hem shall be round the opening of it, weavers' work, like the
opening of the habergeon shall it (the seam) be to it ; it shall not
be torn." By the habergeon (dwpaf;), or coat-of-mail, we have
to understand the Xivodtopn^, the linen coat, such as was worn by
Ajax for example (II. 2, 529). Linen habergeons of this kind
were made in Egypt in a highly artistic style (see Hengstenberg,
Egypt, etc., pp. 141-2). In order that the meil might not be torn
when it was put on, the opening for the head was to be made
with a strong hem, which was to be of weavers' work ; from which
it follows as a matter of course that the robe was woven in one
piece, and not made in several pieces and then sewed together ;
and this is expressly stated in chap, xxxix. 22. Josephus and
the Rabbins explain the words infc >tyV® (Hpyov vfyavrov) in this
way, and observe at the same time that the meil had no sleeves,
but only arm-holes. — Vers. 33, 34. On the lower hem (D*w the
tail or skirt) there were to be pomegranates of dark-blue and
dark-red purple and crimson, made of twisted yarn of these
colours (chap, xxxix. 24), and little golden bells between them
round about, a bell and a pomegranate occurring alternately all
round. According to Rashi the pomegranates were " globi
quidam rotundi instar mahrum punicorum, quasi essent ova gal-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVIII 81-85. 201
linarum." D^bJ!? (from D?B to strike or knock, like the old High
German cloecon, clochon, i.e. to smite) signifies a little bell, not a
spherical ball. — Ver. 35. Aaron was to put on this coat, to mini-
ster, i.e. to perform the dnties of his holy office, " that his sound
might be heard when he went into the holy place before Jehovah, and
when he came out, and he might not die." These directions are
referred to in Ecclus. xlv. 9, and explained as follows : u He
compassed him with pomegranates and with many golden bells
round about, that as he went there might be a sound, and a noise
made, that might be heard in the temple, for a memorial to the
children of his people." The probable meaning of these words
is either that given by Hiskuni (in Drusius), ut sciant tempus
cultus divini atque ita pravparent cor suum ad patrem suurh, qui
est in ccelis, or that given by Oehler, viz. that the ringing of the
bells might announce to the people in the court the entrance of
the high priest and the rites he was performing, in order that
they might accompany him with their thoughts and prayers.
But this is hardly correct. For not only is the expression, " for
a memorial to the children of Israel," evidently intended by the
writer of Ecclesiasticus as a translation of the words "w f)3T
7 $y?*. hi ver. 12 (cf. ver. 29), so that he has transferred to the
bells of the meil what really applies to the precious stones on the
ephod, which contained the names of the twelve sons of Israel,
but he has misunderstood the words themselves ; for Aaron was
to bear the names of the sons of Israel before Jehovah in these
precious stones for a reminder, i.e. to remind Jehovah of His
people. Moreover, the words " and he shall not die " are not in
harmony with this interpretation. Bdhr, Oehler, and others,
regard the words as referring to the whole of the high priest's
robes, and understand them as meaning, that he would be threat-
ened with death if he appeared before Jehovah without his robes,
inasmuch as he was merely a private individual without this holy
dress, and could not in that case represent the nation. This is
so far justifiable, no doubt, although not favoured by the position
of the words in the context, that the bells were inseparably con-
nected with the robe, which was indispensable to the ephod with
the choshen, and consequently the bells had no apparent signifi-
cance except in connection with the whole of the robes. But
even if we do adopt this explanation of the words, we cannot
suppose that Aaron's not dying depended upon the prayers of
Digitized by
Google
202 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
the congregation which accompanied his going in and out before
Jehovah; for in that case the intercession of the high priest
would have lost its objective meaning altogether, and his life
would have been actually given up in a certain sense to the
caprice of the people. All that remains, therefore, is to take the
words as they occur : Aaron was not to appear before the Lord
without the sound of the bells upon his robe being heard, in
order that he might not die ; so that to understand the reason
for his not dying, we must inquire what the ringing of the bells
signified, or rather, what was the signification of Aaron's robe,
with its border of pomegranates and ringing bells. The trivial
explanation given by Abraham ben David, viz. that the ringing
was to take the place of knocking at the door of Jehovah's
palace, as an abrupt entrance into the presence of a great king
was punished with death, is no more deserving of a serious refu-
tation than KnobeVs idea, for which there is no foundation, that
the sounding of the bells was to represent a reverential greeting,
and a very musical offering of praise (!).
The special significance of the meil cannot have resided in
either its form or its colour ; for the only feature connected with
its form, that was at all peculiar to it, was its being woven in
one piece, which set forth the idea of wholeness or spiritual
integrity; and the dark-blue colour indicated nothing more than
the heavenly origin and character of the office with which the
robe was associated. It must be sought for, therefore, in the
peculiar pendants, the meaning of which is to be gathered from
the analogous instructions in Num. xv. 38, 39, where every
Israelite is directed to make a fringe in the border of his gar-
ment, of dark-blue purple thread, and when he looks at the
fringe to remember the commandments of God and do them.
In accordance with this, we are also to seek for allusions to the
word and testimony of God in the pendant of pomegranates and
bells attached to the fringe of the high priest's robe. The simile
in Prov. xxv. 11, where the word is compared to an apple, sug-
gests the idea that the pomegranates, with their pleasant odour,
their sweet and refreshing juice, and the richness of their deli-
cious kernel, were symbols of the word and testimony of God as
a sweet and pleasant spiritual food, that enlivens the soul and
refreshes the heart (compare Ps. xix. 8-11, cxix. 25, 43, 50, with
Deut. viii. 3, Prov. ix. 8, Ecclus. xv. 3), and that the bells
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVIII. 36-38. 203
were symbols of the sounding of this word, or the revelation and
proclamation of the word. Through the robe, with this pendant
attached, Aaron was represented as the recipient and medium
of the word and testimony which came down from heaven ; and
this was the reason why he was not to appear before the Lord
without that sound, lest he should forfeit his life. It was not
because he would simply have appeared as a private person if he
had gone without it, for he would always have the holy dress of
a priest upon him, even when he was not clothed in the official
decorations of the high priest ; but because no mere priest was
allowed to enter the immediate presence of the Lord. This pri-
vilege was restricted to the representative of the whole congre-
gation, viz. the high priest ; and even he could only do so when
wearing the robe of the word of God, as the bearer of the divine
testimony, upon which the covenant fellowship with the Lord
was founded.
Vers. 36-38. The fourth artiele of the high priest's dress
was the diadem upon his head-band. Y*t, from ps to shine, a
plate of pure gold, on which the words nfaP? EHi?, " holiness (i.e.
all holy) to Jehovah" were engraved, and which is called the
" crown of holiness" in consequence, in chap, xxxix. 30. This
gold plate was to be placed upon a riband of dark-blue purple,
or, as it is expressed in chap, xxxix. 31, a riband of this kind
was to be fastened to it, to attach it to the head-band, " upon the
fore-front (as in chap. xxvi. 9) of the head-band," from above
(chap, xxxix. 31) ; by which we are to understand that the gold
plate was placed above the lower coil of the head-band and
over Aaron's forehead. The word nwsD, from *fft to twist or
coil (Isa. xxii. 18), is only applied to the head-band or turban
of the high priest, which was made of simple byssus (ver. 39),
and, judging from the etymology, was in the shape of a turban.
This is all that can be determined with reference to its form.
The diadem was the only thing about it that had any special
significance. This was to be placed above (upon) Aaron's fore-
head, that he " might bear the iniquity of the holy things,
which the children of Israel sanctified, with regard to all their
holy gifts, . . as an acceptableness for them before Jehovah."
fiy Kfco : to bear iniquity (sin) and take it away ; in other words,
to exterminate it by taking it upon one's self. The high priest
was exalted into an atoning mediator of the whole nation ; and
Digitized by
Google
204 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
an atoning, sin-exterminating intercession was associated with
his office. The qualification for this he received from the dia-
dem upon his forehead with the inscription, " holiness to the
Lord." Through this inscription, which was fastened upon his
head-dress of brilliant white, the earthly reflection of holiness,
he was crowned as the sanctified of the Lord (Ps. cvi. 16), and
endowed with the power to exterminate the sin which clung to
the holy offerings of the people on account of the unholiness of
their nature, so that the gifts of the nation became well-pleasing
to the Lord, and the good pleasure of God was manifested to
the nation. 1
Ver. 39. In addition to the distinguishing dress of the high
priest, Aaron was also to wear, as the official costume of a priest,
a body-coat (cetonetK) made of byssns, and woven in checks or
cubes; the head-band (for the diadem), also made of simple
byssus ; and a girdle (abnet, of uncertain etymology, and only
applied to the priest's girdle) of variegated work, ue. made of
yarn, of the same four colours as the holy things were to be
made of (cf. chap, xxxix. 29).
Vers. 40-43. The official dress of the sons of Aaron, i.e. of
the ordinary priests, was to consist of just the same articles as
Aaron's priestly costume (ver. 39). But their body-coat is called
weavers' work in chap, xxxix. 27, and was therefore quite a plain
cloth, of white byssus or cotton yarn, though it was whole
throughout, appa<po<; without seam, like the robe of Christ (John
xix. 23). It was worn close to the body, and, according to
Jewish tradition, reached down to the ankles (cf. Josephus, in.
7, 2). The head-dress of an ordinary priest is called n ^P,
related to lf32i a basin or cup, and therefore seems to have been
in the form of an inverted cup, and to have been a plain white
1 See my Archaeology i. pp. 183-4. The following are Calvin's admir-
able remarks : Oblationum sanctarum iniquitas tollenda et purganda fait
per sacerdotem. Frigidum est illud commentum, si quid erroris admissum
est in ceremoniis, remissum fuisse sacerdotis precibus. Longius enim respi-
cere nos oportet : ideo oblationum iniquitateni deleri a sacerdote, quia nulla
oblatio, quatenus est hominis, omni vitio caret. Dictu hoc asperura est et
fere irapaia^ou, sanctitates ipsas esse immundas, ut veuia indigeant ; sed
tenendum est, nihil esse sane purum, quod non aliquid labia a nobis con-
trahat Nihil Dei cultu prsestantius : et tamen nihil offeree potuit
populus, etiam a lege prsescriptum, nisi intercedente venia, quam nonnisi
per sacerdotem obtinuit.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVM. 40-43. 205
cotton cap. The girdle, according to chap, xxxix. 29, was of the
same material and work for Aaron and his sons. This dress was
to be for glory and for beauty to, the priests, just as Aaron's
dress was to him (ver. 2). The glory consisted in the brilliant
white colour, the symbol of holiness ; whilst the girdle, which an
oriental man puts on when preparing for the duties of an office,
contained in the four colours of the sanctuary the indication
that they were the officers of Jehovah in His earthly kingdom. —
Ver. 41. But since the clothing prescribed was an official dress,
Moses was to put it upon Aaron and his sons, to anoint them and
fill their hands, i.e. to invest them with the requisite sacrificial
gifts (see at Lev. vii. 37), and so to sanctify them that they
should be priests of Jehovah. For although the holiness of their
office was reflected in their dress, it was necessary, on account
of the sinfulness of their nature, that they should be sanctified
through a special consecration for the administration of their
office; and this consecration is prescribed in chap. xxix. and
carried out in . Lev. viii. — Vers. 42, 43. The covering of their
nakedness was an indispensable prerequisite. Aaron and his
sons were therefore to receive O'WSD (from W3 to cover or con-
ceal, lit. concealers), short drawers, reaching from the hips to
the thighs, and serving u to cover the flesh of the nakedness."
For this reason the directions concerning them are separated
from those concerning the different portions of the dress, which
were for glory and beauty. The material of which these drawers
were to be made is called 13. The meaning of this word is un-
certain. According to chap, xxxix. 28, it was made of twined
byssus or cotton yarn ; and the rendering of the LXX., \lva
or \u>eo9 (Lev. vi. 3), is not at variance with this, as the ancients
not only apply the term Xlvov, linum, to flax, but frequently use
it for fine white cotton as well. In all probability bad was a
kind of white cloth, from T13 to be white or clean, primarily to
separate. — Ver. 43. These drawers the priests were to put on
whenever they entered the sanctuary, that they might not " bear
iniquity and die," i.e. incur guilt deserving of death, either
through disobedience to these instructions, or, what was still
more important, through such violation of the reverence due to
the holiness of the dwelling of God as they would be guilty of,
if they entered the sanctuary with their nakedness uncovered.
For as the consciousness of sin and guilt made itself known first
Digitized by
Google
206 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
of all in the feeling of nakedness, so those members which sub-
serve the natural secretions are especially pudenda or objects of
shame, since the mortality and corruptibility of the body, which
sin has brought into human nature, are chiefly manifested in
these secretions. For this reason these members are also called
the "flesh of nakedness." By this we are not to understand merely
" the sexual member as the organ of generation or birth, because
the existence and permanence of sinful, mortal human nature
are associated with these," as Bahr supposes. For the frailty and
nakedness of humanity are not manifested in the organ and act
of generation, which rather serve to manifest the inherent capa-
city and creation of man for imperishable life, but in the impu-
rities which nature ejects through those organs, and which bear
in themselves the character of corruptibility. If, therefore, the
priest was to appear before Jehovah as holy, it was necessary
that those parts of his body especially should be covered, in
which the impurity of his nature and the nakedness of his flesh
were most apparent. For this reason, even in ordinary life,
they are most carefully concealed, though not, as Baumgartm
supposes, " because the sin of nature has its principal seat in the
flesh of nakedness." — " A statute for ever ;" as in chap, xxvii. 31.
Chap. xxix. vers. 1-37. Consecration or Aabon and his
Sons through the anointing of their persons and the offering of
sacrifices, the directions for which form the subject of vers.
1-35. This can only be fully understood in connection with the
sacrificial law contained in Lev. i.-vii. It will be more advis-
able therefore to defer the examination of this ceremony till we
come to Lev. viii., where the consecration itself is described.
The same may also be said of the expiation and anointing of the
altar, which are commanded in vers. 36 and 37, and carried out
in Lev. viii. 11.
Vers. 38-46. The daily Bubnt-offering, Meat-offeb-
ing, AND Dkink-offeking. — The directions concerning these
are attached to the instructions for the consecration of the priests,
because these sacrifices commenced immediately after the com-
pletion of the tabernacle, and, like the shew-bread (xxv. 30), the
daily trimming of the lamps (xxvii. 20, 21), and the daily in-
cense-offering (xxx. 7 sqq.), were most intimately connected
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIX. 38-46. 207
with the erection of the sanctuary. — Ver. 38. "And this is
what thou shalt make (offer) upon the altar; yearling lambs two
a day continually," one in the morning, the other between
the two evenings (see at chap. xii. 6) ; to every one a meat-
offering (minchah) of a tenth of fine wheaten flour (soleth, see at
Lev. ii. 1), mixed with a quarter of a hin of beaten oil (cathith,
see at chap, xxvii. 20), and a drink-offering (nesek) of a quarter
of a hin of wine, fife"? (a tenth) is equivalent to np^Kn JVyby,
the tenth part of an ephah (Num. xxviii. 5), or 198*5 Parisian
cubic inches according to Bertheau's measurement. Thenius,
however, sets it down at 101-4 inches, whilst the Kabbins reckon
it as equivalent to 43 hen's eggs of average size, i.e. somewhat
more than 2£ lbs. A hin (a word of Egyptian origin) is 330*9
inches according to Bertlieau, 168*9 according to Thenius, or 72
eggs, so that a quarter of a hin would be 18 eggs. — Ver. 41. S?
is to be understood ad sensum as referring to fW) 4 . The daily
morning and evening sacrifices were to be " for a sweet savour,
a firing unto Jehovah" (see at Lev. i. 9). In these Israel was
to consecrate its life daily unto the Lord (see at Lev. i. and ii.).
In order that the whole of the daily life might be included, it
was to be offered continually every morning and evening for all
future time (" throughout your generations" as at chap. xii. 14)
at the door of the tabernacle, i.e. upon the altar erected there,
before Jehovah, who would meet with the people and commune
with them there (see chap. xxv. 22). This promise is carried
out still further in vers. 43-46. First of all, for the purpose of
elucidating and strengthening the words, " I will meet with you
there" (ver. 42), the presence and communion of God, which
are attached to the ark of the covenant in chap. xxv. 22, are
ensured to the whole nation in the words, " And there I will
meet with the children of Israel, and it (Israel) shall be sancti-
fied through My glory." As the people were not allowed to
approach the ark of the covenant, but only to draw near to the
altar of burnt-offering in the sanctuary, it was important to de-
clare that the Lord would manifest Himself to them even there,
and sanctify them by His glory. Most of the commentators
have taken the altar to be the subject of "shall be sanctified; "
but this is certainly an error, not only because the altar is not
mentioned in the previous clause, and only slightly hinted at in
the w in ver. 41, but principally because the sanctification of the
Digitized by
Google
208 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
altar is noticed by itself afterwards in ver. 44. The correct exe-
gesis is that adopted by Bavmgarten and others, who supply the
word Israel (viz. regarded as a nation), which they take from
the expression " children of Israel" in the previous clause. In
ver. 44, the sanctification of the tabernacle and altar on the part
of God is promised, also that of His servants, and finally, in
vers. 45, 46, the abode of God in the midst of the children of
Israel, with an allusion to the blessings that would follow from
Jehovah's dwelling in the midst of them as their God (Gen.
xvii. 7).
Chap. xxx. 1-10. The Altae of Incense and Incense-
offering bring the directions concerning the sanctuary to a
close. What follows, from xxx. 11-xxxi. 17, is shown to be
merely supplementary to the larger whole by the formula "and
Jehovah spake unto Moses," with which every separate command
is introduced (cf. vers. 11, 17, 22, 34, xxxi. 1, 12). — Vers. 1-5 (cf.
chap, xxxvii. 25-28). Moses was directed to make an altar of
burning of incense (lit. incensing of incense), of acacia-wood, one
cubit long and one broad, four-cornered, two cubits high, fur-
nished with horns like the altar of burnt-offering (chap, xxvii.
1, 2), and to plate it with pure gold, the roof (ii) thereof (i.e. its
upper side or surface, which was also made of wood), and its
walls round about, and its horns ; so that it was covered with gold
quite down to the ground upon which it stood, and for this rea-
son is often called the golden altar (chap, xxxix. 38, xl. 5, 26;
Num. iv. 11). Moreover it was to be ornamented with a golden
wreath, and furnished with golden rings at the corners for the
carrying-poles, as the ark of the covenant and the table of shew-
bread were (xxv. 11 sqq., 25 sqq.) ; and its place was to be in
front of the curtain, which concealed the ark of the covenant
(xxvi. 31), " before the capporeth" (xl. 5), so that, although it
really stood in the holy place between the candlestick on the
south side and the table on the north (xxvi. 35, xl. 22, 24), it
was placed in the closest relation to the capporeth, and for this
reason is not only connected with the most holy place in 1 Kings
vi. 22, but is reckoned in Heb. ix. 4 as part of the furniture of
the most holy place (see Delitzsch on Heb. ix. 4). — Vers. 7-9.
Upon this altar Aaron was to burn fragrant incense, the pre-
paration of which is described in vers. 34 sqq., every morning
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXX. 1-10. 209
and evening before Jehovah, at the time when he trimmed the
lamps. No " strange incense" was to be offered upon it, — i.e.
incense which Jehovah had not appointed (cf . Lev. x. 1), that is
to say, which had not been prepared according to His instructions,
— nor burnt sacrifice, nor meat-offering ; and no drink-offering
was to be poured upon it. As the altar of incense was not only
marked as a place of sacrifice by its name H3IO, " place of slain-
offering," but was put on a par with the altar of sacrifice by its
square shape and its horns, it was important to describe minutely
what sacrifices were to be offered upon it. For the burning of
fragrant incense is shown to be a sacrifice, by the fact that it
was offered upon a place of sacrifice, or altar. Moreover the
word TOP?, to cause to ascend in smoke and steam, from "iBi? to
smoke or steam, is not only applied to the lighting of incense, but
also to the lighting and burning of the bleeding and bloodless sacri-
fices upon the altar of incense. Lastly, the connection between
the incense-offering and the burnt-offering is indicated by the rule
that they were to be offered at the same time. Both offerings sha-
dowed forth the devotion of Israel to its God, whilst the fact that
they were offered every day exhibited this devotion as constant
and uninterrupted. But the distinction between them consisted
in this, that in the burnt or whole offering Israel consecrated
and sanctified its whole life and action in both body and soul to
the Lord, whilst in the incense-offering its prayer was embodied
as the exaltation of the spiritual man to God (cf. Ps. cxli. 2 ;
Rev. v. 8, viii. 3, 4) ; and with this there was associated the still
further distinction, that the devotion was completed in the burnt-
offering solely upon the basis of the atoning sprinkling of blood,
■whereas the incense-offering presupposed reconciliation with
God, and on the basis of this the soul rose to God in this embodi-
ment of its prayer, and was thus absorbed into His Spirit. In
this respect, the incense-offering was not only a spiritualizing
and transfiguring of the burnt-offering, but a completion of that
offering also. — Ver. 10. Once a year Aaron was to expiate the
altar of incense with the blood of the sin-offering of atonement,
because it was most holy to the Lord, that is to say, as is expressly
observed in the directions concerning this expiatory act (Lev.
xvi. 18, 19), to purify it from the uncleannesses of the children
of Israel. "*B3, with ^? ohjecti constr., signifies literally to cover
over a thing, then to cover over sin, or make expiation. In the
PENT. — VOL. II. O
Digitized by
Google
210 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
second clause we have " upon it" (the altar) instead of " upon
the horns of it," because the altar itself was expiated in its
horns. The use of tP in DID is to be explained on the ground
that only a part of the blood of the sin-offering was smeared
with the finger upon the horns. (Far further remarks, see at
Lev. xvi. 18, 19.) The term " most holy" is not only applied
to this altar, in common with the inner division of the tabernacle
(chap. xxvi. 33), but also to the altar of burnt-offering (chap.
xxix. 37, xl. 10), and all the vessels of the sanctuary (chap,
xxx. 29), which were anointed with holy oil ; then to the whole
of the tabernacle in its holiest aspect (Num. xviii. 10) ; and
lastlyj to all the sacrifices, which were given up entirely to Je-
hovah (see at Lev. ii. 3) ;— consequently to everything which
stood in so intimate a relation to Jehovah as to be altogether
removed, not only from use and enjoyment on the part of man,
but also from contact on the part of unsanctified men. Who-
ever touched a most holy thing was sanctified thereby (compare
ver. 29 with chap. xxix. 37).
Vers. 11-16. The Atonement-money, which every Is-
raelite had to pay at the numbering of the people, has the first
place among the supplementary instructions concerning the erec-
tion and furnishing of the sanctuary, and serves to complete the
demand for freewill-offerings for the sanctuary (chap. xxv. 1-9).
— Ver. 12. " When thou takest the sum of the children of Israel
according to them that are numbered, tlvey shall give every one an
expiation for hie soul to the Lord at their numbering, that a plague
may not strike them (happen to them) at their numbering." ~l$2,
lit. adspexit, then inspexit explorandi causa, hence to review, or
number an army or a nation, for the purpose of enrolling for
military service. D'T^sp with reference to the numbered, qui
in censum veniunt. IBS (expiation, expiation-money, from "IBS
to expiate) is to be traced to the idea that the object for which
expiation was made was thereby withdrawn from the view of
the person to be won or reconciled. It is applied in two ways :
(1) on the supposition that the face of the person to be won was
covered by the gift (Gen. xxxii. 21 ; 1 Sam. xii. 3) ; and (2) on
the supposition that the guilt itself was covered up (Ps. xxxii. 1),
or wiped away (Jer. xviii. 23), so far as the eye of God was
concerned, as though it had no longer any existence, and that
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXX. 11-16. 211
the sinful man was protected from the punishment of the judge
in consequence of this covering. In this way "iBb has acquired
the meaning Xvrpov, a payment hy which the guilty are redeemed
(chap. xxi. 30 ; Num. xxxv. 31) ; and this is the meaning which
it has in the passage before us, where the soul is said to be pro-
tected by the copher, so as to be able to come without danger into
the presence of the holy God (Num. viii. 19. See Odder in
Herzog's Cycl.). Such an approach to God took place at the num-
bering of the people for the purpose of enrolling them in the army
of Jehovah (Num. i. 3, cf. Ex. vii. 4, xii. 41). Hence " every one
who passed over to those that were numbered," who was enrolled
among them, i.e. in the army of Jehovah, — that is to say, every
male Israelite of 20 years old and upwards (ver. 14), — was to
pay half a shekel of the sanctuary as atonement-money ; the
rich no more, the poor no less (ver. 15), because all were equal in
the sight of Jehovah; and this payment was to be a "heave"
(terumah, see chap. xxv. 2) for Jehovah for the expiation of the
souls. The shekel of the sanctuary, which contained 20 gerahs,
was no doubt the original shekel of full weight, as distinguished
from the lighter shekel which was current in ordinary use. In
chap, xxxviii. 26 the half shekel is called l>i?3, lit. the split, i.e.
half, from l>i?3 to split ; and we find it mentioned as early as the
time of the patriarchs as a weight in common use for valuing
gold (Gen. xxiv. 22), so that, no doubt, 'even at that time there
were distinct silver pieces of this weight, which were probably
called shekels when employed for purposes of trade, since the
word shekel itself does not denote any particular weight, as we
may perceive at once from a comparison of 1 Kings x. 17 and
2 Chron. ix. 16, at least so far as later times are concerned. The
sacred shekel, to judge from the weight of the Maccabean
shekels, which are in existence still, and vary from 256 to 272
Parisian grains, weighed 274 grains, and therefore, according to
present valuation, would be worth 26 groschen (about 2s. 7d.),
so that the half-shekel or bekah would be 13 groschen (Is. 3f d.).
— Ver. 16. This atonement-money Moses was to appropriate to
the work of the sanctuary (cf. chap, xxxviii. 25—28, where the
amount and appropriation are reported). Through this appro-
priation it became " a memorial to the children of Israel before
the Lord to expiate their souls," i.e. a permanent reminder of
their expiation before the Lord, who would henceforth treat
Digitized by
Google
212 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
them as reconciled because of this payment. It was no ordinary
tribute, therefore, which Israel was to pay to Jehovah as its
King, but an act demanded by the holiness of the theocratic
covenant. As an expiation for souls, it pointed to the unholiness
of Israel's nature, and reminded the people continually, that by-
nature it was alienated from God, and could only remain in
covenant with the Lord and live in His kingdom on the ground
of His grace, which covered its sin. It was not till this sinful
nature had been sanctified by a perfect atonement, and servitude
under the law had been glorified and fully transformed into
that sonship to which Israel was called as the first-born son of
Jehovah, that as children of the kingdom they had no longer to
pay this atonement-money for their souls (Matt. xvii. 25, 26). —
According to Num. i. 1, 18, as compared with Ex. xl. 17, the
census of the nation was not taken till a month after the build-
ing of the tabernacle was completed, and yet the atonement-
money to be paid at the taking of the census was to be appro-
priated to the purpose of the building, and must therefore have
been paid before. This apparent discrepancy may be reconciled
by the simple assumption, that immediately after the command
of God had been issued respecting the building of the tabernacle
and the contributions which the people were to make for that
purpose, the numbering of the males was commenced and the
atonement-money collected from the different individuals, that
the tabernacle was then built and the whole ceremonial insti-
tuted, and that, after all this had been done, the whole nation was
enrolled according to its tribes, fathers' houses, and families, on
the basis of this provisional numbering, and thus the census was
completed. For this reason the census gave exactly the same
number of males as the numbering (cf. chap, xxxviii. 26 and
Num. i. 46), although the one had been carried out nine months
before the other.
Vers. 17-21 (cf. chap, xxxviii. 8). The Beazen Laveb,
and its use. — The making of this vessel is not only mentioned in
a supplementary manner, but no description is given of it because
of the subordinate position which it occupied, and from the fact
that it was not directly connected with the sanctuary, but was
only used by the priests to cleanse themselves for the perform-
ance of their duties, "u'3 : a basin, a round, caldron-shaped
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXX. 17-21. 213
vessel, to (its support) : by this we are not to understand the
pedestal of the caldron, but something separate from the basin,
which was no doubt used for drawing off as much water as was
required for washing the officiating priests. For although J3
belongs to "tf'S, the fact that it is always specially mentioned in
connection with the basin necessarily leads to the conclusion,
that it had a certain kind of independence (cf. chap. xxxi. 9,
xxxv. 16, xxxix. 39, xl. 11 ; Lev. viii. 11). These two vessels
were to be made of brass or copper, like the other things in the
court ; and, according to chap, xxxviii. 8, they were made of the
brass of the mirrors of the women who served before the door of
the tabernacle. rwa'sn ntqoa does not mean either " provided
with mirrors of the women" (Bahr, i. pp. 485—6), or ornamented
"with forms, figures of women, as they were accustomed to
appear at the sanctuary" (Knobel). Both these views are over-
thrown by the fact, that 3 never signifies with in the sense of an
outward addition, but always denotes the means, " not an inde-
pendent object, but something accompanying and contributing
to the action referred to" (Ewald, § 217, f. 3). In this case 3
can only apply to the material used, whether we connect it with
fcV? as in chap. xxxi. 4, or, what seems decidedly more correct,
with nero as a more precise definition ; so that 3 would denote
that particular quality which distinguished the brass of which the
basin was made (Ewald, § 217 f.), — apart altogether from the
fact, that neither the mirrors of women, nor the figures of
women, would form a fitting ornament for the basin, as the
priests did not require to look at themselves when they washed
their hands and feet ; and there is still less ground for Knobel's
fiction, that Levitical women went to the sanctuary at particular
times, forming a certain procession, and taking things with them
for the purpose of washing, cleaning, and polishing. The true
meaning is given by the Septuagint, «c raw KaroTrrpcov. Accord-
ing to 1 Sam. ii. 22, the nka'x were women, though not washer-
women, but women who dedicated their lives to the service of
Jehovah, and spent them in religious exercises, in fasting and
in prayer, like Anna, the daughter of Fhanuel, mentioned in
Luke ii. 37. 1 83? denotes spiritual warfare, and is accordingly
1 KnobeVs objection to this explanation, viz. that " at a time when the
sanctuary was not yet erected, the author could not speak of women as
coming to the door of the sanctuary, or performing religious service there,"
Digitized by
Google
214 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
rendered by the LXX. vriorevew, by Onkeloa, ware, with which
the Rabbins agree. The mirrors of the women had been used
for the purpose of earthly adorning. But now the pious Israelites
renounced this earthly adorning, and offered it to the Lord as a
heave-offering to make the purifying laver in front of the sanc-
tuary, in order that " what had hitherto served as a means of
procuring applause in the world might henceforth be the means
of procuring the approbation of God" (Hengstenberg, Dissert,
vol. ii.). — The laver was to be placed between the tabernacle,
i.e. the dwelling, and the altar in the court (ver. 18), probably
not in a straight line with the door of the dwelling and the altar
of burnt-offering, but more sideways, so as to be convenient for
the use of the priests, whether they were going into the taber-
nacle, or going up to the altar for service, to kindle a firing for
Jehovah, i.e. to offer sacrifice upon the altar. They were to
wash their hands, with which they touched the holy things, and
their feet, with which they trod the holy ground (see chap. iii.
5), " that they might not die," as is again emphatically stated
in vers. 20 and 21. For touching holy things with unclean
hands, and treading upon the floor of the sanctuary with dirty
feet, would have been a sin against Jehovah, the Holy One of
Israel, deserving of death. These directions do not imply " that,
notwithstanding all their consecration, they were regarded as
still defiled by natural uncleanness " (Baumgarten), but rather
that consecration did not stamp them with a character indelebilis,
or protect them from the impurities of the sinful nation in the
midst of which they lived, or of their own nature, which was
still affected with mortal corruption and sin.
Vers. 22-33. The Holy Anointing Oil. — This was to be
prepared from the best perfumes (Wfa Q, 0E'3, where £***">, caput,
the principal or chief, is subordinate to D'oba), viz. of four fra-
grant spices and olive-oil. The spices were, (1) liquid myrrh, as
would contain its own refutation, if there were any ground for it at all.
For before the sanctuary was erected, the author could not speak of Levitical
women as coming at particular times to the sanctuary, and bringing things
with them for the purpose of washing and cleaning. But the participle
nK2X does not imply that they had served there before the erection of the
sanctuary, but only that from that time forward they did perform service
there.
Digitized by
Google
. CHAP. XXX. 22-83. 215
distinguished from the dry gum ; — (2) Dfe>3"TtMj?, cinnamon of fra-
grance, the name having been introduced to the Semitic nations
along with the thing itself, and then by the Phoenicians to the
Greeks and Romans (icwvayuov, cinnamum) : whether it came from
Ceylon, the great mart of cinnamon, is very doubtful, as there
is no word that can be discovered in the Indian dialects corre-
sponding to cinnamon; — (3) cane of fragrance, the KaKafws
apfofiariKo^, calamus odoratus, of the Greeks and Romans, i.e.
the scented calamus which is imported from India; — and (4)
kiddah, probably cassia, and possibly the species called amttw in
Dioscor. 1, 12, in which case WVp (Ps. xlv. 9) is either the
generic name for cassia, or else refers to a different species.
The proportion in which these spices were to be taken was 500
shekels or 14£ lbs. of myrrh, half the quantity, i.e. 7 lbs., of
cinnamon, and the same of calamus and cassia ; in all, therefore,
21 lbs. of dry spices, which were to be mixed with one hin of
oil (about 5 quarts) and 14 lbs. of liquid myrrh. These pro-
portions preclude the supposition, that the spices were pulverized
and mixed with the oil and myrrh in their natural condition,
for the result in that case would have been a thick mess : they
rather favour the statement of the Rabbins, that the dry spices
were softened in water and boiled, to extract their essence, which
^yas then mixed with oil and myrrh, and boiled again until all
the watery part had evaporated. An artificial production of this
kind is also indicated by the expressions IPljrip nj3*i " spice-work
of spice-mixture," and njft iWKTD " labour (work) of the perfumer
or ointment-maker." — Vers. 26 sqq. With this holy anointing oil
the tabernacle and all its furniture were to be anointed and sanc-
tified, that they might be most holy ; also Aaron and his sons,
that they might serve the Lord as priests (see at Lev. viii. 10
sqq.). This anointing oil was holy, either because it was made
from the four fragrant substances according to the proportions
commanded by Jehovah, or because God declared this kind of
mixture and preparation holy (cf. ver. 32), and forbade for all
time, on pain of death (ver. 31), not only the use of ointment so
prepared for any ordinary anointings, but even an imitation of
it. " Upon man's flesh shall it not be poured]' i.e. it is not to be
used for the ordinary practice of anointing the human body
(ver. 32). "Man," i.e. the ordinary man in distinction from
the priests. taJ3riD3 according to its measure, i.e. according to
Digitized by
Google
216 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
the proportions prescribed for its manufacture, "it (ver. 33), a
stranger, is not only the non-Israelite, but laymen or non-priests
in general. On the expression, " cut off from his people," see at
Gen. xvii. 14.
"Vers. 34-38. The Holt Incense was also to be made of
four ingredients, viz. (1) nataph (otcuctij, staete), i.e. not the re-
sinous myrrh, or sap obtained from the fragrant myrrh and
dried, but a kind of storax gum resembling myrrh, which was
baked, and then used, like incense, for fumigating ; — (2) sheche-
leth (oioif, unguis odoratus), the shell of a shell-fish resembling
the purpura, of an agreeable odour ; — (3) chelbenak (jfaXjidvtj),
a resin of a pungent, bitter flavour, obtained, by means of an
incision in the bark, from the ferula, a shrub which grows in
Syria, Arabia, and Abyssinia, and then mixed with fragrant
substances to give greater pungency to their odour ; — and (4)
lebonah (Xlfiavos or \ifiavetrosi), frankincense, a resin of a plea-
sant smell, obtained from a tree in Arabia Felix or India, but
what tree has not been discovered, nar pure, i.e. unadulterated.
The words rw 133 13 " part for part shall it be," are explained
by the LXX. as meaning Xaov Xatp etrrat, Vulg. aqualis ponderis
erurtt omnia, i.e. with equal parts of all the different substances.
But this is hardly correct, as 13 literally means separation, and
the use of 3 in this sense would be very striking. The explana-
tion given by A ben Ezra is more correct, viz. " every part shall
be for itself ;" that is to say, each part was to be first of all pre-
pared by itself, and then all the four to be mixed together after-
wards. — Ver. 35. Of this Moses was to make incense, spice-
work, etc. (as in ver. 25), salted, seasoned with salt (n?Dp, a
denom. from TVO salt), like the meat-offering in Lev. ii. 13. The
word does not mean fiefiisffievov, mixtum (LXX.^ Vulg.), or
rubbed to powder, for the rubbing or pulverizing is expressed by
jnrnjpnB' in the following verse. — Ver. 36. Of this incense (a
portion) was to be placed u before the testimony in the tabernacle,''
i.e. not in the most holy place, but where the altar of incense
stood (cf. xxx. 6 and Lev. xvi. 12). The remainder was of
course to be kept elsewhere. — Vers. 37, 38. There is the same
prohibition against imitating or applying it to a strange use as
in the case of the anointing oil (vers. 32, 33). " To smell thereto,"
i.e. to enjoy the perfume of it.
Digitized by
Google
' CHAP. XXXI. 1-11. • 217
Chap. xxxi. 1-11. The BuiLDEBS (cf. chap. xxxv. 30-xxxvi.
1). — After having girnn directions for the construction of the
sanctuary, and all the things required for the worship, Jehovah
pointed out the builders, whom He had called to cany out the
work, and had filled with His Spirit for that purpose. To " call
by name" is to choose or appoint by name for a particular work
(cf. Isa. xlv. 3, 4). Bezaleel was a grandson of Hur, of the tribe
of Judah, who is mentioned in chap. xvii. 10, xxiv. 14, and was
called to be the master-builder, to superintend the whole of the
building and carry out the artistic work ; consequently he is not
only invariably mentioned first (chap. xxxv. 30, xxxvi. 1, 2),
but in the accounts of the execution of the separate portions he
is mentioned alone (chap, xxxvii. 1, xxxviii. 22). Filling with
the Spirit of God signifies the communication of an extraordi-
nary and supernatural endowment and qualification, "in wisdom,"
etc., i.e. consisting of wisdom, understanding, knowledge, and
every kind of workmanship, that is to say, for the performance
of every kind of work. This did not preclude either natural
capacity or acquired skill, but rather presupposed them ; for in
ver. 6 it is expressly stated in relation to his assistants, that God
had put wisdom into all that were wise-hearted (see at chap,
xxviii. 3). Being thus endowed with a supernaturally exalted
gift, Bezaleel was qualified " to think out inventions," i.e. ideas or
artistic designs. Although everything had been minutely de-
scribed by Jehovah, designs and plans were still needed in carry-
ing out the work, so that the result should correspond to the
divine instructions. — Ver. 6. There were associated with Bezaleel
as assistants, Oholiab, the son of Achisamach, of the tribe of Dan,
and other men endowed with understanding, whom God had
filled with wisdom for the execution of His work. According to
chap, xxxviii. 23, Oholiab was both, faber, a master in metal, stone,
and wood work, and also an artistic weaver of colours. In vers.
7-11, the works to be executed, which have been minutely de-
scribed in chap, xxv.— xxx., are mentioned singly once more ; and,
in addition to these, we find in ver. 10 T^>} *|U3 mentioned,
along with, or rather before, the holy dress of Aaron. This is
the case also in chap. xxxv. 19 and xxxix. 41, where there is also
the additional clause, "to serve (rnt? ministrare) in the sanc-
tuary." They were composed, according to chap, xxxix. 1, of
blue and red purple, and crimson. The meaning of the word
Digitized by
Google
218 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
serad, which only occurs in these passages, is quite uncertain.
The Rabbins understand by the bigde hasserad the wrappers in
which the vessels of the sanctuary were enclosed when the camp
was broken up, as these are called begadim. of blue and red
purple, and crimson, in Num. iv. 6 sqq. But this rendering is
opposed to the words which follow, and which indicate their use
in the holy service, i.e. in the performance of worship, and there-
fore are quite inapplicable to the wrappers referred to. There
is even less ground for referring them, as Gesenius and others
do, to the inner curtains of the tabernacle, or the inner hangings
of the dwelling-place. For, apart from the uncertainty of the
rendering given to serad, viz. netted cloth, filet, it is overthrown
by the fact that these curtains of the dwelling-place were not of
net-work ; and still more decisively by the order in which the
bigde hasserad occur in chap, xxxix. 41, viz. not till the dwelling-
place and tent, and everything belonging to them, have been
mentioned, even down to the hangings of the court and the pegs
of the tent, and all that remains to be noticed is the clothing of
the priests. From the definition " to serve in the sanctuary," it
is obvious that the bigde serad were clothes used in the worship,
<rro\al Xeirovpyinai, as the LXX. have rendered it in agree-
ment with the rest of the ancient versions, — that they were, in
fact, the rich robes which constituted the official dress of the
high priest, whilst "the holy garments for Aaron" were the holy
clothes which were worn by him in common with the priests.
Vers. 12-17 (cf. chap. xxxv. 2, 3). God concludes by en-
forcing the observance of His Sabbaths in the most solemn
manner, repeating the threat of death and extermination in the
case of every transgressor. The repetition and further develop-
ment of this command, which was included already in the deca-
logue, is quite in its proper place here, inasmuch as the thought
might easily have occurred, that it was allowable to omit the
keeping of the Sabbath, when the execution of so great a work
in honour of Jehovah had been commanded. " My Sabbaths :"
by these we are to understand the weekly Sabbaths, not the
other sabbatical festivals, since the words which follow apply to
the weekly Sabbath alone. This was " a sign between Jehovah
and Israel for all generations, to know (i.e. by which Israel might
learn) that it was Jehovah who sanctified them" viz. by the sab-
batical rest (see at chap. xx. 11). It was therefore a holy thing
Digitized by
Google*
CHAP. XXXI. 18. 219
for Israel (ver. 14), the desecration of which would be followed
by the punishment of death, as a breach of the covenant. The
kernel of the Sabbath commandment is repeated in ver. 15 ; the
seventh day of the week, however, is not simply designated a
" Sabbath," but tfrae* na# « a high Sabbath" (the repetition of
the same word, or of an abstract form of the concrete noun,
denoting the superlative; see Gea. § 113, 2), and "holy to
Jehovah" (see at chap. xvi. 23). For this reason Israel was to
keep it in all future generations, i.e. to observe it as an eternal
covenant (ver. 16), as in the case of circumcision, since it was to
be a sign for ever between Jehovah and the children of Israel
(ver. 20). The eternal duration of this sign was involved in the
signification of the sabbatical rest, which is pointed out in chap.
xx. 11, and reaches forward into eternity.
Ver. 18. When Moses had received all the instructions re-
specting the sanctuary to be erected, Jehovah gave him the two
tables of testimony, — tables of stone, upon which the decalogue
was written with the finger of God. It was to receive these
tables that he had been called up the mountain (chap. xxiv. 12).
According to chap, xxxii. 16, the tables themselves, as well as
the writing, were the work of God ; and the writing was engraved
upon them (Wnn from Win =xapaTreiv), and the tables were
•written on both their sides (chap, xxxii. 15). Both the choice
of stone as the material for the tables, and the fact that the
writing was engraved, were intended to indicate the imperishable
duration of these words of God. The divine origin of the tables,
as well as of the writing, corresponded to the direct proclamation
of the ten words to the people from the summit of the mountain
by the mouth of God. As this divine promulgation was a suffi-
cient proof that they were the immediate word of God, unchanged
by the mouth and speech of man, so the writing of God was
intended to secure their preservation in Israel as a holy and
inviolable thing. The writing itself was not a greater miracle
than others, by which God has proved Himself to be the Lord
of nature, to whom all things that He has created are subser-
vient for the establishment and completion of His kingdom upon
earth ; and it can easily be conceived of without the anthropo-
morphic supposition of a material finger being possessed by God.
Nothing is said about the dimensions of the tables : at the same
time, we can hardly imagine them to have been as large as the
Digitized by
Google
220 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
inside of the ark ; for stone slabs 2£ cubits long and 1£ cubit
broad, which must necessarily have been some inches in thick-
ness to prevent their breaking in the hand, would have required
the strength of Samson to enable Moses to carry them down the
mountain " in his hand" (chap, xxxii. 15), or even " in his two
hands" (Deut. ix. 15, 17). But if we suppose them to have
been smaller than this, say at the most a cubit and a half long
and one cubit broad, there would have been plenty of room on
the four sides for the 172 words contained in the decalogue, with
its threats and promises (chap. xx. 2-17), without the writing
being excessively small.
THE COVENANT BROKEN AND RENEWED. — CHAP. XXXII.-XXXIV.
Chap, xxxii. 1-6. The long stay that Moses made upon the
mountain rendered the people so impatient, that they desired
another leader, and asked Aaron, to whom Moses had directed
the people to go in all their difficulties during his absence (chap,
xxiv. 14), to make them a god to go before them. The pro-
tecting and helping presence of God had vanished with Moses,
of whom they said, " We know not what has become of him,'
and whom they probably supposed to have perished on the
mountain in the fire that was burning there. They came to
Aaron, therefore, and asked him, not for a leader, but for a
god to go before them ; no doubt with the intention of trusting
the man as their leader who was able to make them a god.
They were unwilling to continue longer without a God to go
before them ; but the faith upon which their desire was founded
was a very perverted one, not only as clinging to what was ap-
parent to the eye, but as corrupted by the impatience and un-
belief of a natural heart, which has not been pervaded by the
power of the living God, and imagines itself forsaken by Him,
whenever His help is not visibly and outwardly at hand. The
delay (2^3, from Bfa to act bashfully, or with reserve, then to
hesitate, or delay) of Moses' return was a test for Israel, in
which it was to prove its faith and confidence in Jehovah and
His servant Moses (xix. 9), but in which it gave way to the
temptation of flesh and blood. — Ver. 2. Aaron also succumbed
to the temptation along with the people. Instead of coura-
geously and decidedly opposing their proposal, and raising the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXII. 1-6. 221
despondency of the people into the strength of living faith, by-
pointing them to the great deeds through which Jehovah had
proved Himself to be the faithful covenant God, he hoped to
be able to divert them from their design by means of human
craftiness. " lear off the golden ornaments in the ears of your
vrives, your sons, and your daughters, and bring them to me:"
this he said in the hope that, by a demand which pressed so
heavily upon the vanity of the female sex and its love of dis-
play, he might arouse such opposition as would lead the people
to desist from their desire. But his cleverness was put to shame.
" All the people" tore off their golden ornaments and brought
them to him (ver. 3) ; for their object was not merely " to
accomplish an act of pure self-will, in which case there is no
sacrifice that the human heart is not ready to make," but to
secure a pledge of the protection of God through a visible image
of the Deity. The weak-minded Aaron had no other course
left than to make (i.e. to cause to be made) an image of God
for the people.
Ver. 4. He took (the golden ear-rings) from their hands, and
formed it (the gold) with the graving-tool, or chisel, and made it
a molten calf." Out of the many attempts that have been made
at interpreting the words B"ina tofc "OW, there are only two that
deserve any notice, viz. the one adopted by Bochart and Schroe-
der, " he bound it up in a bag," and the one given by the
earlier translators, " he fashioned ("W, as in 1 Kings vii. 15)
the gold with the chisel." No doubt "WW (from "i« = "TO) does
occur in the sense of binding in 2 Kings v. 23, and B"in may
certainly be used for B*"in a bag ; but why should Aaron first
tie up the golden ear-rings in a bag ? And if he did so, why
this superfluous and incongruous allusion to the fact ? We give
in our adhesion to the second, which is adopted by the LXX.,
Onkelos, the Syriac, and even Jonathan, though the other ren-
dering is also interpolated into the text. Such objections, as
that the calf is expressly spoken of as molten work, or that files
are used, and not chisels, for giving a finer finish to casts, have
no force whatever. The latter is not even correct. A graving-
knife is quite as necessary as a file for chiselling, and giving a
finer finish to things cast in a mould ; and cheret does not neces-
sarily mean a chisel, but may signify any tool employed for
carving, engraving, and shaping hard metals. The other objec-
Digitized by
Google
222 THE SECOND BOOR OF MOSES.
tion rests upon the supposition that massecah means an image
made entirely of metal (e.g. gold). But this cannot be sus-
tained. Apart from the fact, that most of the larger idols wor-
shipped by the ancients had a wooden centre, and were merely
covered with gold plate, such passages as Isa. xl. 19 and xxx. 22
prove, not only that the casting of gold for idols consisted merely
in casting the metal into a flat sheet, which the goldsmith ham-
mered out and spread into a coating of gold plate, but also that
a wooden image, when covered in this way with a coating of
gold, was actually called massecah. And Aaron's molten calf
was also made in this way : it was first of all formed of wood,
and then covered with gold plate. This is evident from the way
in which it was destroyed : the image was first of all burnt,
and then beaten or crushed to pieces, and pounded or ground to
powder (Deut. ix. 21) ; i.e. the wooden centre was first burnt
into charcoal, and then the golden covering beaten or rubbed
to pieces (ver. 20 compared with Deut. ix. 21).
The " golden calf" (?iV a young bull) was copied from the
Egyptian Apis (yid. Hengstenberg, Dissertations) ; but for all
that, it was not the image of an Egyptian deity, — it was no
symbol of the generative or bearing power of nature, but an
image of Jehovah. For when it was finished, those who had
made the image, and handed it over to the people, said, " This
is thy God (pluralis majest.), O Israel, who brought thee out of
Egypt." This is the explanation adopted in Ps. cvi. 19, 20. —
Vers. 5, 6. When Aaron saw it, he built an altar in front of
the image, and called aloud to the people, " To-morrow is a feast
of Jehovah ;" and the people celebrated this feast with burnt-
offerings and thank-offerings, with eating and drinking, i.e. with
sacrificial meals and sports (pn?), or with loud rejoicing, shout-
ing, antiphonal songs, and dances (cf. vers. 17-19), in the same
manner in which the Egyptians celebrated their feast of Apis
{Herod. 2, 60, and 3, 27). But this intimation of an Egyptian
custom is no proof that the feast was not intended for Jehovah ;
for joyous sacrificial meals, and even sports and dances, are met
with in connection with the legitimate worship of Jehovah (cf.
chap. xv. 20, 21). Nevertheless the making of the calf, and the
sacrificial meals and other ceremonies performed before it, were
a shameful apostasy from Jehovah, a practical denial of the
inimitable glory of the true God, and a culpable breach of the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXII. 7-14. 223
second commandment of the covenant words (chap. xx. 4),
whereby Israel had broken the covenant with the Lord, and
fallen back to the heathen customs of Egypt. Aaron also
shared the guilt of this transgression, although it was merely
out of sinful weakness that he had assented to the proposals of
the people and gratified their wishes (cf. Deut. ix. 20). He
also fell with the people, and denied the God who had chosen .
him, though he himself was unconscious of it, to be His priest,
to bear the sins of the people, and to expiate them before
Jehovah. The apostasy of the nation became a temptation to
him, in which the unfitness of his nature for the office was to
be made manifest, in order that he might ever remember this,
and not excuse himself from the office, to which the Lord had
not called him because of his own worthiness, but purely as an
act of unmerited grace.
Vers. 7-14. Before Moses left the mountain, God told him
of the apostasy of the people (vers. 7, 8). " Thy people, which
thou hast brought out of Egypt:" God says this not in the sense
of an " obliqua exprobratio," or " Mosen quodammodo vocare in
partem criminis quo examinetur ejus tolerantia et plus etiam
mceroris ex ret indignitate concipiat" (Calvin), or even because
the Israelites, who had broken the covenant, were no longer the
people of Jehovah ; but the transgression of the people concerned
Moses as the mediator of the covenant. — Ver. 8. " They have
turned aside quickly (lit. hurriedly):" this had increased their
guilt, and made their ingratitude to Jehovah, their Redeemer,
all the more glaring. — Vers. 9, 10. " Behold, it is a stiff-necked
people (a people with a hard neck, that will not bend to the com-
mandment of God ; cf . chap, xxxiii. 3, 5, xxxiv. 9 ; Deut. ix. 6,
etc.) : now therefore suffer Me, that My wrath may burn against
tliem, and I may consume them, and I will make of thee a great
nation." Jehovah, as the unchangeably true and faithful God,
would not, and could not, retract the promises which He had
given to the patriarchs, or leave them unfulfilled ; and therefore
if in His wrath He should destroy the nation, which had shown
the obduracy of, its nature in its speedy apostasy, He would still
fulfil His promise in the person of Moses, and make of him a
great nation, as He had promised Abraham in Gen. xii. 2.
When God says to Moses, " Leave Me, allow Me, that My wrath
may burn," this is only done, as Gregory the Great expresses it,
Digitized by
Google
224 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
deprecandi an&am prcebere. God puts the fate of the nation into
the hand of Moses, that he may remember his mediatorial office,
and show himself worthy of his calling. This condescension on
the part of God, which placed the preservation or destruction of
Israel in the hands of Moses, coupled with a promise, which left
the fullest freedom to his decision, viz. that after the destruction
of the people he should himself be made a great nation, constituted
a great test for Moses, whether he would be willing to give up
his own people, laden as they were with guilt, as the price of his
own exaltation. And Moses stood the test. The preservation
of Israel was dearer to him than the honour of becoming the
head and founder of a new kingdom of God. True to his call-
ing as mediator, he entered the breach before God, to turn away
His wrath, that He might not destroy the sinful nation (Ps. cvi.
23). — But what if Moses had not stood the test, had not offered
his soul for the preservation of his people, as he is said to have
done in ver. 32 ? Would God in that case have thought him
fit to make into a great nation ? Unquestionably, if this had
occurred, he would not have proved himself fit or worthy of
such a call ; but as God does not call those who are fit and
worthy in themselves, for the accomplishment of His purposes of
salvation, but choose3 rather the unworthy, and makes them fit
for His purposes (2 Cor. iii. 5, 6), He might have made even
Moses into a great nation. The possibility of such a thing, how-
ever, is altogether an abstract thought : the case supposed could
not possibly have occurred, since God knows the hearts of His
servants, and foresees what they will do, though, notwithstanding
His omniscience, He gives to human freedom room enough for
self-determination, that He may test the fidelity of His servants.
No human speculation, however, can fully explain the conflict
between divine providence and human freedom. This promise
is referred to by Moses in Deut. ix. 14, when he adds the words
which God made use of on a subsequent occasion of a similar
kind (Num. xiv. 12), " I will make of thee a nation stronger and
more numerous than this." — Ver. 11. "And Moses besought the
Lord his God." ' w \}S"nt? npn, Ut. to stroke the face of Jehovah,
for the purpose of appeasing His anger, i.e. to entreat His mercy,
either by means of sacrifices (1 Sam. xiii. 12) or by intercession.
He pleaded His acts towards Israel (ver. 11), His honour in the
sight of the Egyptians (ver. 12), and the promises He had made
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXII. 15-24. 225
to the patriarchs (ver. 13), and prayed that for His own sake,
and the sake of His honour among the heathen, He would show
mercy instead of justice, njna (ver. 12) does not mean fiera
"irovrjptas (LXX.), or collide (Vulg.), but "for their hurt" — the
preposition denoting the manner in which, or according to which,
anything took place. — Ver. 14. " And Jehovah repented of the
evil, etc." — On the repentance of God, see at Gen. vi. 6. Augus-
tine is substantially correct in saying that " an unexpected change
in the things which God has put in His own power is called
repentance" (contra adv. leg. 1, 20), but he has failed to grasp
the deep spiritual idea of the repentance of God, as an anthropo-
pathic description of the pain which is. caused to the love of God
by the destruction of His creatures. — Ver. 14 contains a remark
which anticipates the development of the history, and in which
the historian mentions the result of the intercession of Moses,
even before Moses had received the assurance of forgiveness, for
the purpose of bringing the account of his first negotiations with
Jehovah to a close. God let Moses depart without any such
assurance, that He might display before the people the full
severity of the divine wrath.
Vers. 15-24. When Moses departed from God with the two
tables of the law in his hand (see at chap. xxxi. 18), and came,
to Joshua on the mountain (see at chap. xxiv. 13), the latter
heard the shouting of the people (lit. the voice of the people in
its noise, njn for fon, from JT| noise, tumult), and took it to be the
noise of war ; but Moses said (ver. 18), " It is not the sound of the
answering of power, nor the sound of the answering of weakness,"
i.e. they are not such sounds as you hear in the heat of battle
from the strong (the conquerors) and the weak (the conquered) ;
- " the sound of antiphonal songs I hear." (nSV is to be understood,
both here and in Ps. lxxxviii. 1, in the same sense as in chap,
xv. 21.) — Ver. 19. But when he came nearer to the camp, and
saw the calf and the dancing, his anger burned, and he threw
down the tables of the covenant and broke them at the foot of
the mountain, as a sign that Israel had broken the covenant. —
Ver. 20. He then proceeded to the destruction of the idol. " He
burned it in (with) fire" by which process the wooden centre was
calcined, and the golden coating either entirely or partially
melted ; and what was left by the fire he ground till it was fine,
or, as it is expressed in Deut. ix. 21, he beat it to pieces, grind-
PENT.^VOL. H. P
Digitized by
Google
226 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
ing it well (i.e. crushing it with and between stones), till it was
as fine as dust. 1 The dust, which consisted of particles of char-
coal and gold, he then " strewed upon the water," or, according to
Deuteronomy, " threw it into the brook which flowed down from
the mountain, and made the children of Israel drink," i.e. com-
pelled them to drink the dust that had been thrown in along
with the water of the brook. The object of this was certainly
not to make them ashamed, by showing them the worthlessness
of their god, and humiliating them by such treatment as com-
pelling them to swallow their own god (as Knobel supposes). It
was intended rather to set forth in a visible manner both the sin
and its consequences. The sin was poured as it were into their
bowels along with the water, as a symbolical sign that they would
have to bear it and atone for it, just as a woman who was sus-
pected of adultery was obliged to drink the curse-water (Num.
v. 24). — Ver. 21. After the calf had been destroyed, Moses called
Aaron to account. " W/iat has this people done to thee (" done"
in a bad sense, as in Gen. xxvii. 45 ; Ex. xiv. 11), that thou hast
brought a great sin upon it ?" Even if Aaron had merely acted
from weakness in carrying out the will of the people, he was the
most to blame, for not having resisted the urgent entreaty of the
people firmly and with strong faith, and even at the cost of his
life. Consequently he could think of nothing better than the
pitiful subterfuge, " Be not angry, my lord (he addresses Moses
in this way on account of his office, and because of his anger, cf .
Num. xii. 11): thou knowest the people, that it is in itrickedness"
(cf . 1 John v. 19), and the admission that he had been overcome
by the urgency of the people, and had thrown the gold they
handed him into the fire, and that this calf had come out (vers.
22-24), as if the image had come out of its own accord, without
his intention or will. This excuse was so contemptible that
Moses did not think it worthy of a reply , at the same time, as
he told the people afterwards (Dent. ix. 20), he averted the great
wrath of the Lord from him through his intercession.
Vers. 25-29. Moses then turned to the unbridled nation,
1 There is no necessity to refer to the process of calcining gold, either
here or in connection with the destruction of the Asherah by Josiah (2 Kings
xxiii. 4, 12 ; 2 Chron. xxxiv. 4, 7), apart altogether from the question,
whether this chemical mode of reducing the precious metals was known at
all to Moses and the Israelites. ' '
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXII. 25-29. 227
whom Aaron had set free from all restraint, "for a reproach
among their foes" inasmuch as they would necessarily become
an object of scorn and derision among the heathen on account of
the punishment which their conduct would bring down upon
them from God (compare ver. 12 and Deut. xxviii. 37), and
sought to restrain their licentiousness and ward off the threatened
destruction of the nation through the infliction of a terrible
punishment. If the effect of this punishment should show that
there were still some remains of obedience and faithfulness
towards God left in the nation, Moses might then hope, that in
accordance with the pleading of Abraham in Gen. xviii. 23 sqq.,
he should obtain mercy from God for the whole nation for the
sake of those who were righteous. He therefore went into the
gate of the camp (the entrance to the camp) and cried out :
" Whoever (belongs) to the Lord, (come) to me!" and his hope
was not disappointed. "All the Levites gathered together to him"
Why the Levites ? Certainly not merely, nor chiefly, "because
the Levites for the most part had not assented to the people's
sin and the worship of the calf, but had been displeased on ac-
count of it" (C. a Lapide); but partly because the Levites
were more prompt in their determination to confess their crime,
and return with penitence, and partly out of regard to Moses,
who belonged to their tribe, in connection with which it must
be borne in mind that the resolution and example of a few dis-
tinguished men was sure to be followed by all the rest of their
tribe. • The reason why no one came over to the side of Moses
from any of the other tribes, must also be attributed, to some
extent, to the bond that existed among members of the same
tribe, and is not sufficiently explained by Calvin's hypothesis,
that "they were held back, not by contempt or obstinacy, so
much as by shame, and that they were all so paralyzed by their
alarm, that they waited to see what Moses was about to do and
to what length he would proceed." — Ver. 27. The Levites had
to allow their obedience to God to be subjected to a severe test.
Moses issued this command to them in the name of Jehovah the
God of Israel : "Let every one gird on his sword, and go to and
fro through the camp from one gate (end) to the other, and put to
death brothers, friends, and neighbours" i.e. all whom they met,
without regard to relationship, friendship, or acquaintance.
And they stood the test. About 3000 men fell by their sword
Digitized by
Google
228 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
on that day. There are several difficulties connected with this
account, which have furnished occasion for doubts as to its his-
torical credibility. The one of least importance is that which
arises from the supposed severity and recklessness of Moses'
proceedings. The severity of the punishment corresponded to
the magnitude of the crime. The worship of an image, being a
manifest transgression of one of the fundamental laws of the
covenant, was a breach of the covenant, and as such a capital
crime, bringing the punishment of death or extermination in its
train. Now, although the whole nation had been guilty of this
crime, yet in this, as in every other rebellion, the guilt of all
would not be the same, but many would simply follow the ex-
ample of others ; so that, instead of punishing all alike, it was
necessary that a separation should be made, if not between the
innocent and guilty, yet between the penitent and the stiff-necked
transgressors. To effect- this separation, Moses called out into
the camp: " Over to me, whoever is for the Lord!" All the
Levites responded to his call, but not the other tribes ; and it
was necessary that the refractory should be punished. Even
these, however, had not all sinned to the same extent, but might
be divided into tempters and tempted ; and as they were all
mixed up together, nothing remained but to adopt that kind of
punishment, which has been resorted to in all ages in such cir-
cumstances as these. " If at any time," as Calvin says, " mutiny
has broken out in an army, and has led to violence, and even to
bloodshed, by universal law a commander proceeds to decimate
the guilty." He then adds, " How much milder, however, was
the punishment here, when out of six hundred thousand only
three thousand were put to death !" This decimation Moses com-
mitted to the Levites ; and just as in every other decimation the
selection must be determined by lot or accidental choice, so here
Moses left it to be determined by chance, upon whom the sword
of the Levites would fall, knowing very well that eveii the so-
called chance would be under the direction of God.
There is apparently a greater difficulty in the fact, that not
only did the Levites execute the command of Moses without re-
serve, but the people let them pass through the camp, and kill
every one who came within reach of their sword, without offer-
ing the slightest resistance. To remove this difficulty, there is
no necessity that we should either assume that the Levites knew
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXII. 25-29. 229
who were the originators and ringleaders of the worship of the
calf, and only used their swords against them, as Calvin does, or
that we should follow Kurtz, and introduce into the text a
" formal conflict between the two parties, in which some of Moses'
party were also slain," since the history says nothing about " the
men who sided with Moses gaining a complete victory," and
merely states that in obedience to the word of Jehovah the God
of Israel, as declared by Moses, they put 3000 men of the people
to death with the sword. The obedience of the Levites was an
act of faith, which knows neither the fear of man nor regard to
person. The unresisting attitude of the people generally may
be explained, partly from their reverence for Moses, whom God
had so mightily and marvellously accredited as His servant in
the sight of all the nation, and partly from the despondency and
fear so natural to a guilty conscience, which took away all capa-
city for opposing the bold and determined course that was
adopted by the divinely appointed rulers and their servants in
obedience to the command of God. It must also be borne in
mind, that in the present instance the sin of the people was not
connected with any rebellion against Moses.
Very different explanations have been given of the words
which were spoken by Moses to the Levites (ver. 29) : " Fill
your hand to-day for Jehovah; for every one against his son
and against his brother, and to bring a blessing upon you to-day."
" To fill the hand for Jehovah " does not mean to offer a sacri-
fice to the Lord, but to provide something to offer to God (1
Chron. xxix. 5 ; 2 Chron. xxix. 31). Thus Jonathan's explana-
tion, which Kurtz has revived in a modified form, viz. that
Moses commanded the Levites to offer sacrifices as an expiation
for the blood that they had shed, or for the rent made in the
congregation by their reckless slaughter of their blood-relations,
falls to the ground ; though we cannot understand how the ful-
filment of a divine command, or an act of obedience to the de-
clared will of God, could be regarded as blood-guiltiness, or as
a crime that needed expiation. As far as the clause which
follows is concerned, so much is clear, viz. that the words can
neither be rendered, " for every one is in his son," etc., nor "for
every one was against his son," etc. To the former it is im-
possible to attach any sense ; and the latter cannot be correct,
because the preterite njn could not be omitted after an imperative,
Digitized by
Google
230 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
if the explanatory clause referred to what was past. If '3 were
a causal particle in this case, the meaning could only be, " for
every one shall be against his son," etc. But it is much better
to understand it as indicating the object, " that every one may
be against his son and against his brother;" i.e. that in the
cause of the Lord every one may not spare even his nearest
relative, but deny either son or brother for the Lord's sake
(Deut. xxxiii. 9). "And to give" (or bring), i.e. so that ye
may bring, u a blessing upon yourselves to-day" The following,
then, is the thought contained in the verse: Provide yourselves
to-day with a gift for the Lord, consecrate yourselves to-day
Tor the service of the Lord, by preserving the obedience you
have just shown towards Him, by not knowing either son or
brother in His service, and thus gain for yourselves a blessing.
In the fulfilment of the command of God, with the denial of
their own flesh and blood, Moses discerns such a disposition and
act as would fit them for the service of the Lord. He there-
fore points to the blessing which it would bring them, and ex-
horts them by their election as the peculiar possession of Jeho-
vah (Num. iii. iv.), which would be secured to them from this
time forward, to persevere in this fidelity to the Lord. " The
zeal of the tribe-father burned still in the Levites ; but this time
it was for the glory of God, and not for their own. Their an-
cestor had violated both truth and justice by his vengeance upon
the Shechemites, from a false regard to blood-relationship, but
now his descendants had saved truth, justice, and the covenant
by avenging Jehovah upon their own relations" {Kurtz, and
Oehler in Herzotfs Cycl.), so that the curse which rested upon
them (Gen. xlix. 7) could now be turned into a blessing (cf.
Deut. xxxiii. 9).
Vers. 30-35. After Moses had thus avenged the honour of
the Lord upon the sinful nation, he returned the next day to
Jehovah as a mediator, who is not a mediator of one (Gal. iii.
20), that by the force of his intercession he- might turn the
divine wrath, which threatened destruction, into sparing grace
and compassion, and that he might expiate the sin of the nation.
He had received no assurance of mercy in reply to his first en-
treaty (vers. 11-13). He therefore announced his intention to
the people in these words : " Peradventure I can make an atone-
ment for your sin." But to the Lord he said (vers. 31, 32),
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXII. 80-85. 231
' " The sin of this people is a great sin ; they have made themselves a
god of gold" in opposition to the clear commandment in chap,
xx. 23 : " and now, if Thou wilt forgive their sin, and if not, blot
me out of the book that Thou hast written." The book which
Jehovah has written is the book of life, or of the living (Ps.
j lxix. 29 ; Dan. xii. 1). This expression is founded upon the
custom of writing the names of the burgesses of a town or
country in a burgess-list, whereby they are recognised as natives
of the country, or citizens of the city, and all the privileges of
citizenship are secured to them. The book of life contains the list
of the righteous (Ps. lxix. 29), and ensures to those whose names
are written there, life before God, first in the earthly kingdom
of God, and then eternal life also, according to the knowledge of
salvation, which keeps pace with the progress of divine revela-
tion, e.g. in the New Testament, where the heirs of eternal life
are found written in the book of life (Phil. iv. 3 ; Rev. iii. 5,
xiii. 8, etc.), — an advance forwhich the way was already prepared
by Isa. iv. 3 and Dan. xii. 1. To blot out of Jehovah's book,
therefore, is to cut off from fellowship with the living God, or
from the kingdom of those who live before God, and to deliver
over to death. As a true mediator of his people, Moses was
ready to stake his own life for the deliverance of the nation, and
not to live before God himself, if Jehovah did not forgive the
people their sin. These words of Moses were the strongest ex-
pression of devoted, self-sacrificing love. And they were just
as deep and true as the wish expressed by the Apostle Paul in
Rom. ix. 3, that he might be accursed from Christ for the sake
of his brethren according to the flesh. Bengel compares this
wish of the apostle to the prayer of Moses, and says with re-
gard to this unbounded fulness of love, " It is not easy to esti-
mate the measure of love in a Moses and a Paul ; for the narrow
boundary of our reasoning powers does not comprehend it, as
the little child is unable to comprehend the courage of warlike
heroes" (Eng. Tr.). The infinite love of God is unable to
withstand the importunity of such love. God, who is holy love,
cannot sacrifice the righteous and good for the unrighteous and
guilty, nor can He refuse the mediatorial intercession of His
faithful servant, so long as the sinful nation has not filled up
the measure of its guilt, in which case even the intercession of
a Moses and a Samuel would not be able to avert the judgment
Digitized by
Google
232 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
(Jer. xv. 1, cf. Ezek. xiv. 16). Hence, although Jehovah pats
back the wish and prayer of Moses with the words, " Whoever
C"ie>K 'D, both here and in 2 Sam. xx. 11, is more emphatic than
either one or the other alone) has sinned, him will I blot out of
My book" He yields to the entreaty that He will ensure to
Moses the continuance of the nation under His guidance, and
under the protection of His angel, which shall go before it (see
at chap, xxxiii. 2, 3), and defer the punishment of their sin until
the day of His visitation. — Ver. 35. " Thus Jehovah smote the
people because they had made the calf." With these words the
historian closes the first act of Moses' negotiations with the Lord
on account of this sin, from which it was apparent how God had
repented of the evil with which He had threatened the nation
(ver. 14). Moses had obtained the preservation of the people
and their entrance into the promised land, under the protection
of God, through his intercession, and averted from the nation
the abrogation of the covenant ; but the covenant relation which
had existed before was not restored in its integrity. Though
grace may modify and soften wrath, it cannot mar the justice of
the holy God. No doubt an atonement had been made to
justice, through the punishment which the Levites had inflicted
upon the nation, but only a passing and imperfect one. Only a
small portion of the guilty nation had been punished, and that
without the others showing themselves worthy of forgiving
grace through sorrow and repentance. The punishment, there-
fore, was not remitted, but only postponed in the long-suffering
of God, " until the day of retribution " or visitation. The day
of visitation came at length, when the stiff-necked people had
filled up the measure of their sin through repeated rebellion
against Jehovah and His servant Moses, and were sentenced at
Kadesh to die out in the wilderness (Num. xiv. 26 sqq.). The
sorrow manifested by the people (chap, xxxiii. 4), when the
answer of God was made known to them, was a proof that the
measure was not yet full.
Chap, xxxiii. 1-6. Moses' negotiations with the people, for
the purpose of bringing them to sorrow and repentance, com-
menced with the announcement of what Jehovah had said.
The words of Jehovah in vers. 1-3, which are only a still fur-
ther expansion of the assurance contained in chap, xxxii. 34,
commence in a similar manner to the covenant promise in chap.
Digitized by
Google
chap. xxxm. 7-u. 233
xxiii. 20, 23 ; but there is this great difference, that whereas
the name, i.e. the presence of Jehovah Himself, was to have
gone before the Israelites in the angel promised to the people
as a leader in chap, xxiii. 20, now, though Jehovah would still
send an angel before Moses and Israel, He Himself would not
go up to Canaan (a land flowing, etc., see at iii. 8) in the midst
of Israel, lest He should destroy the people by the way, be-
cause they were stiff-necked (1??$ for y?N, see Ges. § 27, 3,
Anm. 2). — Ver. 4. The people were so overwhelmed with sor-
row by this evil word, that they all put off their ornaments, and
showed by this outward sign the trouble of their heart. — Ver. 5.
That this good beginning of repentance might lead to a true
and permanent change of heart, Jehovah repeated His threat
in a most emphatic manner : " Thou art a stiff-necked people ; if
I go a moment in the midst of thee, I destroy thee :" i.e. if I were
to go up in the midst of thee for only a single moment, I should
be compelled to destroy thee because of thine obduracy. He
then issued this command : " Throw thine ornament away from
thee, and I shall know (by that) what to do to thee." — Ver. 6.
And the people obeyed this commandment, renouncing all that
pleased the eye. " The children of Israel spoiled themselves
(see at chap. xii. 36) of their ornament from Mount Horeb on-
wards'' Thus they entered formally into a penitential condi-
tion. The expression, " from Mount Horeb onwards," can
hardly be paraphrased as it is by Seb. Schmidt, viz. " going
from Mount Horeb into the camp," but in all probability ex-
presses this idea, that from that time forward, i.e. after the
occurrence of this event at Horeb, they laid aside the ornaments
which they had hitherto worn, and assumed the outward appear-
ance of perpetual penitence. -
Vers. 7—11. Moses then tookji tent, and pitched it outside
the camp, at some distance off, and called it " tent of meeting."
The " tent" is neither the sanctuary of the tabernacle de-
scribed in chap. xxv. sqq., which was not made till after the
perfect restoration of the covenant (chap. xxxv. sqq.), nor an-
other sanctuary that had come down from their forefathers and
was used before the tabernacle was built, as Clericus, J. D.
Mchaelis, Hosenmuller, and others suppose ; but a tent belonging
to Moses, which was made into a temporary sanctuary by the
fact that the pillar of cloud came down upon it, and Jehovah
Digitized by
Google
234 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
talked with Moses there, and which was called by the same name
as the tabernacle, viz. "iJJto ?rik (see at chap, xxvii. 21), because
Jehovah revealed Himself there, and every one who sought Him
had to go to this tent outside the camp. There were two rea-
sons for this : in the first place, Moses desired thereby to lead
the people to a fuller recognition of their separation from their
God, that their penitence might be deepened in consequence ;
and in the second place, he wished to provide such means of
intercourse with Jehovah as would not only awaken in the
minds of the people a longing for the renewal of the covenant,
but render the restoration of the covenant possible. And this
end was answered. Not only did every one who sought Jehovah
go out to the tent, but the whole nation looked with the deepest
reverence when Moses went out to the tent, and bowed in ado-
ration before the Lord, every one in front of his tent, when
they saw the pillar of cloud come down upon the tent and stand
before the door. Out of this cloud Jehovah talked with Moses
(vers. 7—10) "face to face, as a man talks with his friend"
(ver. 11) ; that is to say, not from the distance of heaven,
through any kind of medium whatever, but " mouth to mouth,"
as it is called in Num. xii. 8, as closely and directly as friends
talk to one another. " These words indicate, therefore, a
familiar conversation, just as much as if it had been said, that
God appeared to Moses in some peculiar form of manifestation.
If any one objects to this, that it is at variance with the asser-
tion which we shall come to presently, ' Thou canst not see My
face,' the answer is a very simple one. Although Jehovah
showed Himself to Moses in some peculiar form of manifesta-
tion, He never appeared in His own essential glory, but only in
such a mode as human weakness could bear. This solution
contains a tacit comparison, viz. that there never w&s any one
equal to Moses, or who had attained to the same dignity as he"
{Calvin). When Moses returned to the tent, his servant Joshua
remained behind as guard. — This condescension on the part of
Jehovah towards Moses could not fail to strengthen the people
in their reliance upon their leader, as the confidant of Jehovah.
And Moses himself was encouraged thereby to endeavour to
effect a perfect restoration of the covenant bond that had been
destroyed.
Vers. 12-23. Jehovah had commanded Moses to lead the
\
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXIII. 12-28. 235
people to Canaan, and promised him the guidance of an angel ;
but He had expressly distinguished this angel from His own
personal presence (vers. 1-3). Moreover, though it has not
been mentioned before, Jehovah had said to Moses, " I have
known thee by name" — i.e. I have recognised thee as Mine, and
chosen and called thee to execute My will (cf. Isa. xliii. 1, xlix. 1),
or put thee into " a specifically personal relation to God, which
was peculiar to Moses, and therefore was associated with his
name" (Oehler) ; — " and tliou hast also found grace in My eyes,"
inasmuch as God had granted a hearing to his former interces-
sion. Moses now reminded the Lord of this divine assurance
with such courage as can only be produced by faith, which
wrestles with God and will not let Him go without a blessing
(Gen. xxxii. 27) ; and upon the strength of this he presented the
petition (ver. 13), " Let me know Thy way (the way which Thou
wilt take with me and with this people), that I may know Thee,
in order that I may find grace in Thine eyes, and see that this
people is Thy people." The meaning is this : If I have found
grace in Thy sight, and Thou hast recognised me as Thy servant,
and called me to be the leader of this people, do not leave me in
uncertainty as to Thine intentions concerning the people, or as
to the angel whom Thou wilt give as a guide to me and the
nation, that I may know Thee, that is to say, that my finding
grace in Thine eyes may become a reality ;* and if Thou wilt
lead the people up to Canaan, consider that it is Thine own
people, to whom Thou must acknowledge Thyself as its God.
Such boldness of undoubting faith presses to the heart of God,
and brings away the blessing. Jehovah replied (ver. 14), " My
face will go, and I shall give thee rest," — that is to say, shall
bring thee and all this people into the land, where ye will find
rest (Deut. iii. 20). The " face" of Jehovah is Jehovah in
His own personal presence, and is identicaLwith the " angel"
in whom the name of Jehovah was (chap, xxiii. 20, 21), and
who is therefore called in Isa. lxiii. 9 " the angel of His face."
With this assurance on the part of God, the covenant bond
was completely restored. But to make more sure of it, Moses
replied (vers. 15, 16), " If Thy face is not going (with us), lead
us not up hence And whereby shall it be known that I have found
grace in thine eyes, land Thy people, if not (lit. is it not known)
1 Damim fac ut verbis litis respondeat eventus (Calvin).
s
Digitized by
Google
236 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
in Thy going with us, that we, I and Thy people,- are distinguished
(see at chap. viii. 18) before every nation upon the face of the
earth f" These words do not express any doubt as to the truth of
the divine assurance, " but a certain feeling of the insufficiency
of the assurance," inasmuch as even with the restoration of the
former condition of things there still remained " the fear lest the
evil root of the people's rebellion, which had once manifested
itself, should break forth again at any moment" (Baumgarten).
For this reason Jehovah assured him that this request also should
be granted (ver. 17). " There was nothing extraordinary in the
fact that Moses desired for himself and his people that they might
be distinguished before every nation upon the face of the earth ;
this was merely the firm hold of faith upon the calling and elec-
tion of God (chap. xix. 5, 6)." — Ver. 18. Moses was emboldened
by this, and now prayed to the Lord, " Let me see Thy glory."
What Moses desired to see, as the answer of God clearly shows,
must have been something surpassing all former revelations of
the glory of Jehovah (chap. xvi. 7, 10, xxiv. 16, 17), and even
going beyond Jehovah's talking with him face to face (ver. 11).
When God talked with him face to face, or mouth to mouth, he
merely saw a " similitude of Jehovah" (Num. xii. 8), a form
which rendered the invisible being of God visible to the human
eye, i.e. a manifestation of the divine glory in a certain form,
and not the direct or essential glory of Jehovah, whilst the people
saw this glory under the Veil of a dark cloud, rendered luminous
by fire, that is to say, they only saw its splendour as it shone
through the cloud ; and even the elders, at the time when the
covenant was made, only saw the God of Israel in a certain form
which hid from their eyes the essential being of God (xxiv. 10,
11). What Moses desired, therefore, was a sight of the glory
or essential being of God, without any figure, and without a veil.
Moses was urged to offer this prayer, as Calvin truly says,
not by " stulta euriositas, quae utplurimum titillat hominum mentes,
ut audacter penetrare tentent usque ad ultima calorum arcana,"
but by " a desire to cross the chasm which had been made by
the apostasy of the nation, that for the future he might have a
firmer footing than the previous history had given him. As so
great a stress had been laid upon his own person in his present
task of mediation between the offended Jehovah and the apostate
nation, he felt that the separation, which existed between himself
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXIIL 12 23. 237
and Jehovah, introduced a disturbing element into his office.
For if his own personal fellowship with Jehovah was not fully
established, and raised above all possibility of disturbance, there
could be no eternal foundation for the perpetuity of his media-
tion" (Baumgarten). As a man called by God to be His servant,
he was not yet the perfect mediator ; but although he was faithful
in all his house, it was only as a servant, called efc (taprvptov
tow Xakqdrjffoiievoiv (Heb. iii. 5), i.e. as a herald of the saving
revelations of God, preparing the way for. the coming of the
perfect Mediator. Jehovah therefore granted his request, but
only so far as the limit existing between the infinite and holy
God and finite and sinful man allowed. " I will make all My
goodness pass before thy face, and proclaim the name of Jehovah
before thee (DB'a tO|5 see at Gen iv. 26), and will be gracious to
•whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show
mercy. Thou canst not see My face, for man cannot see Me and
live." The words 'U1 'nSm, although only connected with the pre-
vious clause by the cop. \ are to be understood in a causative
sense, as expressing the reason why Moses' request was granted,
viz. that it was an act of unconditional grace and compassion on
the part of God, to which no man, not even Moses, could lay
any just claim. The Apostle Paul uses the words in the same
sense in Rom. ix. 15, for the purpose of overthrowing the claims
of self-righteous Jews to participate in the Messianic salvation.
— No mortal man can see the face of God and remain alive ; for
not only is the holy God a consuming fire to unholy man, but a
limit has been set, in and with the a&fia ypiicov and ifrvxiicov (the
earthly and psychical body) of man, between the infinite God, the
absolute Spirit, and the human spirit clothed in an earthly body,
which will only be removed by the " redemption of our body,"
and our being clothed in a " spiritual body," and which, so long
as it lasts, renders a direct sight of the glory of God impossible.
As our bodily eye is dazzled, and its power of vision destroyed,
by looking directly at the brightness of the sun, so would our
whole nature be destroyed by an unveiled sight of the brilliancy
of the glory of God. So long as we are clothed with this body,
which was destined, indeed, from the very first to be transformed
into the glorified state of the immortality of the spirit, but has
become through the fall a prey to the corruption of death, we
can only walk in faith, and only see God with the eye of faith,
Digitized by
Google
238 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
so far as He has revealed His glory to us in His works and His
word. When we have become like God, and have been trans-
formed into the " divine nature" (2 Pet. i. 4), then, and not till
then, shall we see Him as He is ; then we shall see His glory
without a veil, and live before Him for ever. For this reason
Moses had to content himself with the passing by of the glory of
God before his face, and with the revelation of the name of
Jehovah through the medium of the word, in which God dis-
closes His inmost being, and, so to speak, His whole heart to
faith. In ver. 22 " My glory" is used for " all My goodness,"
and in chap, xxxiv. 6 it is stated that Jehovah passed by before
the face of Moses. 3^t3 is not to be understood in the sense of
beautiful, or beauty, but signifies goodness ; not the brilliancy
which strikes the senses, but the spiritual and ethical nature of
the Divine Being. For the manifestation of Jehovah, which
passed before Moses, was intended unquestionably to reveal
nothing else than what Jehovah expressed in the proclamation
of His name.
The manifested glory of the Lord would so surely be followed
by the destruction of man, that even Moses needed to be pro-
tected before it (vers. 21, 22). Whilst Jehovah, therefore,
allowed him to come to a place upon the rock near Him, i.e.
upon the summit of Sinai (chap, xxxiv. 2), He said that He
would put him in a cleft of the rock whilst He was passing by,
and cover him with His hand, i.e. with His protecting power,
and only take away His hand when He had gone by, that he
might see His back, because His face could not be seen. The
back, as contrasted with the face, signifies the reflection of the
glory of God that had just passed by. The words are transferred
anthropomorphically from man to God, because human language
and human thought can only conceive of the nature of the abso-
lute Spirit according to the analogy of the human form. As the
inward nature of man manifests itself in his face, and the sight
of his back gives only an imperfect and outward view of him, so
Moses saw only the back and not the face of Jehovah. It is
impossible to put more into human words concerning this unpa-
ralleled vision, which far surpasses all human thought and com-
prehension. According to chap, xxxiv. 2, the place where Moses
stood by the Lord was at the top (the head) of Sinai, and no
more can be determined with certainty concerning it. The cleft
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXIV. 1-10. 239
in the rock (ver. 22) has been supposed by some to be the same
place as the " cave" in which Elijah lodged at Horeb, and where
the Lord appeared to him in the still small voice (1 Kings xix.
9 sqq.). The real summit of the Jehel Musa consists of " a
small area of huge rocks, about 80 feet in diameter," upon
which there is now a chapel that has almost fallen down, and
about 40 feet to the south-west a dilapidated mosque (Ro-
binson, Palestine, vol. i. p. 153). Below this mosque, according
to Seetzen (Reise iii. pp. 83, 84), there is a very small grotto,
into which you descend by several steps, and to which a large
block of granite, about a fathom and a half long and six spans
in height, serves as a roof. According to the Mussulman tradi-
tion, which the Greek monks also accept, it was in this small
grotto that Moses received the law ; though other monks point
oat a " hole, just large enongh for a man," near the altar of
the Elijah chapel, on the small plain upon the ridge of Sinai,
above which the loftier peak rises about 700 feet, as the cave in
which Elijah lodged on Horeb {Robinson, Pal. ut supra).
Chap, xxxiv. 1-10. When Moses had restored the covenant
bond through his intercession (chap, xxxiii. 14), he was directed
by Jehovah to hew out two stones, like the former ones which he
had broken, and to come with them the next morning up the
mountain, and Jehovah would write upon them the same words
as upon the first, 1 and thus restore the covenant record. It was
also commanded, as in the former case (chap. xix. 12, 13), that
no one should go up the mountain with him, or be seen upon it,
and that not even cattle should feed against the mountain, i.e.
in the immediate neighbourhood (ver. 3). The first tables of
the covenant were called "tables of stone" (chap. xxiv. 12,
xxxi. 18) ; the second, on the other hand, which were hewn by
Moses, are called " tables of stones" (vers. 1 and 4) ; and the
latter expression is applied indiscriminately to both of them in
Deut. iv. 13, v. 19, ix. 9-11, x. 1-4. This difference does not
indicate a diversity in the records, but may be explained very
simply from the fact, that the tables prepared by Moses were
hewn from two stones, and not both from the same block;
whereas all that could be said of the former, which had been
1 Namely, the ten words in chap. xx. 2-17, not the laws contained in
vers. 12-26 of this chapter, as Gothe and Hitzig suppose. See Hengstenberg,
Dissertations ii. p. 319, and Kurtz on the Old Covenant iii. 182 sqq.
Digitized by
Google
240 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
made by God Himself, was that they were of stone, since no
one knew whether God had used one stone or two for the pur-
pose. There is apparently far more importance in the following
distinction, that the second tables were delivered by Moses and
only written upon by God, whereas in the case of the former
both the writing and the materials came from God. This can-
not have been intended either as a punishment for the nation
(Hengstenberg), or as " the sign of a higher stage of the covenant,
inasmuch as the further the reciprocity extended, the firmer was
the covenant" (Baumgarteri). It is much more natural to seek
for the cause, as Bashi does, in the fact, that Moses had broken
the first in pieces ; only we must not regard it as a sign that God
disapproved of the manifestation of anger on the part of Moses,
but rather as a recognition of his zealous exertions for the restora-
tion of the covenant which had been broken by the sin of the
nation. As Moses had restored the covenant through his ener-
getic intercession, he should also provide the materials for the
renewal of the covenant record, and bring |hem to God, for Him
to complete and confirm the record by writing the covenant
words upon the tables.
On the following morning, when Moses ascended the moun-
tain, Jehovah granted him the promised manifestation of His
glory (vers. 5 sqq.). The description of this unparalleled occur-
rence is in perfect harmony with the mysterious and majestic
character of the revelation. u Jehovah descended (from heaven)
in the cloud, and stood by him there, and proclaimed the name of
Jehovah; and Jehovah passed by in his sight, and proclaimed
Jehovah, Jehovah God, merciful and gracious," etc. What Moses
saw we are not told, but simply the words in which Jehovah
proclaimed all the glory of His being ; whilst it is recorded of
Moses, that he bowed his head toward the earth and worshipped.
This " sermon on the name of the Lord," as I^uther calls it, dis-
closed to Moses the most hidden nature of Jehovah. It pro-
claimed that God is love, but that kind of love in which mercy,
grace, long-suffering, goodness, and truth are united with holiness
and justice. As the merciful One, who is great in goodness and
truth, Jehovah shows mercy to the thousandth, forgiving sin and
iniquity in long-suffering and grace ; but He does not leave sin
altogether unpunished, and in His justice visits the sin of the
fathers upon the children and the children's children even unto
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXIV. 1-10. 241
the fourth generation. The Lord had already revealed Himself
to the whole nation from Mount Sinai as visiting sin and show-
ing mercy (chap. xx. 5 sqq.). But whereas on that occasion the
burning zeal of Jehovah which visits sin stood in the foreground,
and mercy only followed afterwards, here grace, mercy, and good-
ness are placed in the front. And accordingly all the words which
the language contained to express the idea of grace in its varied
manifestations to the sinner, are crowded together here, to reveal
the fact that in His inmost being God is love. But in order that
grace may not be perverted by sinners into a ground of wanton-
ness, justice is not wanting even here with its solemn threatenings,
although it only follows mercy, to jshow that mercy is mightier,
than wrath, and that holy love does not punish till sinners despise
the riches of the goodness, patience,, and long-suffering of God.
As Jehovah here proclaimed His name, so did He continue to bear
witness of it to the Israelites, from their departure from Sinai till
their entrance into Canaan, and from that time forward till their
dispersion among the heathen, and even now in their exile show-
ing mercy to the thousandth, when they turn to the Redeemer
who has come out of Zion. — Ver. 9. On this manifestation of
mercy, Moses repeated the prayer that Jehovah would go in the
midst of Israel. It is true the Lord had already promised that
His face should go with them (chap, xxxiii. 14) ; but as Moses
had asked for a sight of the glory of the Lord as a seal to the
promise, it was perfectly natural that, when this petition was
granted, he should lay hold of the grace that had been revealed
to him as it never had been before, and endeavour to give even
greater stability to the covenant. To this end he repeated his
former intercession on behalf of the nation, at the same time
making this confession, " For it is a stiff-necked people ; there-
fore forgive our iniquity and our sin, and make us the inherit-
ance." Moses spoke collectively, including himself in the nation
in the presence of God. The reason which he assigned pointed
to the deep root of corruption that had broken out in the worship
of the golden calf, and was appropriately pleaded as a motive for
asking forgiveness, inasmuch as God Himself had assigned the
natural corruption of the human race as a reason why He would
not destroy it again with a flood (Gen. viii. 21). Wrath was
mitigated by a regard to the natural condition. — ?ru in the Kal,
with an accusative of the person, does not mean to lead a person
PENT. — VOL. II. Q
Digitized by
Google
242 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
into the inheritance, but to make a person into an inheritance ;
here, therefore, to make Israel the possession of Jehovah (Deut.
iv. 20, ix. 26, cf. Zech. ii. 16).. Jehovah at once declared
(ver. 10) that He would conclude a covenant, i.e. restore the
broken covenant, and do marvels before the whole nation, such
as had not been done in all the earth or in any nation, and thus
by these His works distinguish Israel before all nations as His
own property (chap, xxxiii. 16). The nation was to see this,
because it would be terrible ; terrible, namely, through the over-
throw of the powers that resisted the kingdom of God, every one
of whom would be laid prostrate and destroyed by the majesty
of the Almighty.
Vers. 11-26. To recall the duties of the covenant once more
to the minds of the people, the Lord repeats from among the
rights of Israel, upon the basis of which the covenant had been
established (chap, xxi.-xxiii.), two of the leading points which
determined the attitude of the nation towards Him, and which
constituted, as it were, the main pillars that were to support the
covenant about to be renewed. These were, first, the warning
against every kind of league with the Oanaanites, who were to
be driven out before the Israelites (vers. 11-16) ; and, secondly,
the instructions concerning the true worship of Jehovah (vers.
17-26). The warning against friendship with the idolatrous
Canaanites (vers. 11-16) is more fully developed and more
strongly enforced than in chap, xxiii. 23 sqq. The Israelites,
when received into the covenant with Jehovah, were not only to
beware of forming any covenant with the inhabitants of Canaan
(cf . xxiii. 32, 33), but were to destroy all the signs of their ido-
latrous worship, such as altars, monuments (see chap, xxiii. 24),
and asherim, the idols of Astarte, the Canaanitish goddess of
nature, which consisted for the most part of wooden pillars (see
my Comm. on 1 Kings xiv. 23), and to worship no other god,
because Jehovah was called jealous, i.e. had revealed Himself as
jealous (see at chap. xx. 5), and was a jealous God. This was
commanded, that the Israelites might not suffer themselves to be
led astray by such an alliance ; to go a whoring after their gods,
and sacrifice to them, to take part in their sacrificial festivals, or
to marry their sons to the daughters of the Canaanites, by whom
they would be persuaded to join in the worship of idols. The
use of the expression " go a whoring" in a spiritual sense, in re-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXIV. 27-35. 243
lation to idolatry, is to be accounted for on the ground, that the
religious fellowship of Israel with Jehovah was a covenant
resembling the marriage tie ; and we meet with it for the first
time here, immediately after the formation of this covenant be-
tween Israel and Jehovah. The phrase is all the more expressive
on account of the literal prostitution that was frequently asso-
ciated with the worship of Baal and Astarte (cf. Lev. xvii. 7,
xx. 5, 6 ; Num. xiv. 33, etc.). We may see from Num. xxv. 1
sqq. how Israel was led astray by this temptation in the wilder-
ness. — Vers.. 17-26. The true way to worship Jehovah is then
pointed out, first of all negatively, in the prohibition against
making molten images, with an allusion to the worship of the
golden calf, as evinced by the use of the expression H3DD , fpK )
which only occurs again in Lev. xix. 4, instead of the phrase
" gods of silver and gold" (chap. xx. 23) ; and then positively,
by a command to observe the feast of Mazzoth and the conse-
cration of the first-born connected with the Passover (see at chap,
xiii. 2, ll,and 12), also the Sabbath (ver. 21),the feasts of Weeks
and Ingathering, the appearance of the male members of the
nation three times a year before the Lord (ver. 22, see at chap,
xxiii. 14-17), together with all the other instructions connected
with them (vers. 25, 26). Before the last, however, the promise
is introduced, that after the expulsion of the Canaanites, Jeho-
vah would enlarge the borders of Israel (cf. xxiii. 31), and make
their land so secure, that when they went up to the Lord three
times in the year, no one should desire their land, sc. because of
the universal dread of the might of their God (chap, xxiii. 27).
Vers. 27-35. Moses was to write down these words, like the
covenant rights and laws that had been given before (chap. xxiv.
4, 7), because Jehovah had concluded the covenant with Moses
and Israel according to the tenor of them. By the renewed
adoption of the nation, the covenant in chap. xxiv. was eo ipso
restored ; so that no fresh conclusion of this covenant was neces-
sary, and the writing down of the fundamental conditions of the
covenant was merely intended as a proof of its restoration. It
does not appear in the least degree " irreconcilable," therefore,
with the writing down of the covenant rights before (KnobeT). —
Ver. 28. Moses remained upon the mountain forty days, just as
on the former occasion (cf. xxiv. 18). " And He (Jehovah)
wrote upon the tables the ten covenant words " (see at ver. 1). —
Digitized by
Google
244 THK SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
Vers. 29 sqq. The sight of the glory of Jehovah, though only of
the back or reflection of it, produced such an effect npon Moses'
face, that the skin of it shone, though without Moses observing
it. When he came down from the mountain with the tables of
the law in his hand, and the skin of his face shone friK ^3"13, i.e.
on account of his talking with God, Aaron and the people were
afraid to go near him when they saw the brightness of his face.
But Moses called them to him, — viz. first of all Aaron and the
princes of the congregation to speak to them, and then all the
people to give them the commandments of Jehovah ; but on
doing this (ver. 33), he put a veil upon (before) his face, and only
took it away when he went in before Jehovah to speak with
Him, and then, when he came out (from the Lord out of the
tabernacle, of course after the erection of the tabernacle), he
made known His commands to the people. But while doing
this, he put the veil upon his face again, and always wore it
in his ordinary intercourse with the people (vers. 34, 35). This
reflection of the splendour thrown back by the glory of God
was henceforth to serve as the most striking proof of the con-
fidential relation in which Moses stood to Jehovah, and to set
forth the glory of the office which Moses filled. The Apostle
Paul embraces this view in 2 Cor. iii. 7 sqq., and lays stress
upon the fact that the glory was to be done away, which he
was quite justified in doing, although nothing is said in the
Old Testament about the glory being transient, from the
simple fact that Mos,es died. The apostle refers to it for the
purpose of contrasting the perishable glory of the law with
the far higher and imperishable glory of the Gospel. At the
same time he regards the veil which covered Moses' face as a
symbol of the obscuring of the truth revealed in the Old Tes-
tament. But this does not exhaust the significance of this
splendour. The office could only confer such glory upon
the possessor by virtue of the glory of the blessings which it
contained, and conveyed to those for whom it was established.
Consequently, the brilliant light on Moses' face also set forth
the glory of the Old Covenant, and was intended both for Moses
and the people as a foresight and pledge of the glory to which
Jehovah had called, and would eventually exalt, the people of
His possession.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXV. 1-29. 245
ERECTION OF THE TABERNACLE, AND PREPARATION OF THE
APPARATUS OF WORSHIP. — CHAP. XXXV.-XXXIX.
Chap. xxxv. 1-xxxvi. 7. Preliminaries to the Work. —
Chap. xxxv. 1-29. After the restoration of the covenant, Moses
announced to the people the divine commands with reference
to the holy place of the tabernacle which was to be built. He
repeated first of all (vers. 1-3) the law of the Sabbath accord-
ing to chap. xxxi. 13-17, and strengthened it by the announce-
ment, that on the Sabbath no fire was to be kindled in their
dwelling, because this rule was to be observed even in connec-
tion with the work to be done for the tabernacle. (For a fuller
comment, see at chap. xx. 9 sqq.) Then, in accordance with
the command of Jehovah, he first of all summoned the whole
nation to present freewill-offerings for the holy things to be pre-
pared (vers. 4, 5), mentioning one by one all the materials that
would be required (vers. 5-9, as in chap. xxv. 3-7) ; and after
that he called upon those who were endowed with understand-
ing to prepare the different articles, as prescribed in chap, xxv.-
xxx., mentioning these also one by one (vers. 11-19), even down
to the pegs of the dwelling and court (xxvii. 19), and " their
cords," i.e. the cords required to fasten the tent and the hang-
ings round the court to the pegs that were driven into the
ground, which had not been mentioned before, being altogether
subordinate things. (On the " cloths of service," ver. 19, see
at chap. xxxi. 10.) In vers. 20-29 we have an account of the
fulfilment of this command. The people went from Moses, i.e.
from the place where they were assembled, round Moses, away
to their tents, and willingly offered the things required as a
heave-offering for Jehovah ;' every one " whom his heart lifted
up," i.e. who felt himself inclined and stirred up in his heart to
do this. The men along with (?y as in Gen. xxxii. 12; see
Ewald, § 217) the women brought with a willing heart all
kinds of golden rings and jewellery: chak, lit. hook, here a
clasp or ring ; nezem, an ear or nose-ring (Gen. xxxv. 4, xxiv.
47) ; tabbaath, a finger-ring ; cumaz, globulus aureus, probably
little golden balls strung together like beads, which were worn
by the Israelites and Midianites (Num. xxxi. 50) as an orna-
ment round the wrist and neck, as Diod. Sic. relates that they
were by the Arabians (3, 44). "All kinds of golden jewellery,
Digitized by
Google
246 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
and every one who had waved (dedicated) a wave (offering) of
gold to Jehovah" sc. offered it for the work of the tabernacle.
The meaning is, that in addition to the many varieties of golden
ornaments, which were willingly offered for the work to be per-
formed, every one brought whatever gold he had set apart as a
wave-offering (a sacrificial gift) for Jehovah. T?? to wave, lit.
to swing or move to and fro, is used in connection with the
sacrificial ritual to denote a peculiar ceremony, through which
certain portions of a sacrifice, which were not intended for
burning upon the altar, but for the maintenance of the priests
(Num. xviii. 11),' were Consecrated to the Lord, or given up to
Him in a symbolical manner (see at Lev. vii. 30). Tenuphak,
the wave-offering, accordingly denoted primarily those portions
of the sacrificial animal which were allotted to the priests as
their share of the sacrifices ; and then, in a more general sense,
"every gift or offering that was consecrated to the Lord for the
establishment and maintenance of the sanctuary and its wor-
ship. In thi3 wider sense the term tenuphah (wave-offering) is
applied both here and in chap, xxxviii. 24, 29 to the gold and
copper presented by the congregation for the building of the
tabernacle. So that it does not really differ from terumah, a
lift or heave-offering, as every gift intended for the erection
and maintenance of the sanctuary was called, inasmuch as the
offerer lifted it off from his own property, to dedicate it to the
Lord for the purposes of His worship. Accordingly, in ver. 24
the freewill-offerings of the people in silver and gold for the
erection of the tabernacle are called teiiimah ; and in chap,
xxxvi. 6, all the gifts of metal, wood, leather, and woven
materials, presented by the people for the erection of the taber-
nacle, are called Bhp nonn (On heaving and the heave-offer-
ing, see at chap. xxv. 2 and Lev. ii. 9.) — Vers. 25, 26. AH
the women who understood it (were wise-hearted, as in chap,
xxviii. 3) spun with their hands, and presented what they spun,
viz. the yarn required for the blue and red purple cloth) the
crimson and the byssus; from which it is evident that the coloured
cloths were dyed in the yarn or in the wool, as was the case in
Egypt according to different specimens of old Egyptian cloths
(see ffengstenberg, Egypt and the Books of Moses, p. 144). Other
women spun goats' hair for the upper or outer covering of the
tent (xxvi. 7 sqq.). Spinning was done by the women in very
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXV 80-XXXVT 7. 247
early times (Plin. hist. n. 8, 48), particularly in Egypt, where
women are represented on the monuments as busily engaged
with the spindle (see Wilkinson, Manners ii. p. 60 ; iii. p. 133,
136), and at a later period among the Hebrews (Prov. xxxi. 19).
At the present day the women in the peninsula of Sinai spin the
materials for their tents from camels' and goats' hair, and pre-
pare sheep's wool for their clothing (Ruppell, Nubien, p. 202) ;
and at Neswa, in the province of Oman, the preparation of cotton
yarn is the principal employment of the women (Wellstedt, i.
p. 90). Weaving also was, and still is to a great extent, a
woman's work (cf. 2 Kings xxiii. 7) ; it is so among the Arab
tribes in the Wady Gkarandel, for example (Russegger, iii. 24),
and in Nubia (Burckhardt, Nub. p. 211) ; but at Neswa the
weaving is done by the men ( Wellstedt). The woven cloths for
the tabernacle were prepared by men, partly perhaps because
the weaving in Egypt was mostly done by the men (Herod. 2,
35 ; cf. Hengstenberg, p. 143), but chiefly for this reason, that
the cloths for the hangings and curtains were artistic works,
which the women did not understand, but which the men had
learned in Egypt, where artistic weaving was carried out to a
great extent ( Wilkinson, iii. pp. 113 sqq.). 1 — Vers. 27, 28. The
precious stones for the robes of the high priest, and the spices
for the incense and anointing oil, were presented by the princes
of the congregation, who had such costly things in their pos-
session.
Ver. 30-chap. xxxvi. 7. Moses then informed the people
that God had called Bezaleel and Aholiab as master-builders, to
complete the building and all the work connected with it, and
had not only endowed them with His Spirit, that they might
draw the plans for the different works and carry them out, but
" had put it into his (Bezaleel' s) heart to teach " (ver. 34), that
is to say, had qualified him to instruct labourers to prepare the
different articles under his supervision and guidance. " He and
Aholiab" (ver 34) are in apposition to " his heart: " into his and
Aholiab's heart (see Ges. § 121, 3 ; Ewald, § 311 a). The con-
cluding words in ver. 35 are iii apposition to Dnfc (them) : " them
hath He filled with wisdom .... as performers of every kind
of work and inventors of designs," i.e. that they, may make
* For drawings of the Egyptian weaving-stool, see Wilkinson, iii. p.
135 ; also Hartmann, die Hebraerinn am Putztisch i. Taf . 1.
Digitized by
Google
248 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
every kind of work and may invent designs. In chap, xxxvi. 1,
nt5»jn with vav co'nsec. is dependent upon what precedes, and signi-
fies either, "and so will make," or, so that he will make (see Ewald,
§ 342 b). The idea is this, " Bezaleel, Aholiab, and the other
men who understand, into whom Jehovah has infused (a JTU)
wisdom and understanding, that they may know how to do,
shall do every work for the holy service (worship) with regard
to (? as in chap, xxviii. 38, etc.) all that Jehovah has com-
manded." — Vers. 2-7. Moses then summoned the master-builders
named, and all who were skilled in art, " evertf one whom his
heart lifted up to come near to the work to do it " (i.e. who felt
himself stirred up in heart to take part in the work), and handed
over to them the heave-offering presented by the people for that
purpose, whilst the children of Israel still continued bringing
freewill-offerings every morning. — Ver. 4. Then the wise work-
men came, every one from his work that they were making,
and said to Moses, " Much make the people to bring, more than
suffices for tlie labour (the finishing, as in chap, xxvii. 19) of
the work," i.e. they are bringing more than will be wanted for
carrying out the work (the f? in *TO is comparative) ; whereupon
Moses let the cry go through the camp, i.e. had proclamation
made, " No one is to make any more property (p%*fy? as in chap,
xxii. 7, 10, cf. Gen. xxxiii. 14) for a holy heave-offering," i.e. to
prepare anything more from his own property to offer for the
building of the sanctuary ; and with this he put a stop to any
further offerings. — Ver. 7. "And there was enough (DJ1 their
sufficiency, i.e. the requisite supply for the different things to be
made) of the property for every work to make it, and over " (lit.
and to leave some over). By this liberal contribution of free-
will gifts, for the work commanded by the Lord, the people
proved their willingness to uphold their covenant relationship
with Jehovah their God.
Chap, xxxvi. 8-xxxviii. 20. Execution op the Work. —
Preparation of the dwelling-place: viz. the hangings and coverings
(chap, xxxvi. 8-19, as in chap. xxvi. 1-14) ; the wooden boards
and bolts (vers. 20-34, as in chap. xxvi. 15-30) ; the two cur-
tains, with the pillars, hooks, and rods that supported them (vers.
35-38, as in chap. xxvi. 31-37). As these have all been already
explained, the only thing remaining to be noticed here is, that
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXVIII. 21-81. 249
the verbs <Wp) in ver. 8, "BTW in ver. 10, etc., are in the third
person singular with an indefinite subject, corresponding to the
German man (the French on). — Preparation of the vessels of the
dwelling : viz. the ark of the covenant (chap, xxxvii. 1-9, as in
chap. xxv. 10-22) ; the table of shew-bread and its vessels
(vers. 10-16, as in chap. xxv. 23-30) ; the candlestick (vers.
17-24, as in chap. xxv. 31-40) ; the altar of incense (vers. 25-
28, as in chap. xxx. 1-10) ; the anointing oil and incense (ver.
29), directions for the preparation of which are given in chap,
xxx. 22-38 ; the altar of burnt-offering (chap, xxxviii. 1-7, as
in chap, xxvii. 1-8) ; the laver (ver. 8, as in chap. xxx. 17-21) ;
and the court (vers. 9-20, as in chap, xxvii. 9-19). The order
corresponds on the whole to the list of the separate articles in
chap. xxxv. 11-19, and to the construction of the entire sanc-
tuary ; but the holy chest (the ark), as being the most holy thing
of all, is distinguished above all the rest, by being expressly
mentioned as the work of Bezaleel, the chief architect of the
whole.
Chap, xxxviii. 21-31. Estimate of the amount op
Metal used. — Ver. 21. " These are the numbered things of
the dwelling, of the dwelling of the testimony, tliat were numbered
at ike command of Moses, through the service of the Levites, by
the hand of Ithamar, the son of Aaron the priest." D^'pS does
not mean the numbering (equivalent to liJBO 2 Sam. iv. 9, or
n^B 2 Chron. xvii. 14, xxvi. 11), as Knobel supposes, but here
as elsewhere, even in Num. xxvi. 63, 64, it signifies "the num-
bered ; " the only difference being, that in most cases it refers to
persons, here to things, and that the reckoning consisted not
merely in the counting and entering of the different things, but
in ascertaining their weight and estimating their worth. Lyra
has given the following correct rendering of this heading : " hcec
est summa numeri ponderis eorum, qua facta sunt in tabernaculo
ex auro, argento et cere" It was apparently superfluous to enu-
merate the different articles again, as this had been repeatedly
done before. The weight of the different metals, therefore, is
all that is given. The " dwelling" is still further described as
"the dwelling of the testimony," because the testimony, i.e. the
decalogue written with the finger of God upon the tables of stone,
was kept in the dwelling, and this testimony formed the base of
Digitized by
Google
7.3 *
250 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
the throne of Jehovah, and was the material pledge that Jeho-
vah would cause His name, His manifested presence, to dwell
there, and would thus show Himself to His people in grace and
righteousness. " That which was numbered " is an explanatory
apposition to the previous clause, " the numbering of the dwell-
ing ; " and the words DW JTlby, which follow, are an accusative
construed freely to indicate more particularly the mode of num-
bering {Ewald, § 204 a), viz. " through the service," or " by
means of the service of the Levites," not for their service.
" By the hand of Ithamar : " who presided over the calculations
which the Levites carried out under his superintendence. —
Vers. 22, 23. The allusion to the service of the Levites under
Ithamar leads the historian to mention once more the architects
of the whole building, and the different works connected with it
(cf. chap. xxxi. 2 sqq.). — Ver. 24. " (As for) all the gold that
was used C*ty>\}) for the work in every kind of holy work, the
gold of the wave-offering (the gold that was offered as a wave-
offering, see at chap. xxxv. 22) was (amounted to) 29 talents
and 730 shekels in holy shekel," that is to say, 87,370 shekels or
877,300 thalers (L.131,595), if we accept Thenius' estimate, that
the gold shekel was worth 10 thalers (L.l, 10s.), which is.pro-
bably very near the truth. — Vers. 25 sqq. Of the silver, all that
is mentioned is the amount of atonement-money raised from
those who were numbered (see at chap. xxx. 12 sqq.) at the rate
of half a shekel for every male, without including the freewill-
offerings of silver (chap. xxxv. 24, cf. chap. xxv. 3), whether it
was that they were too insignificant, or that they were not used
for the work, but were placed with the excess mentioned in
chap, xxxvi. 7. The result of the numbering gave 603,550
men, every one of whom paid half a shekel. This would yield
301,775 shekels, or 100 talents and 1775 shekels, which proves
by the way that a talent contained 3000 shekels. A hundred
talents of this were used for casting 96 sockets for the 48 boards,
and 4 sockets for the 4 pillars of the inner court,— one talent
therefore for each socket, — and the 1775 shekels for the hooks of
the pillars that sustained the curtains, for silvering their capitals,
and " for binding the pillars," i.e. for making the silver con-
necting rods for the pillars of the court (chap, xxvii. 10, 11,
xxxviii. 10 sqq.). — Vers. 29 sqq. The copper of the wave-offer-
ing amounted to 70 talents and 2400 shekels ; and of this the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXVIII. 21-81. 251
sockets of the pillars at the entrance of the tabernacle (chap,
xxvi. 37), the altar of burnt-offering with its network and vessels,
the supports of the pillars of the court, all the pegs of the dwell-
ing and court, and, what is not expressly mentioned here, the
laver with its support (xxx. 18), were made. 3 nfe>p to work in
(with) copper, i.e. to make of copper.
If this quantity of the precious metals may possibly strike
some readers as very large, and was in fact brought forward
years ago as a reason for questioning the historical credibility of
our account of the building of the tabernacle, it has been fre-
quently urged, on the other hand, that it looks quite small, in
comparison with the quantities of gold and silver that have been
found accumulated in the East, in both ancient and modern
times. According to the account before us, the requisite amount
of silver was raised by the comparatively small payment of
half a shekel, about fifteen pence, for every male Israelite of
20 years old and upwards. Now no tenable objection can be
raised against the payment of such a tribute, since we have no
reason whatever for supposing the Israelites to have been
paupers, notwithstanding the oppression which they endured
during the closing period of their stay in Egypt. They were
settled in the most fertile part of Egypt ; and coined silver was
current in western Asia even in the time of the patriarchs (Gen.
xxiii. 16). But with reference to the quantities of gold and
copper that were delivered, we need not point to the immense
stores of gold and other metals that were kept in the capitals of
the Asiatic kingdoms of antiquity, 1 but will merely call to mind
the fact, that the kings of Egypt possessed many large gold
mines on the frontiers of the country, and in the neighbouring
lands of Arabia and Ethiopia, which were worked by criminals,
prisoners of war, and others, under the harshest pressure, and
the very earliest times copper mines were discovered on the
1 Thus, to mention only one or two examples, the images in 'the temple
of Belus, at Babylon, consisted of several thousand talents of gold, to say
nothing of the golden tables, the bedsteads, and other articles of gold and
silver (Diod. Sic. 2, 9 ; Herod. 1, 181, 183). In the siege of Nineveh, Sar-
danapalus erected a funeral pile, upon which he collected all his wealth, in-
cluding 150 golden bedsteads, 150 golden tables, a million talents of gold,
and ten times as much silver and other valuables, to prevent their falling
into the hands of the foe (Ctesias in Athen. 12, 38, p. 529). According to a
Digitized by
Google
252 THE SECOND BOOK OF HOSES.
Arabian peninsula, which were worked by a colony of labourers
(Lepsius, Letters from Egypt, p. 336). Moreover, the love of
the ancient Egyptians for valuable and elegant ornaments, gold
rings, necklaces, etc., is sufficiently known from the monuments
(see Rosellini in Hengstenberg' s Egypt, p. 137). Is it not likely,
then, that the Israelites should have acquired a taste for jewellery
of this kind, and should have possessed or discovered the means
of procuring all kinds of gold and silver decorations, not to men-
tion the gold and silver jewellery which they received from the
Egyptians on their departure ? The liking for such things even
among nomad tribes is very well known. Thus, for example,
after the defeat of the Midianites, the Israelites carried off so
much gold, silver, copper, and other metals as • spoil, that their
princes alone were able to offer 16,750 shekels of gold as a
heave-offering to Jehovah from the booty that had been obtained
in this kind of jewellery (Num. xxxi. 50 sqq.). Diodorus /Sic.
(3, 44) and Strabo (xvi. p. 778) bear witness to the great
wealth of the Nabateans and other Arab tribes on the Elanitic
Gulf, and mention not only a river, said to flow through the
land, carrying gold dust with it, but also gold that was dug up,
and which was found, " not in the form of sand, but of nuggets,
which did not require much cleaning, and the smallest of which
were of the size of a nut, the average size being that of a medlar,
whilst the largest pieces were as big as a walnut. These they
bored, and made necklaces or bracelets by stringing them to-
gether alternately with transparent stones. They also sold the
gold very cheap to their neighbours, giving three times the
quantity for copper, and double the quantity for iron, both on
account of their inability to work these metals, and also because
of the scarcity of the metals which were so much more neces-
sary for daily use" (Strabo). The Sabaeans and Gerrhaeans
are also mentioned as the richest of all the tribes of Arabia,
statement in Pliny's Hist. Nat. 33, 8, on the conquest of Asia by Cyrus,
he carried off booty to the extent of 84,000 lbs. of gold, beside the golden
vessels and 500,000 talents of silver, including the goblet of Semiramis,
which alone weighed 15 talents. Alexander the Great found more than
40,000 talenta of gold and silver and 9000 talents of coined gold in the
royal treasury at Susa (Diod. Sic. 17, 66), and a treasure of 120,000
talents of gold in the citadel of Persepolis (Diod. Sic. 17, 71 ; Curtius, v.
6, 9). For further accounts of the enormous wealth of Asia in gold and
silver, see liahr, Symbolik i. pp. 258 sqc[.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXIX. 1-81. 253
through their trade in incense and in cinnamon and other spices. 1
From the Arabs, who carried on a very extensive caravan
trade through the desert even at that time, the Israelites would
be able to purchase such spices and materials for the building
of the tabernacle as they had not brought with them from
Egypt ; and in Egypt itself, where all descriptions of art and
handicraft were cultivated from the very earliest times (for
proofs see Hengst. Egypt, pp. 133—139), they might so far have
acquired all the mechanical and artistic ability required for the
work, that skilled artisans could carry out all that was prescribed,
under the superintendence of the two master-builders who had
been specially inspired for the purpose.
Chap, xxxix. 1-31. Preparation of the priests' clothes. — Pre-
vious to the description of the dress itself, we have a statement
in ver. 1 of the materials employed, and the purpose to which
they were devoted (" cloths of service," see at chap. xxxi. 10).
The robes consisted of the ephod (vers. 2-7, as in chap, xxviii.
6-12), the ehoshen or breastplate (vers. 8-21, as in chap, xxviii.
15-29), the meil or over-coat (vers. 22-26, as in chap, xxviii.
31-34) ; the body-coats, turbans, drawers, and girdles, for Aaron
and his sons (vers. 27-29, as in chap, xxviii. 39, 40, and 42).
The Urim and Thummim are not mentioned (cf. chap, xxviii.
30). The head-dresses of the ordinary priests, which are simply
called "bonnets" in chap, xxviii. 40, are called "goodly bonnets"
or " ornamental caps" in ver. 28 of this chapter (nS>330 t!^.?>
from 1KB an ornament, cf. "1KB ornatus fuit). The singular,
"girdle" in ver. 29, with the definite article, " the girdle" might
appear to refer simply to Aaron's girdle, i.e. the girdle of the
high priest ; but as there is no special description of the girdles
of Aaron's sons (the ordinary priests) in chap. xxix. 40, where
they are distinctly mentioned and called by the same name
(abnet) as the girdle of Aaron himself, we can only conclude
1 " They possess an immense quantity of gold and Bilver articles, such
as beds, tripods, bowls, and cups, in addition to the decorations of their
houses; for doors, walls, and ceilings are all wrought with ivory, gold,
silver, and precious stones" (Strabo ut sup.). In accordance with this,
Pliny (h. n. 6, 28) not only calk the Sabteans " ditissimos silvarum fertiU-
tate odorifera, auri melallis, etc." but the tribes of Arabia in general, " t'n
universum gentes ditissimos, ut apud quas maxim* opes Romanorum Par-
thenon que subsistant, vendentibus que e mari out silvis capiunt, nihil invicem
redimentibus."
Digitized by
Google
254 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
that they were of the same materials and the same form and
make as the latter, and that the singular, B?2Kn, is used here
either in the most general manner, or as a generic noun in a
collective sense (see Ges. § 109, 1). The last thing mentioned
is the diadem upon Aaron's turban (vers. 30, 31, as in chap.
xxviii. 36-38), so that the order in which the priests' robes are
given here is analogous to the position in which the ark of the
covenant and the golden altar stand to one another in the direc-
tions concerning the sacred things in chap, xxv.-xxx. "For just
as all the other things are there placed between the holy ark and
the golden altar as the two poles, so here all the rest of the
priests' robes are included between the shoulder-dress, the prin-
cipal part of the official robes of the high priest, and the golden
frontlet, the inscription upon which rendered it the most strik-
ing sign of the dignity of his office" (Baumgarteri).
Vers. 32-43. Delivery of the work to Moses. — The different
things are again mentioned one by one. By " the tent," in
ver. 33, we are to understand the two tent-cloths, the one of
purple and the other of goats' hair, by which the dwelling (1?^?,
generally rendered tabernacle) was made into a tent fyty. From
this it is perfectly obvious, that the variegated cloth formed the
inner walls of the dwelling, or covered the boards on the inner
side, and that the goats' hair-cloth formed the other covering.
Moreover it is also obvious, that this is the way in which
pnxn is to be understood, from the fact, that in the list of the
things belonging to the ohel the first to be mentioned are the
gold and copper hooks (xxvi. 6, 11) with which the two halves
of the drapery that formed the tent were joined together, and
then after that the boards, bolts, pillars, and sockets, as though
subordinate to the tent-cloths, and only intended to answer the
purpose of spreading them out into a tent or dwelling. —
Ver. 37. u The lamps of the order" i.e. the lamps set in order
upon the candlestick. In addition to all the vessels of the sanc-
tuary, shew-bread (ver. 36), holy oil for the candlestick and for
anointing, and fragrant incense (ver. 38), were also prepared
and delivered to Moses, — everything, therefore, that was re-
quired for the institution of the daily worship, as soon as the
tabernacle was set up. — Ver. 40. " Vessels of service:" see
chap, xxvii. 19. — Ver. 43. When Moses had received and ex-
amined all the different articles, and found that everything was
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XI. t-16. 255
made according to the directions of Jehovah, he blessed the
children of Israel. The readiness and liberality with which the
people had presented the gifts required for this work, and the
zeal which they had shown in executing the whole of the work
in rather less than half a year (see at chap. xl. 17), were most
cheering signs of the willingness of the Israelites to serve the
Lord, for which they could not fail to receive the blessing
of God.
ERECTION AND CONSECRATION - OF THE TABERNACLE.
CHAP. XL.
Vers. 1-16. After the completion of all the works, the com-
mand was given by God to Moses to set up the dwelling of the
tabernacle on the first day of the first month (see at chap xix. 1),
se. in the second year of the Exodus (see ver. 17), and to put all
the vessels, both of the dwelling and court, in the places ap-
pointed by God ; also to furnish the table of shew-bread with
its fitting out (^2ny = DW T$ ver. 23), i.e. to arrange the bread
upon it in the manner prescribed (ver. 4 cf. Lev. xxiv. 6, 7), and
to put water in the laver of the court (ver. 7). After that he
was to anoint the dwelling and everything in it, also the altar of
burnt-offering and laver, with the anointing oil, and to sanctify
them (vers. 9-11) ; and to consecrate Aaron and his sons before
the door of the tabernacle, and clothe them, anoint them, and
sanctify them as priests (vers. 12-15). When we read here, how-
ever, that the dwelling and the vessels therein would be rendered
"holy" through the anointing, but the altar of burnt-offering
"most holy" we are not to understand this as attributing a
higher degree of holiness to the altar of burnt-offering than to
the dwelling and its furniture ; but the former is called " most
holy" merely in the sense ascribed to it in chap. xxx. 10, namely,
that every one who touched it was to become holy ; in other
words, the distinction has reference to the fact, that, standing as
it did in the court, it was more exposed to contact from the
people than the vessels in the dwelling, which no layman was
allowed to enter. In this relative sense we find the same state-
ment in chap. xxx. 29, with reference to the tabernacle and all
the vessels therein, the dwelling as well as the court, that they
would become most holy in consequence of the anointing (see
Digitized by
Google
256 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
the remarks on chap. xxx. 10). It is stated provisionally, in ver.
16, that this command was fulfilled by Moses. But from the
further history we find that the consecration of the priests did
not take place contemporaneously with the erection of the taber-
nacle, but somewhat later, or not till after the promulgation of
the laws of sacrifice (cf. Lev. viii. and Lev. i. 1 sqq.).
Vers. 17-33. On the day mentioned in ver. 2 the dwelling
and court were erected. As not quite nine months had elapsed
between the arrival of the Israelites at Sinai, in the third month
after the Exodus (chap. xix. 1), and the first day of the second
year, when the work was finished and handed over to Moses, the
building, and all the work connected with it, had not occupied
quite half a year ; as we have to deduct from the nine months
(or somewhat less) not only the eighty days which Moses
spent upon Sinai (chap. xxiv. 18, xxxiv. 28), but the days of
preparation for the giving of the law and conclusion of the
covenant (chap. xix. 1-xxiv. 11), and the interval between the
first and second stay that Moses made upon the mountain (chap,
xxxii. and xxxiii.). The erection of the dwelling commenced
with the fixing of the sockets, into which the boards were placed
and fastened with their bolts, and the setting up of the pillars
for the curtains (ver. 18). " He (Moses) then spread the tent over
the dwelling, and laid the covering of the tent upon the top." By
the " covering of the tent" we are to understand the two cover-
ings, made of red ranis' skins and the skins of the sea-cow (chap,
xxvi. 14). In analogy with this, ?nkrrnK fene denotes not only
the roofing with the goats' hair, but the spreading out of the
inner cloth of mixed colours upon the wooden frame-work. —
Vers. 20-21. Arrangement of the ark. " He took and put the
testimony into the ark." nvijpn does not mean " the revelation,
so far as it existed already, viz. with regard to the erection of
the sanctuary and institution of the priesthood (chap.xxv.-xxxL),
and so forth," as Knobel arbitrarily supposes, but " the testi-
mony," i.e. the decalogue written upon the two tables of stone,
or the tables of the covenant with the ten words ; " the testi-
mony," therefore, is an abbreviated expression for " the tables of
testimony" (chap. xxxi. 18, see at chap. xxv. 16). After the
ark had been brought into the dwelling, he "hung the curtain"
(vail, see at chap. xxvi. 31 ; lit. placed it upon the hooks of the
pillars), " and so covered over the ark of the testimony," since
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XL. 17-88. 257
the ark, when placed in the back part of the dwelling, was covered
or concealed from persons entering the dwelling or the holy place.
— Vers. 22-28. Arrangement of the front room of the dwelling.
The table was placed on the right side, towards the north, and
the shew-bread was laid npon it. EH? "SQy does not signify " a
row of bread," bnt the "position or placing of bread;" for,
according to Lev. xxiv. 6, 7, the twelve loaves of shew-bread
were placed upon the table in two rows, corresponding to the
size of the tables (two cubits long and one cubit broad). The
candlestick was placed upon the left side, opposite to the table,
and the golden altar in front of the curtain, i.e. midway between
the two sides, but near the curtain in front of the most holy
place (see at chap. xxx. 6). After these things had been placed,
the curtain was hung in the door of the dwelling. — Vers. 29-32.
The altar of burnt-offering was then placed " before the door of the
dwelling of the tabernacle," and the laver " between the tabernacle
and the altar" from which it is evident that the altar was not
placed close to the entrance to the dwelling, but at some distance
off, though in a straight line with the door. The laver, which
stood between the altar and the entrance to the dwelling, was
probably placed more to the side ; so that when the priests washed
their hands and feet, before entering the dwelling or approach-
ing the altar, there was no necessity for them to go round the
altar, or to pass close by it, in order to get to the laver. Last of
all the court was erected round about the dwelling and the altar,
by the setting up of the pillars, which enclosed the space round
the dwelling and the altar with their drapery, and the banging
up of the curtain at the entrance to the court. There is no allu-
sion to the anointing of these holy places and things, as com-
manded in vers. 9-11, in the account of their erection ; for this
did not take place till afterwards, viz. at the consecration of
Aaron and his sons as priests (Lev. viii. 10, 11). It is stated,
however, on the other hand, that as the vessels were arranged,
Moses laid out the shew-bread upon the table (ver. 23), burned
sweet incense upon the golden altar (ver. 27), and offered " the
burnt-offering and meat-offering," i.e. the daily morning and
evening sacrifice, upon the altar of burnt-offering (chap. xxix.
38-42). Consequently the sacrificial service was performed
upon them before they had been anointed. Although this may
appear surprising, there is no ground for rejecting a conclusion,
PENT. — VOL. II. B
Digitized by
Google
258 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
•which follows so naturally from the words of the text. The
tabernacle and its furniture were not made holy things for the
first time by the anointing ; this simply sanctified them for the
use of the nation, t.«. for the service which the priests were to
perform in connection with them on behalf of the congregation
(see at Lev. viii. 10, 11). They were made holy things and
holy vessels by the fact that they were built, prepared, and set
up, according to the instructions given by Jehovah ; and still
more by the fact, that after the tabernacle had been erected as
a dwelling, the " glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle" (ver.
34). But the glory of the Lord entered the dwelling before the
consecration of the priests, and the accompanying anointing of
the tabernacle and its vessels ; for, according to Lev. i. 1 sqq.,
it was from the tabernacle that Jehovah spake to Moses, when
He gave him the laws of sacrifice, which were promulgated
before the consecration of the priests, and were carried out in
connection with it. But when the glory of the Lord had found
a dwelling-place in the tabernacle, Moses was not required to
offer continually the sacrifice prescribed for every morning and
evening, and by means of this sacrifice to place the congregation
in spiritual fellowship with its God, until Aaron and his sons had
been consecrated for this service.
Vers. 34-38. When the sanctuary, that had been built for
the Lord for a dwelling in Israel, had been set up with all its
apparatus, "the cloud covered the tabernacle, and the glory of
Jehovah filled the dwelling," so that Moses was unable to enter.
The cloud, in which Jehovah had hitherto been present with His
people, and guided and protected them upon their journeying
(see at chap. xiii. 21, 22), now came down upon the tabernacle
and filled the dwelling with the gracious presence of the Lord.
So long as this cloud rested upon the tabernacle the children of
Israel remained encamped ; but when it ascended, they broke up
the encampment to proceed onwards. This sign was Jehovah's
command for encamping or going forward "throughout all their
journeys" (vers. 36-38). This statement is repeated still more
elaborately in Num. ix. 15—23. The mode in which the glory
of Jehovah filled the dwelling, or in which Jehovah manifested
His presence within it, is not described ; but the glory of Jeho-
vah filling the dwelling is clearly distinguished from the cloud
coming down upon the tabernacle. It is obvious, however, from
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XL. 34-88. 259
Lev. xvi. 2, and 1 Kings viii. 10, 11, that in the dwelling the
glory of God was also manifested in a cloud. At the dedication
of the temple (1 Kings viii. 10, 11) the expression "the cloud
filled the house of Jehovah " is used interchangeably with " the
glory of Jehovah filled the house of Jehovah." To consecrate
the sanctuary, which had been finished and erected as His dwell-
ing, and to give to the people a visible proof that He had chosen
it for His dwelling, Jehovah filled the dwelling in both its parts
with the cloud which shadowed forth His presence, so that Moses
was unable to enter it. This cloud afterwards drew back into
the most holy place, to dwell there, above the outspread wings
of the cherubim of the ark of the covenant ; so that Moses and
(at a later period) the priests were able to enter the holy place
and perform the required service there, without seeing the sign
of the gracious presence of God, which was hidden by the cur-
tain of the most holy place. So long as the Israelites were on
their journey to Canaan, the presence of Jehovah was mani-
fested outwardly and visibly by the cloud, which settled upon
the ark, and rose up from it when they were to travel onward.
With the completion of this building and its divine consecra-
tion, Israel had now received a real pledge of the permanence of
the covenant of grace, which Jehovah had concluded with it ; a
sanctuary which perfectly corresponded to the existing circum-
stances of its religious development, and kept constantly before
it the end of its calling from God. For although God dwelt in
the tabernacle in the midst of His people, and the Israelites might
appear before Him, to pray for and receive the covenant bless-
ings that were promised them, they were still forbidden to go
directly to God's throne of grace. The barrier, which sin had
erected between the holy God and the unholy nation, was not yet
taken away. To this end the law was given, which could only
increase their consciousness of sin and unworthiness before God.
But. as this barrier had already been broken through by the
promise of the Lord, that He would meet the people in His
glory before the door of the tabernacle at the altar of burnt-
offering (chap. xxix. 42, 43); so the entrance of the chosen people
into the dwelling of God was effected mediatorially by the
service of the sanctified priests in the holy place, which also pre-
figured their eventual reception into the house of the Lord.
And even the curtain, which still hid the glory of God from the
Digitized by
Google
260 THE SECOND BOOK OF MOSES.
chosen priests and sanctified mediators of the nation, was to be
lifted at least once a year by the anointed priest, who had been
called by God to be the representative of the whole congrega-
tion. On the day of atonement the high priest was to sprinkle
the blood of atonement in front of the throne of grace, to make
expiation for the children of Israel because of all their sin (Lev.
xvi.), and to prefigure the perfect atonement through the blood
of the eternal Mediator, through which the way to the throne of
grace is opened to all believers, that they may go into the house
of God and abide there for ever, and for ever see God.
Digitized by
Google
THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
(LEVITICUS.)
INTRODUCTION.
CONTENTS AND PLAN OF LEVITICUS.
IHE third book of Moses is headed top^ in the original
text, from the opening word. In the Septuagint
and Vulgate it is called Aevirucov, sc. fii&Xiop,
Leviticus, from the leading character of its contents,
and probably also with some reference to the titles which had
obtained currency among the Kabbins, viz. " law of the priests,"
" law-book of sacrificial offerings." It carries on to its comple-
tion the giving of the law at Sinai, which commenced at Ex. xxv.,
and by which the covenant constitution was firmly established.
It contains more particularly the laws regulating the relation of
Israel to its God, including both the fundamental principles
upon which its covenant fellowship with the Lord depended, and
the directions for the sanctification of the covenant people in
that communion. Consequently the laws contained in this
book might justly be described as the "spiritual statute-book
of Israel as the congregation of Jehovah." As every treaty
establishes a reciprocal relation between those who are parties to
it, so not only did Jehovah as Lord of the whole earth enter into
a special relation to His chosen people Israel in the covenant
made by Him with the seed of Abraham, which He had chosen
as His own possession out of all the nations, but the nation of
Israel was also to be brought into a real and living fellowship
with. Him as its God and Lord. And whereas Jehovah would
he Israel's God, manifesting Himself to it in all the fulness of
Digitized by
Google
262 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
His divine nature ; so was it also His purpose to train Israel as
His own nation, to sanctify it for the truest life in fellowship
with Him, and to bless it with all the fulness of His salvation. To
give effect to the former, or the first condition of the covenant,
God had commanded the erection of a sanctuary for the dwelling-
place of His name, or the true manifestation of His own essence ;
and on its erection, i.e. on the setting up of the tabernacle, He
filled the most holy place with a visible sign of His divine glory
(Ex. xl. 34), a proof that He would be ever near and present to
His people with His almighty grace. When this was done, it
was necessary that the other side of the covenant relation should
be realized in a manner suited to the spiritual, religious, and
moral condition of Israel, in order that Israel might become His
people in truth. But as the nation of Israel was separated from
God, the Holy One, by the sin and unholiness of its nature,
the only way in which God could render access to His gracious
presence possible, was by institutions and legal regulations, which
served on the one hand to sharpen the consciousness of sin in the
hearts of the people, and thereby to awaken the desire for mercy
and for reconciliation with the holy God, and on the other hand
furnished them with the means of expiating their sins and
sanctifying their walk before God according to the standard of
His holy commandments.
All the laws and regulations of Leviticus have this for their
object, inasmuch as they, each and all, aim quite as much at the
restoration of an inward fellowship on the part of the nation as
a whole and the individual members with Jehovah their God,
through the expiation or forgiveness of sin and the removal of
all natural uncleanness, as at the strengthening and deepening
of this fellowship by the sanctification of every relation of life.
In accordance with this twofold object, the contents of the book
are arranged in two larger series of laws and rules of life, the
first extending from chap. i. to chap, xvi., the second from
chap. xvii. to chap. xxv. The first of these, which, occupies the
earlier half of the book of Leviticus, opens with the laws of
sacrifice in chap. i.-vii. As sacrifices had been from the very
beginning the principal medium by which men entered into
fellowship with God, the Creator, Preserver, and Governor of
the world, to supplicate and appropriate His favour and grace,
so Israel was not only permitted to draw near to its God with
Digitized by
Google
INTRODUCTION. 263
sacrificial gifts, but, by thus offering its sacrifices according to
the precepts of the divine law, would have an ever open way of
access to the throne of grace. The laws of sacrifice are followed
in chap, viii.-x. by the consecration of Aaron and his sons, the
divinely appointed priests, by their solemn entrance upon their
official duties, and by the sanctification of their priesthood on the
part of God, both in word and act. Then follow in chap. xi.-xv.
the regulations concerning the clean and unclean animals, and
various bodily impurities, with directions for the removal of all
defilements ; and these regulations culminate in the institution
of a yearly day of atonement (chap, xvi.), inasmuch as this day,
with its all-embracing expiation, foreshadowed typically and
prefigured prophetically the ultimate and highest aim of the
Old Testament economy, viz. perfect reconciliation. Whilst all
these laws and institutions opened up to the people of Israel the
way of access to the throne of grace, the second series of laws,
contained in the later half of the book (chap, xvii.-xxv.), set
forth the demands made by the holiness of God upon His
people, that they might remain in fellowship with Him, and
rejoice in the blessings of His grace. This series of laws com-
mences with directions for the sanctification of life in food,
marriage, and morals (chap, xvii.— xx.) ; it then advances to the
holiness of the priests and the sacrifices (chaps, xxi. and xxii.),
and from that to the sanctificatioh of the feasts and the daily
worship of God (chaps, xxiii. and xxiv.), and closes with the
sanctification of the whole land by the appointment of the
sabbatical and jubilee years (chap. xxv.). In these the sancti-
fication of Israel as the congregation of Jehovah was to be
glorified into the blessedness of the sabbatical rest in the full
enjoyment of the blessings of the saving grace of its God ; and
in the keeping of the year of jubilee more especially, the land
and kingdom of Israel were to be transformed into a kingdom
of peace and liberty, which also foreshadowed typically and
prefigured prophetically the time of the completion of the
kingdom of God, the dawn of the glorious liberty of the chil-
dren of God, when the bondage of sin and death shall be abo-
lished for ever.
Whilst, therefore, the laws of sacrifice and purification, on
the one hand, culminate in the institution of the yearly day of
atonement, so, on the other, do those relating to the sanctification
Digitized by
Google
264 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
of life culminate in the appointment of the sabbatical and
jubilee years ; and thus the two series of laws in Leviticus are
placed in unmistakeable correspondence to one another. In the
ordinances, rights, and laws thus given to the covenant nation,
not only was the way clearly indicated, by which the end of its
divine calling was to be attained, but a constitution was given
to it, fully adapted to all the conditions incident to this end, and
this completed the establishment of the kingdom of God in
Israel. To give a finish, however, to the covenant transaction
at Sinai, it was still necessary to impress upon the hearts of the
people, on the one hand, the blessings that would follow the
faithful observance of the covenant of their God, and on the
other hand, the evil of transgressing it (chap. xxvi.). To this
there are also added, in the form of an appendix, the instruc-
tions concerning vows. The book of Leviticus is thus rounded
off, and its unity and independence within the Tliorah are estab-
lished, not only by the internal unity of its laws and their
organic connection, but also by the fact, so clearly proved by
the closing formula in chap. xxvi. 46 and xxvii. 34, that it
finishes with the conclusion of the giving of the law at Sinai.
EXPOSITION.
I. LAWS AND ORDINANCES DETERMINING THE COVENANT
FELLOWSHIP BETWEEN THE LORD AND ISRAEL,
Chap, i.-xvt.
the laws of sacrifice. — chap. i.- vii.
When the glory of the Lord had entered the tabernacle in a
cloud, God revealed Himself to Moses from this place of His
gracious presence, according to His promise in Ex. xxv. 22, to
make known His sacred will through him to the people (i. 1).
The first of these revelations related to the sacrifices, in which
the Israelites were to draw near to Him, that they might become
partakers of His grace. 1
1 Works relating to the sacrifices : Guil. Outram de sacrifiriis Ubri duo,
Amst. 1688; Btihr, Symbotik des mos. Cultus ii. pp. 189 sqq. ; Kurtz on the*
Digitized by
Google
chap. i.-vn. 265
The patriarchs, when sojourning in Canaan, had already-
worshipped the God who revealed Himself to them, with both
burnt-offerings and slain-offerings. Whether their descendants,
the children of Israel, had offered sacrifices to the God of their
fathers during their stay in the foreign land of Egypt, we can-
not tell, as there is no allusion whatever to the subject in the
short account of these 430 years. So much, however, is cer-
tain, that they had not forgotten to regard the sacrifices as a
leading part of the worship of God, and were ready to follow
Moses into the desert, to serve the God of their fathers there
by a solemn act of sacrificial worship (Ex. v. 1-3, compared
with chap. iv. 31, viii. 4, etc.) ; and also, that after the exodus
from Egypt, not only did Jethro offer burnt-offerings and slain-
offerings to God in the camp of the Israelites, and prepare a
sacrificial meal in which the elders of Israel took part along
with Moses and Aaron (Ex. xviii. 12), but young men offered
burnt-offerings and slain-offerings by the command of Moses at
the conclusion of the covenant (Ex. xxiv. 5). Consequently
the sacrificial laws of these chapters presuppose the presentation
of burnt-offerings, meat-offerings, and slain-offerings as a cus-
tom well known to the people, and a necessity demanded by
their religious feelings (chap. i. 2, 3, 10, 14, ii. 1, 4, 5, 14, iii.
1, 6, 11). They were not introduced among the Israelites for
the first time by Moses, as Knobel affirms, who also maintains
that the feast of the Passover was the first animal sacrifice, and
in fact a very imperfect one. Even animal sacrifices date from
the earliest period of our race. Not only did Noah offer burnt-
offerings of all clean animals and birds (Gen. viii. 20), but Abel
brought of the firstlings of his flock an offering to the Lord
(Gen. iv. 4). 1 The object of the sacrificial laws in this book
Sacrificial "Worship of the Old Testament (Clark, 1863) ; and Oehler, in
Herzog's Cyclopaedia. The rabbinical traditions are to be found in the two
talmudical tractates Sebachim and Menachoth, and a brief summary of them
is given in Otho fez. rabbin, philol. pp. 631 sqq.
1 When Knobel, in his Commentary on Leviticus (p. 847), endeavours
to set aside the validity of these proofs, by affirming that sacrificial worship
in the earliest times is merely a fancy of the Jehovisl; apart altogether
from the untenable character of the Elohistic and Jehovistic hypothesis,
there is a sufficient proof that this subterfuge is worthless, in the fact that
the so-called Elohist, instead of pronouncing Moses the originator of the
sacrificial worship of the Hebrews, introduces his laws of sacrifice with this
Digitized by
Google
266 THE THIBD BOOK OF MOSES
was neither to enforce sacrificial worship npon the Israelites, nor
to apply " a theory concerning the Hebrew sacrifices/" (Knobel),
but simply to organize and expand the sacrificial worship of the
Israelites into an institution in harmony with the covenant be-
tween the Lord and His people, and adapted to promote the end
for which it was established.
But although sacrifice in general reaches up to the earliest
times of man's history, and is met with in every nation, it was
not enjoined upon the human race by any positive command of
God, but sprang out of a religious necessity for fellowship with
God, the author, protector, and preserver of life, which was as
innate in man as the consciousness of God itself, though it
assumed very different forms in different tribes and nations, in
consequence of their estrangement from God, and their grow-
ing loss of all true knowledge of Him, inasmuch as their ideas
of the Divine Being so completely regulated the nature, object,
and signification of the sacrifices they offered, that they were
quite as subservient to the worship of idols as to that of the one
true God. To discover the fundamental idea, which was com-
mon to all the sacrifices, we must bear in mind, on the one hand,
that the first sacrifices were presented after the fall, and on the
other hand, that we never meet with any allusion to expiation
in the pre-Mosaic sacrifices of the Old Testament. Before the
fall, man lived in blessed unity with God. This unity was de-
stroyed by sin, and the fellowship between God and man was
disturbed, though not entirely abolished. In the punishment
which God inflicted upon the sinners, He did not withdraw His
mercy from men ; and before driving them out of paradise, He
gave them clothes to cover the nakedness of their shame, by
which they had first of all become conscious of their sin. Even
after their expulsion He still manifested Himself to them, so
formula, " If any man of you briDg an offering of cattle unto the Lord,"
and thus stamps the presentation of animal sacrifice as a traditional cus-
tom. Knobel cannot adduce any historical testimony in support of* his
assertion, that, according to the opinion of the ancients, there were no ani-
mal sacrifices offered to the gods in the earliest times, but only meal, honey,
vegetables, and flowers, roots, leaves, and fruit ; all that he does is to quote
a few passages from Plato, Plutarch, and Porphyry, in which these philo-
sophers, who were much too young to answer the question, express their
ideas and conjectures respecting the rise and progress of sacrificial worship
among the nations.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. I.-VII. 267
that they were able once more to draw near to Him and enter
into fellowship with Him. This fellowship they sought through
the medium of sacrifices, in which they gave a visible expression
not only to their gratitude towards God for His blessing and
His grace, but also to their supplication for the further continu-
ance of His divine favour. It was in this sense that both Cain
and Abel offered sacrifice, though not with the same motives,
or in the same state of heart towards God. In this sense Noah
also offered sacrifice after his deliverance from the flood ; the
only apparent difference being this, that the sons of Adam
offered their sacrifices to God from the fruit of their labour, in
the tilling of the ground and the keeping of sheep, whereas
Noah presented his burnt-offerings from the clean cattle and
birds that had been shut up with him in the ark, i.e. from those
animals which at any rate from that time forward were assigned
to man as food (Gen. ix. 3). Noah was probably led to make
this selection by the command of God to take with him into the
ark not one or more pairs, but seven of every kind of clean
beasts, as he may have discerned in this an indication of the
divine will, that the seventh animal of every description of
clean beast and bird should be offered in sacrifice to the Lord,
for His gracious protection from destruction by the flood. Moses
also received a still further intimation as to the meaning of the
animal sacrifices, in the prohibition which God appended to the
permission to make use of animals as well as green herbs for
food ; viz. " flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof,
shall ye not eat" (Gen. ix. 4, 5), that is to say, flesh which still
contained the blood as the animal's soul. In this there was
already an intimation, that in. the bleeding sacrifice the soul of
the animal was given up to God with the blood ; and therefore,
that by virtue of its blood, as the vehicle of the soul, animal
sacrifice was the most fitting means of representing the surrender
of the human soul to God. This truth may possibly have been
only dimly surmised by Noah and his sons ; but it must have
been clearly revealed to the patriarch Abraham, when God de-
manded the sacrifice of his only son, with whom his whole heart
was bound up, as a proof of his obedience of faith, and then,
after he had attested his faith in his readiness to offer this
sacrifice, supplied him with a ram to offer as a burnt-offering
instead of his son (Gen. xxii.). In this the truth was practically
Digitized by
Google
268 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
revealed to him, that the true God did not require human sacri-
fice from His worshippers, but the surrender of the heart and
the denial of the natural life, even though it should amount to
a submission to death itself, and also that this act of surrender
was to be perfected in the animal sacrifice ; and that it was only
when presented with these motives that sacrifice could be well-
pleasing to God. Even before this, however, God had given
His sanction to the choice of clean or edible beasts and birds for
sacrifice, in the command to Abram to offer such animals, as the
sacrificial substratum for the covenant to be concluded with him
(Gen. xv.). Now, though nothing has been handed down con-
cerning the sacrifices of the patriarchs, with the exception of
Gen xlvi. 1 sqq., there can be no doubt that they offered burnt-
offerings upon the altars which they built to the Lord, who ap-
peared to them in different places in Canaan (Gen. xii. 7, xiii.
4, 18, xxvi. 25, xxxiii. 20, xxxv. 1-7), and embodied in these
their solemn invocation of the name of God in prayer ; since
the close connection between sacrifice and prayer is clearly
proved by such passages as Hos. xiv. 3, Heb. xiii. 15, and is
universally admitted. 1 To the burnt-offering there was added,
in the course of time, the slain-offering, which is mentioned for
the first time in Gen. xxxi. 54, where Jacob seals the covenant,
which has been concluded with Laban and sworn to by God,
with a covenant meal. Whilst the burnt-offering, which was
given wholly up to God and entirely consumed upon the altar,
and which ascended to heaven in the smoke, set forth the self-
surrender of man to God, the slain-offering, which culminated
in the sacrificial meal, served as a seal of the covenant fellow-
ship, and represented the living fellowship of man with God.
Thus, when Jacob-Israel went down with his house to Egypt,
he sacrificed at Beersheba, on the border of the promised land,
to the God of his father Isaac, not burnt-offerings, but slain-
offerings (Gen. xlvi. 1), through which he presented his prayer
to the Lord for preservation in covenant fellowship even in a
foreign land, and in consequence of which he received the pro-
mise from God in a nocturnal vision, that He, the God of his
1 Oviram (I. c. p. 213) draws the following conclusion from Hos. xiv. 8 :
" Prayer was a certain kind of sacrifice, and sacrifice a certain kind of
prayer. Prayers were, so to speak, spiritual sacrifices, and sacrifices sym-
bolical prayers."
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. I.-VII. 269
father, would go with him to Egypt and bring him up again to
Canaan, and so maintain the covenant which He had made with
his fathers, and assuredly fulfil it in due time. The expiatory
offerings, properly so called, viz. the sin and trespass-offerings,
were altogether unknown before the economy of the Sinaitic
law; and even if an expiatory element was included in the
burnt-offerings, so far as they embodied self-surrender to God,
and thus involved the need of union and reconciliation with
Him, so little prominence is given to this in the pre-Mosaic sacri-
fices, that, as we have already stated, no reference is made to
expiation in connection with them. 1 The reason for this striking
fact is to be found in the circumstance, that godly men of the
primeval age offered their sacrifices to a God who had drawn
near to them in revelations of love. It is true that in former
times God had made known His holy justice in the destruction
of the wicked and the deliverance of the righteous (Gen. vi.
13 sqq., xviii. 16 sqq.), and had commanded Abraham to walk
blamelessly before Him (Gen. xvii. 1) ; but He had only mani-
fested Himself to the patriarchs in His condescending love and
mercy, whereas He had made known His holiness in His very
first revelation to Moses in the words, " Draw not nigh hither ;
put off thy shoes," etc. (Ex. iii. 5), and unfolded it more and
1 The notion, which is still very widely spread, that the burnt-offerings
of Abel, Noah, and the patriarchs were expiatory sacrifices, in which the
slaying of the sacrificial animals Bet forth the fact, that the sinner was de-
serving of death in the presence of the holy God, not only cannot be proved
from the Scriptures, but is irreconcilable with the attitude of a Noah, an
Abraham and other patriarchs, towards the Lord God. And even KahnWs
explanation, " The man felt that his own ipse must die, before it could
enter into union with the Holy One, but he had also his surmises, that
another life might possibly bear this death for him, and in this obscure
feeling he took away the life of an animal that was physically clean," is
only true and to the point so far as the deeper forms of the development of
the heathen consciousness of God are concerned, and not in the sphere of
revealed religion, in which the expiatory sacrifices did not originate in any
dim consciousness on the part of the sinner that he was deserving of death,
but were appointed for the first time by God at Sinai, for the purpose of
awakening and sharpening this feeling. There is no historical foundation
for the arguments adduced by Hqfmann in support of the opinion, that
there were sin-offerings before the Mosaic law ; and the assertion, that sin-
offerings and trespass-offerings were not really introduced by the law, but
were presupposed as already well known, just as much as the burnt-offerings
and thank-offerings, is obviously at variance with Lev. iv. and v.
Digitized by
Google
270 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
more in all subsequent revelations, especially at Sinai. After
Jehovah had there declared to the people of Israel, whom He
had redeemed out of Egypt, that they were to be a holy nation
to Him (Ex. xix. 6), He appeared upon the mountain in the
terrible glory of His holy nature, to conclude His covenant of
grace with them by the blood of burnt-offerings and slain-
offerings, so that the people trembled and were afraid of death
if the Lord should speak to them any more (Ex. xx. 18 sqq.).
These facts preceded the laws of sacrifice, and not only prepared
the way for them, but furnished the key to their true interpre-
tation, by showing that it was only by sacrifice that the sinful
nation could enter into fellowship with the holy God.
The laws of sacrifice in chap, i.-vii. are divisible into two
groups. The first (chap. i.-v.) contains the general instructions,
which were applicable both to the community as a whole and
also to the individual Israelites. Chap, i.-iii. contain an account
of the animals and vegetables which could be used for the
three kinds of offerings that were already common among them,
viz. the burnt-offerings, meat-offerings, and slain-offerings ; and
precise rules are laid down for the mode in which they were to
be offered. In chap. iv. and v. the occasions are described on
which sin-offerings and trespass-offerings were to be presented ;
and directions are given as to the sacrifices to be offered, and
the mode of presentation on each separate occasion. The second
group (chap. vi. and vii.) contains special rules for the priests,
with reference to their duties in connection with the different
sacrifices, and the portions they were to receive ; together with
several supplementary laws, for example, with regard to the
meat-offering of the priests, and the various kinds of slain or
peace-offering. All these laws relate exclusively to the sacri-
fices to be offered spontaneously, either by individuals or by the
whole community, the consciousness and confession of sin or
debt being presupposed, even in the case of the sin and trespass-
offerings, and their presentation being made to depend upon
the free-will of those who had sinned. This is a sufficient ex-
planation of the fact, that they contain no rules respecting
either the time for presenting them, or the order in which they
were to follow one another, when two or more were offered to-
gether. At the same time, the different rules laid down with
regard to the ritual to be observed, applied not only to the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. I.-V. 271
private sacrifices, bat also to those of the congregation, which
were prescribed by special laws for every day, and for the an-
nual festivals, as well as to the sacrifices of purification and
consecration, for which no separate ritual is enjoined.
1. General Rules for the Sacrifices. — Chap, i.— v.
The common term for sacrifices of every kind was cokban
(presentation ; see at chap. i. 2). It is not only applied to the
burnt-offerings, meat-offerings, and slain or peace-offerings, in
chap. i. 2, 3, 10, 14, ii. 1, 4 sqq., iii. 1, 6, etc., but also to the sin-
offerings and trespass-offerings in chap. iv. 23, 28, 32, v. 11,
Num. v. 15, etc., as being holy gifts (Ex. xxviii. 38 cf. Num.
xviii. 9) with which Israel was to appear before the face of the
Lord (Ex. xxiii. 15 ; Deut. xvi. 16, 17). These sacrificial gifts
consisted partly of clean tame animals and birds, and partly of
vegetable productions ; and hence the division into the two classes
of bleeding and bloodless (bloody and unbloody) sacrifices. The
animals prescribed in the law are those of the herd, and the flock,
the latter including both sheep and goats (chap. i. 2, 3, 10, xxii.
21 ; Num. xv. 3), two collective terms, for which ox and sheep,
or goat (ox, sheep and goat) were the nomina usitatis (chap. vii.
23, xvii., 3, xxii. 19, 27 ; Num. xv. 11 ; Deut. xiv. 4), that is
to say, none but tame animals whose flesh was eaten (chap. xi. 3 ;
Deut. xiv. 4) ; whereas unclean animals, though tame, such as
asses, camels, and swine, were inadmissible ; and game, though
edible, e.g. the hare, the stag, the roebuck, and gazelle (Deut.
xiv. 5). Both male and female were offered in sacrifice, from
the herd as well as the flock (chap. iii. 1), and young as well as
old, though not under eight days old (chap. xxii. 27 ; Ex. xxii.
29) ; so that the ox was offered either as calf (chap. ix. 2 ; Gen.
xv. 9 ; 1 Sam. xvi. 2) or as bullock, i.e. as young steer or heifer
(chap. iv. 3), or as full-grown cattle. Every sacrificial animal
was to be without blemish, i.e. free from bodily faults (chap. i.
3, 10, xxii. 19 sqq.). The only birds that were offered were
turtle-doves and young pigeons (chap. i. 14), which were pre-
sented either by poor people as burnt-offerings, and as a substi-
tute for the larger animals ordinarily required as sin-offerings
and trespass-offerings (chap. v. 7, xii. 8, xiv. 22, 31), or as sin
and burnt-offerings, for defilements of a less serious kind (chap,
xii. 6, 7, xv. 14, 29, 30 ; Num. vi. 10, 11). The vegetable
Digitized by
Google
272 THE THIRD BOOK OP MOSES.
sacrifices consisted of meal, for the most part of fine flour (chap,
ii. 1), of cakes of different kinds (chap. ii. 4-7), and of toasted
ears or grains of corn (chap. ii. 14), to which there were gene-
rally added oil and incense, hut never leaven or honey (chap. ii.
11) ; and also of wine for a drink-offering (Num. xv. 5 sqq.).
The bleeding sacrifices were divided into four classes : viz.
(1) burnt-offerings (chap, i.), for which a male animal or pigeon
only was admissible ; (2) peace-offerings (slain-offerings of peace,
chap, iii.), which were divisible again into praise-offerings, vow-
offerings, and freewill-offerings (chap. vii. 12, 16), and consisted
of both male and female animals, but never of pigeons ; (3) sin-
offerings (chap. iv. 1-v. 13) ; and (4) trespass-offerings (chap,
v. 14-26). Both male and female animals might be taken for
the sin-offerings ; and doves also could be used, sometimes inde-
pendently, sometimes as substitutes for larger animals ; and in
cases of extreme poverty meal alone might be used (chap. v. 11)
But for the trespass-offerings either a ram (chap. v. 15, 18, 25,
xix. 21) or a lamb had to be sacrificed (chap. xiv. 12 ; Num.
vi. 12). All the sacrificial animals were to be brought " before
Jehovah," i.e. before the altar of burnt-offering, in the court of
the tabernacle (chap. i. 3, 5, 11, iii. 1, 7, 12, iv. 4). There the
offerer was to rest his hand upon the head of the animal (chap. i.
4), and then to slaughter it, flay it, cut it in pieces, and prepare it
for a sacrificial offering ; after which the priest would attend to
the sprinkling of the blood and the burning upon the altar fire
(chap. i. 5—9, vi. 2 sqq., xxi. 6). In the case of the burnt-
offerings, peace-offerings, and trespass-offerings, the blood was
swung all round against the walls of the altar (chap. i. 5, 11, iii.
2, 8, 13, vii. 2) ; in that of the sin-offerings a portion was placed
upon the horns of the altar of burnt-offering, and in certain cir-
cumstances it was smeared upon the horns of the altar of incense,
or sprinkled upon the ark of the covenant in the most holy place,
and the remainder poured out at the foot of the altar of burnt-
offering (iv. 5-7, 16-18, 25, 30). In the case of the burnt-
offering, the flesh was all burned upon the altar, together with
the head and entrails, the latter having been previously cleansed
(chap. i. 8, 13) ; in that of the peace-offerings, sin-offerings, and
trespass-offerings, the fat portions only were burned upon the
altar, viz. the larger and smaller caul, the fat upon the entrails
and inner muscles of the loins, and the kidneys with their fat
Digitized by
Google
chap. i.-v. 273
(chap. Hi. 9-11, 14-16, iv. 8-10, 19, 26, 31, 35, vii. 3-5).
When a peace-offering was presented, the breast piece and right
leg were given to Jehovah for the priests, and the rest of the
flesh was used and consumed by the offerer in a sacrificial meal
(chap. vii. 15-17, 30-34). But the flesh of the trespass-offerings
and sin-offerings of the laity was boiled and eaten by the priests
in a holy place, i.e. in the court of the tabernacle (chap. vi. 19, 22,
vii. 6). In the sin-offerings presented for the high priest and
the whole congregation the animal was all burnt in a clean place
outside the camp, including even the skin, the entrails, and the
ordure (chap. iv. 11, 12, 21). When the sacrifice consisted of
pigeons, the priest let the blood flow down the wall of the altar,
or sprinkled it against it ; and then, if the pigeon was brought
as a burnt-offering, he burnt it upon the altar after taking away
the crop and faeces; but if it was brought for a sin-offering, he
probably followed the rule laid down in chap. i. 15 and v. 8.
The bloodless gifts were employed as meat and drink-offer-
ings. The meat-offering (minchah) was presented sometimes by
itself, at other times in connection with burnt-offerings and peace-
offerings. The independence of the meat-offering, which has
been denied by Bahr and Kurtz on insufficient grounds, is placed
beyond all doubt, not only by the meat-offering of the priests
(chap. vi. 13 sqq.) and the so-called jealousy-offering (Num. v.
15 sqq.), but also by the position in which it is placed in the laws
of sacrifice, between the burnt and peace-offerings. From the
instructions in Num. xv. 1-16, to offer a meat-offering mixed
with oil and a drink-offering of wine with every burnt-offering
and peace-offering, the quantity to be regulated by the size of
the animal, it by no means follows that all the meat-offerings
were simply accompaniments to the bleeding sacrifices, and were
only to be offered in connection with them. On the contrary,
inasmuch as these very instructions prescribe only a meat-offer-
ing of meal with oil, together with a drink-offering of wine, as
the accompaniment to the burnt and peace-offerings, without
mentioning incense at all, they rather prove that the meat-offer-
ings mentioned in chap, ii., which might consist not only of
meal and oil, with which incense had to be used, but also of
cakes of different kinds and roasted corn, are to be distinguished
from the mere accompaniments mentioned in Num. xv. In
addition to this, it is to be observed that pastry, in the form of
PENT. — VOL. II. 6
Digitized by
Google
274 THE THIRD BOOK OP MOSES.
cakes of different kinds, was offered with the praise-offerings,
according to chap. vii. 12 sqq., and probably with the two other
species of peace-offerings as well ; so that we should introduce an
irreconcilable discrepancy between Num. xv. and Lev. ii., if we
were to restrict all the meat-offerings to the accompaniments
mentioned in Num. xv., or reduce them to merely dependent addi-
tions to the burnt and peace-offerings. Only a portion of the
independent meat-offerings was burnt by the priest upon the altar
(chap. ii. 2, 9, 16) ; the rest was to be baked without leaven, and
eaten by the priests in the court, as being most holy (chap. vi.
8-11) : it was only the meat-offering of the priests that was all
burned upon the altar (chap. vi. 16). — The law contains no
directions as to what was to be done with the drink-offering ; but
the wine was no doubt poured round the foot of the altar (Ecclus.
1. 15. Josephus, Ant. iii. 9, 4).
The great importance of the sacrifices prescribed by the law
may be inferred to a great extent, apart from the fact that sacri-
fice in general was founded upon the dependence of man upon God,
and his desire for the restoration of that living fellowship with Him
which had been disturbed by sin, from the circumstantiality and
care with which both the choice of the sacrifices and the mode
of presenting them are most minutely prescribed. But their
special meaning and importance in relation to the economy of
the Old Covenant are placed beyond all question by the position
they assumed in the ritual of the Israelites, forming as they did
the centre of all their worship, so that scarcely any sacred action
was performed without sacrifice, whilst they were also the
medium through which forgiveness of sin and reconciliation
with the Lord were obtained, either by each individual Israelite,
or by the congregation as a whole. This significance, which
was deeply rooted in the spiritual life of -Israel, is entirely de-
stroyed by those who lay exclusive stress upon the notion of
presentation or gift, and can see nothing more in the sacrifices
than a " renunciation of one's own property," for the purpose
of "expressing reverence and devotion, love and gratitude to
God by such a surrender, and at the same time of earning and
securing His favour." 1 The true significance of the legal sacri-
1 This is the view expressed by Knobel in his Commentary on Leviticus,
p. 346, where the idea is carried out in the following manner : in the dedi-
cation of animals they preferred to give the offering the form of a meal,
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. L-V. 275
fices cannot be correctly and fully deduced from the term corban,
which was common to them all, or from such names as were
used to denote the different varieties of sacrifice, or even from
the materials employed and the ritual observed, but only from
all these combined, and from an examination of them in connec-
tion with the nature and design of the Old Testament economy.
Eegarded as offerings or gifts, the sacrifices were only means
by which Israel was to seek and sustain communion with its God.
These gifts were to be brought by the Israelites from the bless-
ing which God had bestowed upon the labour of their hands
(Deut. xvi. 17), that is to say, from the fruit of their regular
occupations, viz. agriculture and the rearing of cattle ; in other
words, from the cattle they had reared, or the produce of the
land they had cultivated, which constituted their principal
articles of food (viz. edible animals and pigeons, corn, oil, and
wine), in order that in these sacrificial gifts they might conse-
crate to the Lord their God, not only their property and food, but
also the fruit of their ordinary avocations. In this light the sacri-
fices are frequently called " food (bread) of firing for Jehovah "
(chap. hi. 11, 16) and " bread of God " (chap. xxi. 6, 8, 17) ;
by which we are not to suppose that food offered to God for His
own nourishment is intended, but food produced by the labour
of man, and then caused to ascend as a firing to his God, for an
odour of satisfaction (vid. chap. iii. 11). In the clean animals,
which he had obtained by his own training and care, and which
constituted his ordinary live-stock, and in the produce obtained
through the labour of his hands in the field and vineyard, from
which he derived his ordinary support, the Israelite offered not
his victm as a symbolum vitce, but the food which he procured in
which was provided for God, and of which flesh formed the principal part,
though bread and wine could not be omitted. These meals of animal food
were prepared every day in the daily burnt-offerings, just as the more re-
spectable classes in the East eat animal food every day, and give the prefer-
ence to food of this kind ; and the daily offering of incense corresponded to
the oriental custom of fumigating rooms, and burning perfumes in honour of
a guest. At the same time Knobel also explains, that the Hebrews hardly
attributed any wants of a sensual kind to Jehovah ; or, at any rate, that the
educated did not look upon the sacrifice as food for Jehovah, or regard the
festal sacrifices as festal meals for Him, but may simply have thought of
the fact that Jehovah was to be worshipped at all times, and more especially
at the feasts, and that in this the prevailing and traditional custom was to
be observed.
Digitized by
Google
276 THE THIRD BOOK OF HOSES.
the exercise of his God-appointed calling, as a symbol of the
spiritual food which endureth unto everlasting life (John vi. 27,
cf. chap. iv. 34), and which nourishes both sotil and body for
imperishable life in fellowship with God, that in these sacrificial
gifts he might give up to the Lord, who had adopted him as His
own possession, not so much the substance of his life, or that
which sustained and preserved it, as the agens of his life, or his
labour and toil, and all the powers he possessed, and might re-
ceive sanctification from the Lord in return. In this way the
sacrificial gifts acquire a representative character, and denote
the self-surrender of a man, with all his labour and productions,
to God. But the idea of representation received a distinct form
and sacrificial character for the first time in the animal sacrifice,
which was raised by the covenant revelation and the giving of
the law into the very centre and soul of the whole institution of
sacrifice, and primarily by the simple fact, that in the animal
a life, a "living soul," was given up to death and offered to God,
to be the medium of vital fellowship to the man who had been
made a " living soul " by the inspiration of the breath of God ;
but still more by the fact, that God had appointed the blood of
the sacrificial animal, as the vehicle of its soul, to be the medium
of expiation for the souls of men (chap. xvii. 11).
The verb "to expiate" ("*?, from ">B3 to cover, construed
with ?J) objecti; see chap. i. 4) "does not signify to cause a sin
not to have occurred, for that is impossible, nor to represent it
as not existing, for that would be opposed to the stringency of
the law, nor to pay or make compensation for it through the
performance of any action; but to cover it over before God, i.e. to
take away its power of coming in between God and ourselves"
(Kahnis, Dogmatik i. p. 271). But whilst this is perfectly true,
the object primarily expiated, or to be expiated, according to the
laws of sacrifice, is not the sin, but rather the man, or the soul
of the offerer. God gave the Israelites the blood of the sacri-
fices upon the altar to cover their souls (chap. xvii. 11). The
end it answered was " to cover him " (the offerer, chap. i. 4) ;
and even in the case of the sin-offering the only object was to
cover him who had sinned, as concerning his sin (chap. iv. 26,
35, etc.). But the offerer of the sacrifice was covered, on ac-
count of his unholiness, from before the holy God, or, speaking
more precisely, from the wrath of God and the manifestation of
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. L-V. 277
that wrath ; that is to say, from the punishment which his sin
had deserved, as we may clearly see from Gen. xxxii. 20, and
still more clearly from Ex. xxxii. 30. In the former case Jacob's
object is to reconcile C 1 ??) the face of his brother Esau by means
of a present, that is to say, to modify the wrath of his brother,
which he has drawn upon himself by taking away the blessing
of the first-born. In the latter, Moses endeavours by means of
his intercession to expiate the sin of the people, over whom the
wrath of God is about to burn to destroy them (Ex. xxxii. 9, 10) ;
in other words, to protect the people from the destruction which
threatens them in consequence of the wrath of God (see also
Num. xvii. 11, 12, xxv. 11-13). The power to make expiation,
i.e. to cover ah unholy man from before the holy God, or to
cover the sinner from the wrath of God, is attributed to the
blood of the sacrificial animal, only so far as the soul lives in the
blood, and the soul of the animal when sacrificed takes the place
of the human soul. This substitution is no doubt incongruous,
since the animal and man differ essentially the one from the
other; inasmuch as the animal follows an involuntary instinct,
and its soul being constrained by the necessities of its nature is
not accountable, and it is only in this respect that it can be re-
garded as sinless ; whilst man, on the contrary, is endowed with
freedom of will, and his soul, by virtue of the indwelling of his
spirit, is not only capable of accountability, but can contract both
sin and guilt. "When God, therefore, said, " I have given it to
you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls " (chap,
xvii. 11), and thus attributed to the blood of the sacrificial ani-
mals a significance which it could not naturally possess ; this
was done in anticipation of the true and perfect sacrifice which
Christ, the Son of man and God, would offer in the fulness of
time through the holy and eternal Spirit, for the reconciliation of
the whole world (Heb. ix. 14). This secret of the unfathomable
love of the triune God was hidden from the Israelites in the
law, but it formed the real background for the divine sanction
of the animal sacrifices, whereby they acquired a typical signifi-
cation, so, that they set forth in shadow that reconciliation, which
God from all eternity had determined to effect by giving up
His only-begotten Son to death, as a sacrifice for the sin of the
whole world.
But however firmly the truth is established that the blood of
Digitized by
Google
278 THE THIBD BOOK OF MOSES.
the sacrifice intervened as a third object between the sinful man
and the holy God, it was not the blood of the animal in itself
which actually took the place of the man, nor was it the shedding
of the blood in itself which was able to make expiation for the
sinful man, in such a sense that the slaying of the animal had
a judicial and penal character and the offering of sacrifice was
an act of judgment instead of an ordinance of grace, as the
juridical theory maintains. It was simply the blood as the
vehicle of the soul, when sprinkled or poured out upon the
altar, that is to say, it was the surrender of an innocent life to
death, and through death to God, that was the medium of
expiation. Even in the sacrifice of Christ it was not by the
shedding of blood, or simply by the act of dying, that His death
effected reconciliation, but by the surrender of His life to death,
in which He not only shed His blood for us, but His body also
was broken for us, to redeem us from sin and reconcile us to
God. And even the suffering and death of Christ effect our
reconciliation not simply by themselves, but as the completion
of His sinless, holy life, in which, through doing and suffering,
He was obedient even to the death of the cross, and through
that obedience fulfilled the law as the holy will of God for us,
and bore and suffered the punishment of our transgression.
Through His obedientia activa et passiva in life and death
Christ rendered to the holy justice of God that satisfactio et
poena vicaria, by virtue of which we receive forgiveness of sin,
righteousness before God, reconciliation, grace, salvation, and
eternal life. But these blessings of grace and salvation, which
we owe to the sacrificial death of Christ, do not really become
ours through the simple fact that Christ has procured them for
man. We have still to appropriate them in faith, by dying
spiritually with Christ, and rising with Him to a new life in
God. This was also the case with the sacrifices of the Old
Testament. They too only answered their end, when the
Israelites, relying upon the word and promise of God, grasped
and employed by faith the means of grace afforded them in the
animal sacrifices ; i.e. when in these sacrifices they offered them-
selves, or their personal life, as a sacrifice well-pleasing to God.
The symbolical meaning of the sacrifices, which is involved in
this, is not excluded or destroyed by the idea of representation,
or representative mediation between sinful man and the holy
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. I.-V. 279
God, which was essential to them. It is rather demanded as
their complement, inasmuch as, without this, the sacrificial
worship would degenerate into a soulless opus operatum, and
would even lose its typical character. This symbolical signifi-
cance is strikingly expressed in the instructions relating to the
nature of the sacrificial gifts, and the ritual' connected with
their presentation ; and in the law it comes into the foreground
just in proportion as the typical character of the sacrifices was
concealed at the time' in the wise economy of God, and was only
unfolded to the spiritual vision of the prophets (Isa. liii.) with
the progressive unfolding of the divine plan of salvation.
The leading features of the symbolical and typical meaning
of the sacrifices are in their general outline the following.
Every animal offered in sacrifice was to be DW, a/wfio*;, free
from faults ; not merely on the ground that only a faultless and
perfect gift could be an offering fit for the Holy and Perfect
One, but chiefly because moral faults were reflected in those of
the body, and to prefigure the sinlessness and holiness of the
true sacrifice, and warn the offerer that the sanctification of all
his members was indispensable to a self-surrender to God, the
Holy One, and to life in fellowship with Him. In connection
with the act of sacrifice, it was required that the offerer should
bring to the tabernacle the animal appointed for sacrifice, and
there present it before Jehovah (chap. i. 3), because it was there
that Jehovah dwelt among His people, and it was from His holy
dwelling that He would reveal Himself to His people as their
God. There the offerer was to lay his hand upon the head of
the animal, that the sacrifice might be acceptable for him, to
make expiation for him (chap. i. 4), and then to slay the animal
and prepare it for a sacrificial gift. By the laying on of his
hand he not only set apart the sacrificial animal for the purpose
for which' he had come to the sanctuary, but transferred the
feelings of his heart, which impelled him to offer the sacrifice,
or the intention with which he brought the gift, to the sacrificial
animal, so that his own head passed, as it were, to the head of
the animal, and the latter became his substitute (see my Archd-
ologie i. 206; Oehler, p. 267; Kahnis, i. p. 270). By the
slaughter of the animal he gave it up to death, not merely for
the double purpose of procuring the blood, in which was the life
of the animal, as an expiation for his own soul, and its flesh as
Digitized by
Google
280 THE THIBD BOOK OF MOSES.
fire-food for Jehovah, — for if the act of dying was profoundly
significant in the case of the perfect sacrifice, it cannot have
been without symbolical significance in the case of the typical
sacrifice, — but to devote his own life to God in the death of the
sacrificial animal which was appointed as his substitute, and to
set forth not only his willingness to die, but the necessity for
the old man to die, that he might attain to life in fellowship
with God. After this self-surrender the priestly mediation
commenced, the priest sprinkling the blood upon the altar, or
its horns, and in one instance before Jehovah's throne of grace,
and then burning the flesh or fat of the sacrifice upon the altar.
The altar was the spot where God had promised to meet with
His people (Ex. xxix. 42), to reconcile them to Himself, and
bestow His grace upon them (see p. 207). Through this act of
sprinkling the blood of the animal that had been given up to
death upon the altar, the soul of the offerer was covered over
before the holy God; and by virtue of this covering it was
placed within the sphere of divine grace, which forgave the sin
and filled the soul with power for new life. Fire was constantly
burning upon the altar, which was prepared and kept up by the
priest (chap. vi. 5). Fire, from its inherent power to annihilate
what is perishable, ignoble, and corrupt, is a symbol in the
Scriptures, sometimes of purification, and sometimes of torment
and destruction. That which has an imperishable kernel within
it is purified by the fire, the perishable materials which have
adhered to it or penetrated within it being burned out and
destroyed, and the imperishable and nobler substance being
thereby purified from all dross ; whilst, on the other hand, in
cases where the imperishable is completely swallowed up in the
perishable, no purification ensues, but total destruction by the
fire (1 Cor. iii. 12, 13). Hence fire is employed as a symbol
and vehicle of the Holy Spirit (Acts ii. 3, 4), and the fire
burning upon the altar was a symbolical representation of the
working of the purifying Spirit of God ; so that the burning of
the flesh of the sacrifice upon the altar " represented the purifi-
cation of the man, who had been reconciled to God, through the
fire of the Holy Spirit, which consumes what is flesh, to pervade
what is spirit with light and life, and thus to transmute it into the
blessedness of fellowship with God" {Kdhnis, p. 272). — It fol-
lows from this, that the relation which the sprinkling of the blood
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. I. 2-4. 281
and the burning of the flesh of the sacrifice upon the altar bore
to one another was that of justification and sanctification, those
two indispensable conditions, without which sinful man could
not attain to reconciliation with God and life in God. But as
the sinner could neither justify himself before God nor sanctify
himself by his own power, the sprinkling of blood and the
burning of the portions of the sacrifice upon the altar were to be
effected, not by the offerer himself, but only by the priest, as
the mediator whom God had chosen and sanctified, not only that
the soul which had been covered by the sacrificial blood might
thereby be brought to God and received into His favour, but also
that the bodily members, of which the flesh of the sacrifice was
a symbol, might be given up to the fire of the Holy Spirit, to be
purified and sanctified from the dross of sin, and raised in a
glorified state to God ; just as the sacrificial gift was consumed
in the altar fire, so that, whilst its earthly perishable elements
were turned into ashes and left behind, its true essence ascended
towards heaven, where God is enthroned, in the most ethereal
and glorified of material forms, as a sweet-smelling savour, i.e.
as an acceptable offering. These two priestly acts, however,
were variously modified according to the different objects of the
several kinds of sacrifice. In the sin-offering the expiation of
the sinner is brought into the greatest prominence ; in the burnt-
offering this falls into the background behind the idea of the
self-surrender of a man to God for the sanctification of all his
members, through the grace of God; and lastly, the peace-
offering culminated in the peace of living communion with the
Lord. (See the explanation of the several laws.)
The materials and ritual of the bloodless sacrifices, and also
their meaning and purpose, are much more simple. The meat
and drink-offerings were not means of expiation, nor did they
include the idea of representation. They were simply gifts, in
which the Israelites offered bread, oil, and wine, as fruits of the
labour of their •hands in the field and vineyard of the inheritance
they had received from the Lord, and embodied in these earthly
gifts the fruits of their spiritual labour in the kingdom of God
(see at chap. ii.).
Chap. i. The Burnt-offering. — Ver. 2. " If any one of
you present an offering to Jehovah of cattle, ye shall present your
Digitized by
Google
282 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
offering from the herd and from the flock." f3"!ij (Corban, from
anjpn to cause to draw near, to bring near, or present, an offer-
ing) is applied not only to the sacrifices, which were burned
either in whole or in part upon the altar (chap. vii. 38 ; Num.
xviii. 9, xxviii. 2, etc.), but to the first-fruits ,(chap. ii. 12), and
dedicatory offerings, which were presented to the Lord for His
sanctuary and His. service without being laid upon the altar
(Num. vii. 3, 10 sqq., xxxi. 50). The word i3 only used in
Leviticus and Numbers, and two passages in Ezekiel (chap. xx.
28, xl. 43), where it is taken from the books of Moses, and is
invariably rendered B&pov in the LXX. (cf. Mark vii. 11,
" Corban, that is to say a gift")- ™??3!1 |D (from the cattle)
belongs to the first clause, though it is separated from it by the
Athnach ; and the apodosis begins with "i£3n \Q (from the herd).
The actual antithesis to "the cattle" is "the fowl" in ver. 14 ;
though grammatically the latter is connected with ver. 10, rather
than ver. 2. The fowls (pigeons) cannot be included in the
behemah, for this is used 'to denote, not domesticated animals
generally, but the larger domesticated quadrupeds, or tame
cattle (cf. Gen. i. 25). — Vers. 3-9. Ceremonial connected vriih
the offering of an ox as a burnt-offering. f6j> (vid. Gen. viii. 20)
is generally rendered by the LXX. oXoieavrafia or oKokwutoo-k,
sometimes oXotcapTrmfia or ohoKapTra>ai<;, in the Vulgate holocaus-
tum, because the animal was all consumed upon the altar. The
ox was to be a male without blemish (a/Mofios, integer, i.e. free from
bodily faults, see chap. xxii. 19-25), and to be presented " at the
door of the tabernacle," — i.e. near to the altar of burnt-offering
(Ex. xl. 6), where all the offerings were to be presented (chap,
xvii. 8, 9), — "for good pleasure for him (the offerer) before Je-
hovah," i.e. that the sacrifice might secure to him the good
pleasure of God (Ex. xxviii. 38). — Ver. 4. " He (the offerer)
shall lay his hand upon the head of the burnt-offering." The
laying on of hands, by which, to judge from the verb ?|DD to
lean upon, we are to- understand a forcible pressure of the hand
upon the head of the victim, took place, in connection with all
the slain-offerings (the offering of pigeons perhaps excepted),
and is expressly enjoined in the laws for the burnt-offerings, the
peace-offerings (chap. iii. 2, 7, 13), and the sin-offerings (chap,
iv. 4, 15, 24, 29, 33), that is to say, in every case in which the
details of the ceremonial are minutely described. But if the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. I. 2-4. 283
description is condensed, then no allusion is made to it: e.g. in
the burnt-offering of sheep and goats (ver. 11), the sin-offering
(chap. v. 6), and the trespass-offering (chap. v. 15, 18, 25).
This ceremony was not a sign of the removal of something
from his own power and possession, or the surrender and dedi-
cation of it to God, as Rosenmuller and Knobel 1 affirm ; nor
an indication of ownership and of a readiness to give up his
own to Jehovah, as Bdhr maintains ; nor a symbol of the impu-
tation of sin, as Kurtz supposes :' but the symbol of a transfer
of the feelings and intentions by which the offerer was actuated
in presenting his sacrifice, whereby he set apart the animal as a
sacrifice, representing his own person in one particular aspect
(see vol. i. p. 279). Now, so far as the burnt-offering expressed
the intention of the offerer to consecrate his life and labour to
the Lord, and his desire to obtain the expiation of the sin
which still clung to all his works and desires, in order that they
might become well-pleasing to God, he transferred the con-
sciousness of his sinfulness to the victim by the laying on of
hands, even in the case of the burnt-offering. But this was not
1 Hence Knobel's assertion (at Lev. vii. 2), that the laying on of the
hand upon the head of the animal, which is prescribed in the case of all
the other sacrifices, was omitted in that of the trespass-offering alone,
needs correction, and there is no foundation for the conclusion, that it did
not take place in connection with the trespass-offering.
2 This was the view held by some of the Rabbins and of the earlier
theologians, e.g. Calovius, bibl. ill. ad Lev. i. 4, Lundius and others, but by
no means by " most of the Rabbins, some of the fathers, and most of the
earlier archaeologists and doctrinal writers," as is affirmed by Bdhr (ii. p.
336), who supports his assertion by passages from Outram, which refer to
the sin-offering only, but which Bdhr transfers without reserve to all the
bleeding sacrifices, thus confounding substitution with the imputation of
sin, in his antipathy to the orthodox doctrine of satisfaction. OutrartCs
general view of this ceremony is expressed clearly enough in the following
passages : "ritus erat ea notandi ac designandi, qux vel morti devota erant,
vel Dei gratix commendata, vel denique gravi alicui muneri usuique sacro
destinata. Eique ritui semper adhiberi solebant verba aUqua explieata, quse rei
susceptm rationi maxime congruere viderentur" (I.e. 8 and 9). With reference
to the words which explained the imposition of hands he observes : " ita ut
sacris piacularibits culparum potissimum confessiones cum panes deprecatione
junctas, voluntariis bonorum precationes, eucharislicis autem et votivis post res
prosperas impetratas periculave depulsa factis laudes et gratiarum actiones,
omnique denique victimarum generi ejusmodi preces adjunctas putem, qux
cuique maxime conveniebant " (c. 9).
Digitized by
Google
284 THE THIRD BOOK OF HOSES.
all : he also transferred the desire to walk before God in holiness
and righteousness, which he could not do without the grace of
God. This, and no more than this, is contained in the words,
" that it may become well-pleasing to him, to make atonement
for him." 1B3 with Seghol (Ges. § 52), to expiate (from the
Kal IBS, which is not met with in Hebrew, the word in Gen.
vi. 14 being merely a denom. verb, but which signifies texit in
Arabic), is generally construed with ?? like verbs of covering,
and in the laws of sacrifice with the person as the object (" for
him," chap. iv. 26, 31, 35, v. 6, 10 sqq., xiv. 20, 29, etc. ; "for
them" chap. iv. 20, x. 17 ; " for her" chap. xii. 7 ; for a soul,
chap. xvii. 11 ; Ex. xxx. 15, cf. Num. viii. 12), and in the case
of the sin-offerings with a second object governed either by 7?
or t» (inNBn 5>J> 1^» chap. iv. 35, v. 13, 18, or taKBnp xty chap. iv.
26, v. 6, etc., to expiate him over or on account of his sin) ; also,
though not so frequently, with "tt>3 pers., ii-iKd%eo-0cu irepl avrov
(chap. xvi. 6, 24; 2 Chron. xxx. 18), and nmn 1JD, Qika&crdai
Trepl tt}<; afutprlev; (Ex. xxxii. 30), and with ? pers., to permit
expiation to be made (Deut. xxi. 8 ; Ezek. xvi. 63) ; also with
the accusative of the object, though in prose only in connection
with the expiation of inanimate objects defiled by sin (chap,
xvi. 33). The expiation was always made or completed by the
priest, as the sanctified mediator between Jehovah and the
people, or, previous to the institution of the Aaronic priesthood,
by Moses, the chosen mediator of the covenant, not by "Je-
hovah from whom the expiation proceeded," as Bdhr supposes.
For although all expiation has its ultimate foundation in the
grace of God, which desires not the death of the sinner, but his
redemption and salvation, and to this end has opened a way of
salvation, and sanctified sacrifice as the means of expiation and
mercy; it is not Jehovah who makes the expiation, but this
is invariably the office or work of a mediator, who intervenes
between the holy God and sinful man, and by means of expia-
tion averts the wrath of God from the sinner, and brings the
grace of God to bear upon him. It is only in cases where the
word is used in the secondary sense of pardoning sin, or show-
ing mercy, that God is mentioned as the subject (e.g. Deut.
xxi. 8 ; Ps. lxv. 4, lxxviii. 38 ; Jer. xviii. 23). 1 The medium of
1 The meaning "to make atonement" lies at the foundation in every
passage in which the word is used metaphorically, such as Gen. xxxii. 21,
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. I 2-4. 285
expiation in the case of the sacrifice was chiefly the blood of the
sacrificial animal that was sprinkled upon the altar (chap. xvii.
11) ; in addition to which, the eating of the flesh of the sin-offer-
ing by the priests is also called bearing the iniquity of the con-
gregation to make atonement for them (chap. x. 17). In other
cases it was the intercession of Moses (Ex. xxxii. 30) ; also the
fumigation with holy incense, which was a symbol of priestly
intercession (Num. xvii. 11). On one occasion it was the zeal
of Phinehas, when he stabbed the Israelite with a spear for
committing fornication with a Midianite (Num. xxv. 8, 13).
In the case of a murder committed by an unknown hand, it
was the slaying of an animal in the place of the murderer who
remained undiscovered (Deut. xxi. 1-9) ; whereas in other cases
blood-guiltiness (murder) could not be expiated in any other
way than by the blood of the person by whom it had been shed
(Num. xxxv. 33). In Isa. xxvii. 9, a divine judgment, by
where Jacob seeks to expiate the face of his angry brother, i.e. to appease
his wrath, with a present ; or Prov. xvi. 14, " The wrath of a king is as
messengers of death, but a wise man expiates it, i.e. softens, pacifies it ;"
Isa. xlvii. 11, " Mischief (destruction) will fall upon thee, thou will not
be able to expiate it," that is to say, to avert the wrath of God, which has
burst upon thee in the calamity, by means of an expiatory sacrifice. Even in
Isa. xxviii. 18, "and your covenant with death is disannulled" (annihilated)
("IB31), the use of the word "isa is to be explained from the fact that the
guilt, which brought the judgment in its train, could be cancelled by a
sacrificial expiation (cf . Isa. vi. 7 and xxii. 14) ; so that there is no
necessity to resort to a meaning which is altogether foreign to the word,
viz. that of covering up by blotting over. When Hofmann therefore main-
tains that there is no other way of explaining the use of the word in these
passages, than by the supposition that, in addition to the verb -|B3 to cover,
there was another denominative verb, founded upon the word -|B3 a cover-
ing, or payment, the stumblingblock in the use of the word lies simply in
this, that Hofmann has taken a one-sided view of the idea of expiation,
through overlooking the fact, that the expiation had reference to the wrath
of God which hung over the sinner and had to be averted from him by
means of expiation, as is clearly proved by Ex. xxxii. SO as compared with
vers. 10 and 22. The meaning of expiation which properly belongs to the
verb 1S3 is not only retained in the nouns cippurim and capporeth, but lies
at the root of the word copher, which is formed from the Kal, as we may
clearly see from Ex. xxx. 12-16, where the Israelites are ordered to pay a
copher at the census, to expiate their souls, i.e. to cover their souls from the
death which threatens the unholy, when he draws near without expiation
to a holy God. Vid. Oehler in Herzog's Oycl.
Digitized by
Google
28t> THE THIRD BOOK OF HOSES.
which the nation was punished, is so described, as serving to
avert the complete destruction which threatened it. And lastly,
it was in some cases a "Wb, such, for example, as the atonement-
, money paid at the numbering of the people (Ex. xxx. 12 sqq.),
and the payment made in the case referred to in Ex. xxi. 30.
If, therefore, the idea of satisfaction unquestionably lay at
the foundation of the atonement that was made, in all those
cases in which it was effected by a penal judgment, or judicial
poena ; the intercession of the priest, or the fumigation which
embodied it, cannot possibly be regarded as a satisfaction ren-
dered to the justice of God, so that we cannot attribute the idea
of satisfaction to every kind of sacrificial expiation. Still less
can it be discerned in the slaying of the animal, when simply
regarded as the shedding of blood. To this we may add, that
in the laws for the sin-offering there is no reference at all to
expiation ; and in the case of the burnt-offering, the laying on
of hands is described as the act by which it was to become well-
pleasing to God, and to expiate the offerer. Now, if the laying
on of hands was accompanied with a prayer, as the Jewish tra- .
dition affirms, and as we may most certainly infer from Deut.
xxvi. 13, apart altogether from Lev. xvi. 21, although no prayer
is expressly enjoined ; then in the case of the burnt-offerings and
peace-offerings, it is in this prayer, or the imposition of hands
which symbolized it, and by which the offerer substituted the
sacrifice for himself and penetrated it with his spirit, that we
must seek for the condition upon which the well-pleased ac-
ceptance of the sacrifice on the part of God depended, and in
consequence of .which it became an atonement for him ; in other
words, was fitted to cover him in the presence of the holiness
of God.
^j Vers. 5-9. The laying on of hands was followed by the
slaughtering (B^, never HW to put to death), which was per-
formed by the offerer himself in the case of the private sacrifices,
and by the priests and Levites in that of the national and festal
offerings (2 Chron. xxix. 22, 24, 34). The slaughtering took
place " before Jehovah" (see ver. 3), or, according to the more
precise account in ver. 11, on the side of the altar northward,
for which the expression " before the door of the tabernacle" is
sometimes used (chap. iii. 2, 8, 13, etc.). "i£3 }3 (a young ox) is
applied to a calf (?}V) in chap. ix. 2, and a mature young bull
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. I. 6-9. 287
(IB) in chap. iv. 3, 14. But the animal of one year old is called
<W in chap. ix. 2, and the mature ox of seven years old is called
"ID in Judg. vi. 25. At the slaughtering the blood was caught <- ■'
by the priests (2 Chron. xxix. 22), and sprinkled upon the altar.
When the sacrifices were very numerous, as at the yearly feasts,
the Levites helped to catch the blood (2 Chron. xxx. 16) ; but
the sprinkling upon the altar was always performed by the
priests alone. In the case of the burnt-offerings, the blood was
swung " against the altar round about," i.e. against all four sides
(walls) of the altar (not " over the surface of the altar") ; i.e. it
was poured out of the vessel against the walls of the altar with
a swinging motion. This was also done when peace-offerings
(chap. iii. 2, 8, 13, ix. 18) and trespass-offerings (chap. vii. 2)
were sacrificed ; but it was not so with the sin-offering (see at
chap. iv. 5). — Vers. 6 sqq. The offerer was then to flay the ^
slaughtered animal, to cut it (nru generally rendered fieXl^eiv in
the LXX.) into its pieces, — i.e. to cut it up into the different
pieces, into which an animal that has been killed is generally
divided, namely, according to the separate joints, or " according
to the bones" (Judg. xix. 29), — that he might boil its flesh in
pots (Ezek. xxiv. 4, 6). He was also to wash its intestines and %,
the lower part of its legs (ver. 9). 2$>, the inner part of the
bodyj or the contents of the inner part of the body, signifies the
viscera ; not including those of the breast, however, such as the
lungs, heart, and liver, to which the term is also applied in other
cases (for in the case of the peace-offerings, when the fat which
envelopes the intestines, the kidneys, and the liver-lobes was to be
placed upon the altar, there is no washing spoken of), but the
intestines of the abdomen or belly, such as the stomach and y/
bowels, which would necessarily have to be thoroughly cleansed,
even when they were about to be used as food, t^jn?, which is
only found in the dual, and always in connection either with
oxen and sheep, or with the springing legs of locusts (chap. xi.
21), denotes the shin, or calf below the knee, or the leg from the
knee down to the foot. — Vers. 7, 8. It was the duty of the sons \y
of Aaron, i.e. of the priests, to offer the sacrifice upon the altar.
To this end they were to " put fire upon the altar" (of course
this only applies to the first burnt-offering presented after the
erection of the altar, as the fire was to be constantly burning
upon the altar after that, without being allowed to go out, vi. 6),
Digitized by
Google
288 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
and to lay " wood in order upon the fire" (TIP to lay in regular
order), and then to " lay the parts, the head and the fat, in order
upon the wood on the fire" and thus to cause the whole to ascend
in smoke. TJB, which is only used in connection with the burnt-
offering (vers. 8, 12, and chap. viii. 20), signifies, according to
the ancient versions (LXX. areap) and the rabbinical writers,
the fat, probably those portions of fat which were separated from
the entrails and taken out to wash. Bocharts explanation is
adeps a carne sejunctus. The head and fat are specially men-
tioned along with the pieces of flesh, partly because they are
both separated from the flesh when animals are slaughtered, and
partly also to point out distinctly that the whole of the animal
(" all," ver. 9) was to be burned upon the altar, with the excep-
tion of the skin, which was given to the officiating priest (chap,
vii. 8), and the contents of the intestines. "Mppii, to cause to
ascend in smoke and steam (Ex. xxx. 7), which is frequently
construed with fnatsn towards the altar (n local, so used as to
include position in a place ; vid. vers. 13, 15, 17, chap ii. 2, 9, etc.),
or whh nansri (chap. vi. 8), or nansrr-^y (chap. ix. 13, 17), was
the technical expression for burning the sacrifice upon the altar,
and showed that the intention was not simply to burn those por-
tions of the sacrifice which were placed in the fire, i.e. to destroy,
or turn them into ashes, but by this process of burning to cause
the odour which was eliminated to ascend to heaven as the ethe-
real essence of the sacrifice, for a "firing of a sweet savour unto
Jehovah" n#K, firing (" an offering made by fire," Eng. Ver.),
is the general expression used to denote the sacrifices, which
ascended in fire upon the altar, whether animal or vegetable
(chap. ii. 2, 11, 16), and is also applied to the incense laid upon
the shew-bread (chap. xxiv. 7) ; and hence the shew-bread itself
(chap. xxiv. 7), and even those portions of the sacrifices which
Jehovah assigned to the priests for them to eat (Deut. xviii. 1
cf. Josh. xiii. 14), came also to be included in the firings for
Jehovah. The word does not occur out of the Pentateuch,
except in Josh. xiii. 14 and 1 Sam. ii. 28. In the laws of sacri-
fice it is generally associated with the expression, " a sweet
savour unto Jehovah" (pa fit) eicoBias: LXX.): an anthropo-
morphic description of the divine satisfaction with the sacrifices
offered, or the gracious acceptance of them on the part of God
(see Gen. viii. 21), which is used in connection with all the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. I. 10-17. 289
sacrifices, even the expiatory or sin-offerings (chap. iv. 31), and
with the drink-offering also (Num. xv. 7, 10).
Vers. 10-13. With regard to the mode of sacrificing, the •/ —
instructions already given for the oxen applied to the flock (i.e.
to the sheep and goats) as well, so that the leading points are
repeated here, together with a more precise description of the
place for slaughtering, viz. "by the side of the altar towards the
north," i.e. on the north side of the altar. This was the rule
with all the slain-offerings ; although it is only in connection
with the burnt-offerings, sin-offerings, and trespass-offerings
(chap. iv. 24, 29, 33, vi. 18, vii. 2, xiv. 13) that it is expressly
mentioned, whilst the indefinite expression " at the door (in front)
of the tabernacle " is applied to the peace-offerings in chap. iii. 2,
8, 13, as it is to the trespass-offerings in chap. iv. 4, from which
the Rabbins have inferred, though hardly upon good ground,
that the peace-offerings could be slaughtered in any part of the
court. The northern side of the altar was appointed as the
place of slaughtering, however, not from the idea that the Deity
dwelt in the north (Ewald), for such an idea is altogether
foreign to Mosaism, but, as Knobel supposes, probably because
the table of shew-bread, with the continual meat-offering, stood
on the north side in the holy place. Moreover, the eastern side
of the altar in the court was the place for the refuse, or heap of
ashes (ver. 16) ; the ascent to the altar was probably on the
south side, as Josephus affirms that it was in the second temple
(/. de bell. jud. v. 5, 6) ; and the western side, or the space be-
tween the altar and the entrance to the holy place, would
unquestionably have been the most unsuitable of all for the
slaughtering. In ver. 12 'W ItPtfrriKI is to be connected per
zeugma with VnTO?, " let him cut it up according to its parts, and
(sever) its head and its fat."
Vers. 14-17. The burnt-offering of fowls was to consist of w —
turtle-doves or young pigeons. The Israelites have reared
pigeons and kept dovecots from time immemorial (Isa. lx. 8, cf.
2 Kings vi. 25) ; and the rearing of pigeons continued to be a
favourite pursuit with the later Jews (Josephus, de bell. jud. v.
4, 4), so that they might very well be reckoned among the
domesticated animals. There are also turtle-doves and wild
pigeons in Palestine in such abundance, that they could easily
furnish the ordinary animal food of the poorer classes, and serve
PENT. — VOL. II. T
/"
Digitized by
Google
290 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
as sacrifices in the place of the larger animals. The directions
for sacrificing these, were that the priest was to bring the bird
to the altar, to nip off its head, and cause it to ascend in smoke
upon the altar, pfc, which only occurs in ver. 15 and chap. v. 8,
signifies undoubtedly to pinch off, and not merely to pinch ; for
otherwise the words in chap. v. 8, u and shall not divide it
asunder," would be superfluous. We have therefore to think
of it as a severance of the head, as the LXX. (airoicvi%ei>v) and
Rabbins have done, and not merely a wringing of the neck and
incision in the skin by which the head was left hanging to the
body ; partly because the words, " and not divide it asunder,"
are wanting here, and partly also because of the words, " and
burn it upon the altar," which immediately follow, and which
must refer to the head, and can only mean that, after the head
had been pinched off, it was to be put at once into the burning
altar-fire. For it is obviously unnatural to regard these words
as anticipatory, and refer them to the burning of the whole dove;
not only from the construction itself, but still more on account
of the clause which follows : " and the blood thereof shall be
pressed out against the wall of the altar." The small quantity
that there was of the blood prevented it from being caught in a
vessel, and swung from it against the altar. — Vers. 16, 17. He
then took out Rnxia taK"ip~riK, i.e., according to the probable
explanation of these obscure words, "its crop in (with) the
faces thereof" l and threw it " at the side of the altar eastwards"
i.e. on the eastern side of the altar, " on the ash-place," where
the ashes were thrown when taken from the altar (chap. vi. 3).
He then made an incision in the wings of the pigeon, but with-
1 This is the rendering adopted by Onkehs. The LXX., on the contrary,
render it dtpihii ro» ■jrpo'Ko/iou aim rait ■frepol;, and this rendering is followed
b/ Luther (and the English Version, Tr.), " its crop with its feathers."
But the Hebrew for this would have been invJV In Mishnah, Sebach. vi. 5,
the instructions are the following : " et removet ingluviem etpennas et viscera
egredentia cum ilia." This interpretation may be substantially correct,
although the reference of nnSU3 to the feathers of the pigeon cannot be
sustained on the ground assigned. For if the bird's -crop was taken out, the
intestines with their contents would unquestionably come out along with it.
The plucking off of the feathers, however, follows from the analogy of the
flaying of the animal. Only, in the text neither intestines nor feathers are
mentioned ; they are passed over as subordinate matters, that could readily be
understood from the analogy of the other instructions.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. II. 291
oat severing them, and burned them on the altar-fire (ver. 17,
cf. ver. 9).
The burnt-offerings all culminated in the presentation of the
whole sacrifice upon the altar, that it might ascend to heaven,
transformed into smoke and fragrance. Hence it is not only
called n?J>, the ascending (see Gen. viii. 20), but ?y|, a whole-offer-
ing (Deut. xxxiii. 10 ; Ps. li. 21 ; 1 Sam. vii. 9). If the burning
and sending up in the altar-fire shadowed forth the self-surren-
der of the offerer to the purifying fire of the Holy Ghost (p. 280) ;
the burnt-offering was an embodiment of the idea of the conse-
cration and self-surrender of the whole man to the Lord, to be
pervaded by the refining and sanctifying power of divine grace.
This self-surrender was to be vigorous and energetic in its
character ; and this was embodied in the instructions to choose
male animals for the burnt-offering, the male sex being stronger
and more vigorous than the female. To render the self-sacrifice
perfect, it was necessary that the offerer should spiritually die,
and that through the mediator of his salvation he should put
his soul into a living fellowship with the Lord by sinking it as
it were into the death of the sacrifice that had died for him,
and should also bring his bodily members within the operations
of the gracious Spirit of God, that thus he might be renewed
and sanctified both body and soul, and enter into union with
God.
Chap. ii. The Meat-offering. — The burnt-offerings are
followed immediately by the meat-offerings, not only because
they were offered along with them from the very first (Gen. iv.
3), but because they stood nearest to them in their general sig-
nification. The usual epithet applied to them is minchah, lit. a
present with which any one sought to obtain the favour or good-
will of a superior (Gen. xxxii. 21, 22, xliii. 11, 15, etc.), then
the gift offered to God as a sign of grateful acknowledgment
that the offerer owed everything to Him, as well as of a desire to
secure His favour and blessing. This epithet was used at first
for animal sacrifices as well as offerings of fruit (Gen. iv. 4, 5).
But in the Mosaic law it was restricted to bloodless offerings,
i.e. to the meat-offerings, whether presented independently, or
in connection with the animal sacrifices (zebachim). The full
term is korban minchah, offering of a gift: hwpov Ovala or
Digitized by
Google
292 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
irpoa-<j}opd, also 6vo-ia alone (LXX.). The meat-offerings con-
sisted of fine wheaten flour (vers. 1-3), or cakes of such flour
(vers. 4-6), or roasted grains as an offering of first-fruits (vers.
14-16). To all of them there were added oil (vers. 1, 4-7, 15) and
salt (ver. 13) ; and to those which consisted of flour and grains,
incense also (vers. 1 and 15). Only a handful of each kind was
burnt upon the altar ; the rest was handed over to the priests, as
" a thing most holy" (ver. 3).
Vers. 1-3. The first kind consisted of soleth, probably from
n?D = ??D to swing, swung flour, like troKij from iraKkto, i.e.
fine flour ; and for this no doubt wheaten flour was always used,
even when tytpn is not added, as in Ex. xxix. 2, to distinguish
it from np5 ? or ordinary meal (<refi(8a\i<: : 1 Kings v. 2). The
suffix in 133*71? (his offering) refers to t^B*., which is frequently
construed»as both masculine and feminine (chap. iv. 2, 27, 28,
v. 1, etc.), or as masculine only (Num. xxxi. 28) in the sense of
person, any one. " And let him pour oil upon it, and put in-
cense thereon (or add incense to it)." This was not spread upon
the flour, on which oil had been poured, but added in such a
way, that it could be lifted from the minchah and burned upon
the altar (ver. 2). The priest was then to take a handful of the
gift that had been presented, and cause the azcarah of it to
evaporate above (together with) all the incense. teDj"> tft>D : the
filling of his closed hand, i.e. as much as he could hold with his
hand full, not merely with three fingers, as the Rabbins affirm.
Azcarah (from "Q\, formed like "TTOtPK from IDE') is only ap-
plied -to Jehovah's portion, which was burned upon the altar in
the case of the meat-offering (vers. 9, 16, and chap. vi. 8), the
sin-offering of flour (chap. v. 12), and the jealousy-offering
(Num. v. 26), and to the incense added to the shew-bread
(chap. xxiv. 7). It does not mean the prize portion, i.e. the
portion offered for the glory of God, as De Dieu and Rosen-
maller maintain, still less the fragrance-offering (Ewald), but
the memorial, or remembrance-portion, /ivr}/j.6o-vvov or dvdfivr)-
<rt? (chap. xxiv. 7, LXX.), memoriale (Vulg.), inasmuch, as
that part of the minchah which was placed upon the altar
ascended in the smoke of the fire " on behalf of the giver, as a
practical memento (' remember me') to Jehovah ;" though there
is no necessity that we should trace the word to the Hiphil in
consequence. The rest of the minchah was to belong to Aaron
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. II. 4-11. 293
and his sons, i.e. to the priesthood, as a most holy thing of the
firings of Jehovah. The term " most holy" is applied to all
the sacrificial gifts that were consecrated to Jehovah, in this
sense, that such portions as were not burned upon the altar
were to be eaten by the priests alone in a holy place ; the laity,
and even such of the Levites as were not priests, being prohi-
bited from partaking of them (see at Ex. xxvi. 33 and xxx.
10). Thus the independent meat-offerings, which were not
entirely consumed upon the altar (vers. 3, 10, vi. 10, x. 12), the
sin-offerings and trespass-offerings, the flesh of which was not
bnrned outside the camp (chap. vi. 18, 22, vii. 1, 6, x. 17, xiv.
13, Num. xviii. 9), the shew-bread (chap. xxiv. 9), and even
objects put under the ban and devoted to the Lord, whether
men, cattle, or property of other kinds (chap, xxvii. 28), as well
as the holy incense (Ex. xxx. 36), — in fact, all the holy sacrificial
gifts, in which there was any fear lest a portion should be per-
verted to other objects, — were called most holy; whereas the
burnt-offerings, the priestly meat-offerings (chap. vi. 12—16) and
other sacrifices, which were quite as holy, were not called most
holy, because the command to burn them entirely precluded the
possibility of their being devoted to any of the ordinary pur-
poses of life.
Vers. 4-11. The second kind consisted of pastry of fine
flour and oil prepared in different forms. The first was maapheh
tannur, oven-baking : by TUB we are not to understand a baker's
oven (Hos. vii. 4, 6), but a large pot in the room, such as are
used for baking cakes in the East even to the present day (see
my Archaol. § 99, 4). The oven-baking might consist either of
" cakes of unleavened meal mixed (made) with oil," or of " pan-
cakes of unleavened meal anointed (smeared) with oil" Challoth :
probably from 7?n to pierce, perforated cakes, of a thicker
kind. Rekikim : from pfl to be beaten out thin ; hence cakes
or pancakes. As the latter were to be smeared with oil, we
cannot understand 5wS as signifying merely the pouring of
oil upon the baked cakes, but must take it in the sense of
mingled, mixed, i.e. kneaded with oil (ireQvpafiivovs (LXX.),
or according to Hesychius, fiefujfievov<s). — Vers. 5, 6. Secondly,
if the minchah was an offering upon the pan, it was also to be
made of fine flour mixed with oil and unleavened. Machabath
is a pan, made, according to Ezek. iv. 3, of iron, — no doubt a
Digitized by
Google
294 THE THIBD BOOK OF MOSES.
large iron plate, such as the Arabs still use for baking unleav-
ened bread in large round cakes made flat and thin {Robinson,
Palestine i. 50, ii. 180). These girdles or flat pans are still in use
among the Turcomans of Syria and the Armenians (see Burck-
hardt, Syr. p. 1003 ; Tavernier, Reise 1, p. 280), whilst the Ber-
bians and Cabyles of Africa use shallow iron frying-pans for
the purpose, and call them tajen, — the same name, no doubt, as
Tqyavov, with which the LXX. have rendered machabath. These
cakes were to be broken in pieces for the minchah, and oil to be
poured upon them (the inf. abs. as in Ex. xiii. 3, xx. 8, vid. Ges.
§ 131, 4) ; just as the Bedouins break the cakes which they bake
in the hot ashes into small pieces, and prepare them for eating
by pouring butter or oil upon them. — Ver. 7. Thirdly, " If thy
oblation be a tigel-minchah, it shall be made of fine flour unth
oil." Marchesheth is not a gridiron (eoj(apa, LXX.) ; but, as it is
derived from Bnn, ebullivit, it must apply to a vessel in which food
was boiled. We have therefore to think of cakes boiled in oil. —
Vers. 8-10. The presentation of the minchah " made of these
things," i.e. of the different kinds of pastry mentioned in vers.
4-7, resembled in the main that described in vers. 1-3. The
|D D'nn in ver. 9 corresponds to the JO Y®P T in ver. 2, and does
not denote any special ceremony of heaving, as is supposed by
the Rabbins and many archaeological writers, who understand
by it a solemn movement up and down. This will be evident
from a comparison of chap. iii. 3 with chap. iv. 8, 31, 35, and
vii. 3. In the place of WQ? D*v in chap. iv. 8 we find rnfl? 2npn
in chap. iii. 3 (cf . chap. vii. 3), and instead of nat "tiBto DIV "itPK?
in chap. iv. 10, 3?n iwn i^K? in chap. iv. 31 and 35 ; so that
\0 DHfi evidently denotes simply the lifting off or removal of
those parts which were to be burned upon the altar from the rest
of the sacrifice (cf . Bdhr, ii. 357, and my Archaologie i. p. 244-
5). — In vers. 11-13 there follow two laws which were applicable
to all the meat-offerings : viz. to offer nothing leavened (ver. 11),
and to salt every meat-offering, and in fact every sacrifice, with
salt (ver. 13). Every minclwh, was to be prepared without leaven :
"for all leaven, and all honey, ye shall not burn a firing of it for
Jehovah. As an offering of first-fruits ye may offer them (leaven
and honey, i.e. pastry made with them) to Jehovah, but they shall
not come upon the altar." Leaven and honey are mentioned
together as things which produce fermentation. Honey has also
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. IL 11-18. 295
an acidifying or fermenting quality, and was even used for
the preparation of vinegar (Plin. h. n. 11, 15 ; 21, 14). In
rabbinical writings, therefore, B^n signifies not only dulcedinem
admittere, but corrumpsi, fermentari, fermentescere (vid. Buxtorf,
lex. chald. taltn. et rabb. p. 500). By " honey" we are to under-
stand not grape-honey, the dibs of the Arabs, as Rashi and Bahr
do, but the honey of bees ; for, according to 2 Chron. xxxi. 5,
this alone was offered as an offering of first-fruits along with
corn, new wine, and oil ; and in fact, as a rule, this was the only
honey used by the ancients in sacrifice (see Bochart, ffieroz. iii.
pp. 393 sqq.). The loaves of first-fruits at the feast of Weeks
were leavened ; but they were assigned to the priests, and not
bnrned upon the altar (chap, xxiii. 17, 20). So also were the
cakes offered with the vow-offerings, which were applied to the
sacrificial meal (chap. vii. 13) ; but not the shew-bread, as
Knobel maintains (see at chap. xxiv. 5 sqq.). Whilst leaven
and honey were forbidden to be used with any kind of minchah,
because of their producing fermentation and corruption, salt on
the other hand was not to be omitted from any sacrificial offer-
ing. u Thou shalt not let the salt of tlie covenant of thy God
cease from thy meat-offering" i.e. thou shalt never offer a meat-
offering without salt. The meaning which the salt, with its
power to strengthen food and preserve it from putrefaction and
corruption, imparted to the sacrifice, was the unbending truth-
fulness of that self-surrender to the Lord embodied in the sacri-
fice, by which all impurity and hypocrisy were repelled. The
salt of the sacrifice is called the salt of the covenant, because in
common life salt was the symbol of covenant ; treaties being
concluded and rendered firm and inviolable, according to a well-
known custom of the ancient Greeks (see Eustathiut ad Iliad, i.
449) which is still retained among the Arabs, by the parties to
an alliance eating bread and salt together, as a sign of the treaty
which they had made. As a covenant of this kind was called
a "covenant of salt," equivalent to an indissoluble covenant
(Num. xviii. 19 ; 2 Chron. xiii. 5), so here the salt added to the
sacrifice is designated as salt of the covenant of God, because
of its imparting strength and purity to the sacrifice, by which
Israel was strengthened and fortified in covenant fellowship with
Jehovah. The following clause, " upon (with) every sacrificial
gift of thine shalt thou offer salt," is not to be restricted to the
Digitized by
Google
296 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
meat-offering, as Knobel supposes, nor to be understood as mean-
ing that the salt was only to be added to the sacrifice externally,
to be offered with or beside it ; in which case the strewing of
salt upon the different portions of the sacrifice (Ezek. xliii. 24 ;
Mark ix. 49) would have been a departure from the ancient law.
For korban without any further definition denotes the sacrificial
offerings generally, the bleeding quite as much as the bloodless,
and the closer definition of ?£ -a*}?? (offer upon) is contained in
the first clause of the verse, "season with salt." The words
contain a supplementary rule which was applicable to every
sacrifice (bleeding and bloodless), and was so understood from
time immemorial by the Jews themselves (cf. Josephus, Ant.
iii. 9, l). 1
Vers. 14-16. The third kind was the meat-offering of first-
fruits, i.e. of the first ripening corn. This was to be offered in
the form of " ears parched or roasted by the fire ; in other words,
to be made from ears which had been roasted at the fire. To
this is added the further definition ?D"j? fens " rubbed out of field-
fruit." fens, from fen3=D"]3, to rub to pieces, that which is rubbed
to pieces ; it only occurs here and in vers. 14 and 16. ?B"i? is
applied generally to a corn-field, in Isa. xxix. 17 and xxxii. 16 to
cultivated ground, as distinguished from desert; here, and in
chap, xxiii. 14 and 2 Kings iv. 42, it is used metonymically for
field-fruit, and denotes early or the first-ripe corn. Corn roasted
by the fire, particularly grains of wheat, is still a very favourite
food in Palestine, Syria, and Egypt. The ears are either burnt
along with the stalks before they are quite ripe, and then rubbed
out in a sieve ; or stalks of wheat are bound up in small bundles
and roasted at a bright fire, and then the grains are eaten
(Seetzen, i. p. 94, iii. p. 221 ; Mobinson, Biblical Researches, p.
393). Corn roasted in this manner is not so agreeable as when
(as is frequently the case in harvest, Ruth ii. 14) the grains of
wheat are taken before they are quite dry and hard, and parched
in a pan or upon an iron plate, and then eaten either along with
or in the place of bread (Robinson, Pal. ii. 394). The minchah
mentioned here was prepared in the first way, viz. of roasted
ears of corn, which were afterwards rubbed to obtain the grains :
* The Greeks and Romans also regarded salt as indispensable to a sacri-
fice. Maxime in sacris inteUigitur auctoritas salts, quando nulla conficiuntur
sine mola salsa. Plin. h. n. 31, 7 (cf. 41).
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. II. 14-16. 297
it consisted, therefore, not of crushed corn or groats, but only of
toasted grains. In the place of *v£ 3'3K we find yp (chap, xxiii.
14), or ^<>p (Josh. t. 11), afterwards employed. Oil and incense
were to be added, and the same course adopted with the offering
as in the case of the offering of flour (vers. 2, 3).
If therefore, all the meat-offerings consisted either of flour
and oil, — the most important ingredients in the vegetable food
of the Israelites, — or of food already prepared for eating, there
can be no doubt that in them the Israelite offered his daily bread
to the Lord, though in a manner which made an essential differ-
ence between them and the merely dedicatory offerings of the
first-fruits of corn and bread. For whilst the loaves of first-
fruits were leavened, and, as in the case of the sheaf of first-
fruits, no part of them was burnt upon the altar (chap, xxiii. 10,
11, xvii. 20), every independent meat-offering was to be prepared
without leaven, and a portion given to the Lord as fire-food, for
a savour of satisfaction upon the altar ; and the rest was to be
scrupulously kept from being used by the offerer, as a most holy
thing, and to be eaten at the holy place by the sanctified priests
alone, as the servants of Jehovah, and the mediators between
Him and the nation. On account of this peculiarity, the meat-
offerings cannot have denoted merely the sanctification of earthly
food, but were symbols of the spiritual food prepared and enjoyed
by the congregation of the Lord. If even the earthly life is not
sustained and nourished merely by the daily bread which a man
procures and enjoys, but by the power of divine grace, which
strengthens and blesses the food as means of preserving life ;
much less can the spiritual life be nourished by earthly food,
but only by the spiritual food which a man prepares and partakes
of, by the power of the Spirit of God, from the true bread of
life, or the word of God. Now, as oil in the Scriptures is in-
variably a symbol of the Spirit of God as the principle of all
spiritual vis vitce (see p. 174), so bread-flour and bread, procured
from the seed of the field, are symbols of the word of God
(Deut. viii. 3 ; Luke viii. 11). As God gives man corn and oil
to feed and nourish his bodily life, so He gives His people His
word and Spirit, that they may draw food from these for the
spiritual life of the inner man. The work of sanctification con-
sists in the operation of this spiritual food, through the right
use of the means of grace for growth in pious conversation and
Digitized by
Google
/-
298 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
good works (Matt. v. 16 ; I Pet. ii. 12). The enjoyment of
this food fills the inner man with peace, joy, and blessedness in
God. This frnit of the spiritual life is shadowed forth in the
meat-offerings. They were to be kept free, therefore, both from
the leaven of hypocrisy (Luke xii. 1) and of malice and wicked-
ness (1 Cor. v. 8), and also from the honey of the delieice carnis,
because both are destructive of spiritual life ; whilst, on the other
hand, the salt of the covenant of God (»'.«. the purifying, strength-
ening, and quickening power of the covenant, by which moral
corruption was averted) and the incense of prayer were both to
be added, in order that the fruit of the spiritual life might be-
come well-pleasing to the Lord. It was upon this signification
that the most holy character of the meat-offerings was founded.
Chap. iii. The Peace-offerings. — The third kind of
sacrifice is called Vy%? rot, commonly rendered thank-offering,
but more correctly a saving-offering (Heilsopfer : Angl. peace-
offering). Besides this fuller form, which is the one most com-
monly employed in Leviticus, we meet with the abbreviated
forms tWUt and DW : euj. rot in chap. vii. 16, 17, xxiii. 37,
more especially in combination with n^, chap. xvii. 8 cf . Ex. x.
25, xviii. 12 ; Num. xv. 3, 5 ; Deut. xii. 27 ; Josh. xxii. 27 ; 1
Sam. vi. 15, xv. 22 ; 2 Kings v. 17, x. 24 ; Isa. lvi. 7 ; Jer. vi.
20, vii. 21, xvii. 26, etc.,— and ttote in chap. ix. 22 ; Ex. xx. 24,
xxxii. 6 ; Deut xxvii. 7 ; Josh. viii. 31 ; Judg. xx. 26, xxi. 4 ;
1 Sam. xiii. 9 ; 2 Sam. vi. 17, 18, xxiv. 25 ; 1 Kings iii. 15, etc.
rot is derived from rot, which is not applied to slaughtering
generally (on^), but, with the exception of Deut. xii. 15, where
the use of rot for slaughtering is occasioned by the retrospective
reference to Lev. xvii. 3, 4, is always used for slaying as a sacri-
fice, or sacrificing ; and even in 1 Sam. xxviii. 24, Ezek. xxxiv.
3 and xxxix. 17, it is only used in a figurative sense. The real
meaning, therefore, is sacrificial slaughtering, or slaughtered
sacrifice. It is sometimes used in a wider sense, and applied to
every kind of bleeding sacrifice (1 Sam. i. 21, ii. 19), especially
in connection with minchah (1 Sam. ii. 29 ; Ps. xl. 7 ; Isa. xix.
21 ; Dan. ix. 27, etc.) ; but it is mostly used in a more restricted
sense, and applied to the peace-offerings, or slain-offerings, which
culminated in a sacrificial meal, as distinguished from the burnt
and sin-offerings, in which case it is synonymous with EwC* or
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. III. 1-5. 299
D'pjB* rnr. The word shelamim, the singular of which (shelem)
is only met with in Amos v. 22, is applied exclusively to these
sacrifices, and is derived from aW to be whole, uninjured. It
does not mean " compensation or restitution," for which we find
the nouns dW (Deut. xxxii. 35), ttW (Hos. ix. 7), and no^e>
(Ps. xci. 8), formed from the Piel oW, but integritat completa,
pacifica, beata, answering to the Sept. rendering avnr\pwv. The
plural denotes the entire round of blessings and powers, by which
the salvation or integrity of man in his relation to God is estab-
lished and secured. The object of the shelamim was invariably
salvation: sometimes they were offered as an embodiment of
thanksgiving for salvation already received, sometimes as a
prayer for the salvation desired; so that they embraced both
supplicatory offerings and thank-offerings, and were offered
even in times of misfortune, or on the day on which supplication
was offered for the help of God (Jndg. xx. 26, xxi. 4; 1 Sam.
xiii. 9 ; 2 Sam xxiv. 25). 1 The law distinguishes three differ-
ent kinds : praise-offerings, vow-offerings, and freewill-offerings
(chap. vii. 12, 16). They were all restricted to oxen, sheep, and
goats, either male or female, pigeons not being allowed, as they
were always accompanied with a common sacrificial meal, for
which a pair of pigeons did not suffice.
Vers. 1—5. In the act of sacrificing, the presentation of the
animal before Jehovah, the laying on of hands, the slaughtering,
and the sprinkling of the blood were the same as in the case of
the burnt-offering (chap. i. 3-5). It was in the application of
the flesh that the difference first appeared. — Ver. 3. The person
presenting the sacrifice was to offer as a firing for Jehovah, first,
" the fat which covered the entrails " (chap. i. 9), i.e. the large
net which stretches from the stomach over the bowels and com-
pletely envelopes the latter, and which is only met with in the
case of men and the mammalia generally, and in the ruminant
animals abounds with fat; secondly, "all the fat on the en-
trails," i.e. the fat attached to the intestines, which could easily
be peeled off ; thirdly, "the two kidneys, and the fat upon them
(and) that upon the loins (WBX\\ %.e. upon the inner muscles of
the loins, or in the region of the kidneys ; and fourthly, " the net
1 Ct.Hengstenberg, Dissertations. Outram's explanation is quite correct :
Sacrificia talutaria in sacris Utteris shelamim dicta, ut quae semper de rebus
prosperis fieri solerent, impetratis utique aut impetrandis.
Digitized by
Google
300 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
upon the liver." The net (irw^n) upon (?P vers. 4, 10, 15, chap,
iv. 9, vii. 4 ; Ex. xxix. 13), or from (JO chap. ix. 10), or of the
liver (chap. viii. 16, 25, ix. 19 ; Ex. xxix. 22), cannot he the
large lobe of the liver, o Twfibs tov fytra,TO<; (LXX.), because
this is part of the liver itself, and does not lie 133iT?l? over
(upon) the liver ; nor is it simply a portion of fat, but the small
net {omentum minus), the liver-net, or stomach-net (reticulum
jeeoris ; Vulg., Luth., De Wette, and Knobel), which commences
at the division between the right and left lobes of the liver, and
stretches on the one side across the stomach, and on the other to
the region of the kidneys. Hence the clause, " on the kidneys
(i.e. by them, as far as it reaches) shall he take it away." This
smaller net is delicate, but not so fat as the larger net ; though
it still forms part of the fat portions. The word Win', which only
occurs in the passages quoted, is to be explained from the Arabic
and Ethiopic (to stretch over; to stretch out), whence also the
words "W a cord (Judg. xvi. 7 ; Ps. xi. 2), and 1JVD the bow-
string (Ps. xxi. 13) or extended teDt-ropes (Ex. xxxv. 18), are
derived. The four portions mentioned comprehended all the
separable fat in the inside of the sacrificial animal. Hence they
were also designated "all the fat" of the sacrifice (ver. 16,
chap. iv. 8, 19, 26, 31, 35, vii. 3), or briefly "the fat" (^"D ver.
9, chap. vii. 33, xvi. 25, xvii. 6 ; Num. xviii. 17), " the fat por
tions" (D-^qn chap. vi. 5, viii. 26, ix. 19, 20, 24, x. 15).— Ver. 5.
This fat the priests were to burn upon the altar, over the burnt
sacrifice, on the pieces of wood upon the fire, rvtyrpy does not
mean " in the manner or style of the burnt-offering " (Knobel),
but "upon (over) the burnt-offering." For apart from the fact
that 7% cannot be shown to have this meaning, the peace-offer-
ing was preceded as a rule by the burnt-offering. At any rate it
was always preceded by the daily burnt-offering, which burned,
if not all day, at all events the whole of the forenoon, until it
was quite consumed ; so that the fat portions of the peace-offer-
ings were to be laid upon the burnt-offering which was burning
already. That this is the meaning of n?5tfr?J? is placed beyond
all doubt, both by chap. vi. 5, where the priest is directed to burn
wood every morning upon the fire of the altar, and then to place
the burnt-offering 'upon it (<fw), and upon that to cause the fat
portions of the peace-offerings to evaporate in Smoke, and also
by chap. ix. 14, where Aaron is said first of all to have burned
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. III. 6-16. 301
the flesh and head of the burnt-offering upon the altar, then to
have washed the entrails and legs of the animal, and burned
them on the altar, itytn ?V, i.e. upon (over) the portions of the
burnt-offering that were burning already.
Vers. 6-16. The same rules apply to the peace-offerings of
sheep and goats, except that, in addition to the fat portions,
which were to be burned upon the altar in the case of the oxen
(vers. 3, 4) and goats (vers. 14, 15), the fat tail of the sheep was
to be consumed as well. fDnpn flvKfi: "the fat tail whole"
(ver. 9), eauda ovillavelarietinaeaquecrassaetadiposa; the same
in Arabic (Ges. thes. p. 102). The fat tails which the sheep
have in Northern Africa and Egypt, also in Arabia, especially
Southern Arabia, and Syria, often weigh 15 lbs. or more, and
small carriages on wheels are sometimes placed under them to
bear their weight (Sonnini, R. ii. p. 358 ; Bochart, Hieroz. i. pp.
556 sqq.). It consists of something between marrow and fat.
Ordinary sheep are also found in Arabia and Syria; but in
modern Palestine all the sheep are " of the broad-tailed species."
The broad part of the tail is an excresence of fat, from which
the true tail hangs down (Robinson, Pal. ii. 166). " Near the
rump-bone shall he (the offerer) take it (the fat tail) away," i.e.
separate it from the body. DXV, air. Xey., is, according to Saad.,
os cauda s. coccygis, i.e. the rump or tail-bone, which passes over
into the vertebrae of the tail (cf . Bochart, i. pp. 560-1). In vers.
11 and 16 the fat portions which were burned are called "food
of the firing for Jehovah," or " food of the firing for a sweet
savour," i.e. food which served as a firing for Jehovah, or reached
Jehovah by being burned ; cf. Num. xxviii. 24, "food of the
firing of a sweet savour for Jehovah." Hence not only are the
daily burnt-offerings and the burnt and sin-offerings of the
different feasts called " food of Jehovah " (" My bread," Num.
xxviii. 2); but the sacrifices generally are described as "the
food of God" ("the bread of their God," chap. xxi. 6, 8, 17, 21,
22, and xxii. 25), as. food, that is, which Israel produced and
caused to ascend to its God in fire as a sweet smelling savour. —
Nothing is determined here with regard to the appropriation of
the flesh of the peace-offerings, as their destination for a sacri-
ficial meal was already known from traditional custom. The
more minute directions for the meal itself are given in chap. vii.
11-36, where the meaning of these sacrifices is more fully ex-
Digitized by
Google
302 THE THIBD BOOK OF HOSES.
plained. — In ver. 17 (ver. 16) the general rule is added, u all fat
belongs to Jehovah" and the law, " eat neither fat nor blood," is
enforced as " an eternal statute " for the generations of Israel (see
at Ex. xii. 14, 24) in all their dwelling-places (see Ex. x. 23 and
xii. 20).
Chap. iv. and v. The Expiatory Sacrifices. — The sacri-
fices treated of in chap, i.— iii. are introduced by their names,
as though already known, for the purpose of giving them a legal
sanction. But in chap. iv. and v. sacrifices are appointed for
different offences, which receive their names for the first time
from the objects to which they apply, Le. from the sin, or the tres-
pass, or debt to be expiated by them : viz. JlKtsn sin, Le. sin-offer-
ing (chap. iv. 3, 8, 14, 19, etc.), and DK'X debt, i<e. debt-offering
(chap. v. 15, 16, 19, 25) ; — a clear proof that the sin and debt-
offerings were introduced at the same time as the Mosaic law.
The laws which follow are distinguished from the preceding
ones by the new introductory formula in chap. iv. 1, 2, which is
repeated in chap. v. 14. This repetition proves that chap. iv. 2—
v. 13 treats of the sin-offerings, and chap. v. 14-26 of the tres-
pass-offerings ; and this is confirmed by the substance of the two
series of laws.
Chap. iv. 2-v. 13. The Sin-offebing3. — The ritual pre-
scribed for these differed, with regard to the animals sacrificed,
the sprinkling of the blood, and the course adopted with the
flesh, according to the position which the person presenting them
happened to occupy in the kingdom of God. The classification
of persons was as follows: (1) the anointed priest (chap. iv.
2-12) ; (2) the whole congregation of Israel (vers. 13-21) ; (3)
the prince (vers. 22-26) ; (4) the common people (ver. 27-v.
13). In the case of the last, regard was also paid to their cir-
cumstances ; so that the sin-offerings could be regulated accord-
ing to the ability of the offerer, especially.for the lighter forms
of sin (chap. v. 1-13). — Ver. 2. "If a soul sin in wandering
from any (?30 in a partitive sense) of the commandments of Jeho-
vah, which ought not to be done, and do any one of them " (nn«D
with ft? partitive, cf. vers. 13, 22, 27, lit. anything of one). This
sentence, which stands at the head of the laws for the sin-offer-
ings, shows that the sin-offerings did not relate to sin or sinfulness
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. IV. 8-12. 303
in general, bnt to particular manifestations of sin, to certain dis-
tinct actions performed by individuals, or by the whole congrega-
tion. The distinguishing characteristic of the sin is expressed by
the term MJJ-B'3. (in error). No sins but those committed n$fa could
be expiated by sin-offerings ; whilst those committed with a high
hand were to be punished by the extermination of the sinner
(Num. xv. 27-31). HM#, from IJB' = roe> to wander or go wrong,
signifies mistake, error, oversight. But sinning " in error" is not
merely sinning through ignorance (vers. 13, 22, 27, v. 18), hurry,
want of consideration, or carelessness (chap. v. 1, 4, 15), but also
sinning unintentionally (Num. xxxv. 11, 15, 22, 23) ; hence all
such sins as spring from the weakness of flesh and blood, as dis-
tinguished from sins committed with a high (elevated) hand, or
in haughty, defiant rebellion against God and His commandments.
Vers. 3-12. The sin of the high priest. — The high priest is
here called the "anointed priest" (vers. 3, 5, 16, vi. 15) on
account of the completeness of the anointing with which he was
consecrated to his office (chap. viii. 12) ; in other places he is
called the great (or high) priest (chap. xxi. 10 ; Num. xxxv. 25,
etc.), and by later writers vhfan jnb, the priest the head, or head
priest (2 Kings xxv. 18; 2 Chron. xbo 11). If he sinned npt5»Ni>
DJ?ri, " to the sinning of the nation," i.e. in his official position
as representative of the nation before the Lord, and not merely
in his own personal relation to God, he was to offer for a sin-
offering because of his sin an ox without blemish, the largest of
all the sacrificial animals, because he filled the highest post in
Israel. — Ver. 4. The presentation, laying on of hands, and
slaughtering, were the same as in the case of the other sacrifices
(chap. i. 3-5). The first peculiarity occurs in connection with
the blood (vers. 5-7). The anointed priest was to take (a part)
of the blood and carry it into the tabernacle, and having dipped
his finger in it, to sprinkle some of it seven times before Jehovah
" in the face of the vail of the Holy " (Ex. xxvi. 31), i*. in the
direction towards the curtain ; after that, he was to put (jn?)
some of the blood upon the horns of the altar of incense, and
then to pour out the great mass of the blood, of which only a
small portion had been used for sprinkling and smearing upon
the horns of the altar, at the bottom, of the altar of burnt-offer-
ing. A sevenfold sprinkling "in the face of the vail" also
took place in connection with the sin-offering for the whole
Digitized by
Google
/
304 THE THIED BOOK OF MOSES.
congregation, as well as with the ox and he-goat which the
high priest offered as sin-offerings on the day of atonement for
himself, the priesthood, and the congregation, when the Hood
was sprinkled seven times before Q}f?) the capporeth (chap,
xvi. 14), and seven times upon the horns of the altar (chap. xvi.
18, 19). So too the blood of the red cow, that was slaughtered
as a sin-offering outside the camp, was sprinkled seven times in
the direction towards the tabernacle (Num. xix. 4). The seven-
fold sprinkling at the feast of atonement had respect to the
purification of the sanctuary from the blemishes caused by the
sins of the people, with which they had been defiled in the
course of the year (see at chap, xvi.), and did not take place
till after the blood had been sprinkled once " against (? upon)
the capporeth in front" for the expiation of the sin of the
priesthood and people, and the horns of the altar had been
smeared with the blood (chap. xvi. 14, 18) ; whereas in the sin-
offerings mentioned in this chapter, the sevenfold sprinkling
preceded the application of the blood to the horns of the altar.
This difference in the order of succession of the two manipula-
tions with the blood leads to the conclusion, that in the case
before us the sevenfold sprinkling had a different signification
from that which it had on the day of atonement, and served as
a preliminary and introduction to the expiation. The blood
also was not sprinkled upon the altar of the holy place, but
only before Jehovah, against the curtain behind which Jehovah
was enthroned, that is to say, only into the neighbourhood of
the gracious presence of God ; and this act was repeated seven
times, that in the number seven, as the stamp of the covenant,
the covenant relation, which sin had loosened, might be restored.
It was not till after this had been done, that the expiatory blood
of the sacrifice was put upon the horns of the altar, — not merely
sprinkled or swung against the wall of the altar, but smeared
upon the horns of the altar ; not, however, that the blood might
thereby be brought more prominently before the eyes of God,
or lifted up into His more immediate presence, as Hofmann and
Knobel suppose, but because the significance of the altar, as the
scene of the manifestation of the divine grace and salvation,
culminated in the horns, as the symbols of power and might
(see p. 190). In the case of the sin-offerings for the high priest
and the congregation, the altar upon which this took place was
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. IV. 3-12. 305
not the altar of burnt-offering in the court, but the altar of
incense in the holy place ; because both the anointed priest, by
virtue of his calling and consecration as the mediator between
the nation and the Lord, and the whole congregation, by virtue
of its election as a kingdom of priests (Ex. xix. 6), were to
maintain communion with the covenant God iii the holy place,
the front division of the dwelling-place of Jehovah, and were
thus received into a closer relation of fellowship with Jehovah
than the individual members of the nation, for whom the court
with its altar was the divinely appointed place of communion
with the covenant God. The remainder of the blood, which
had not been used in the act of expiation, was poured out at the
bottom of the altar of burnt-offering, as the holy place to which
all the sacrificial blood was to be brought, that it might be re-
ceived into the earth. — Vers. 8-10. The priest was to lift off
" all the fat" from the sacrificial animal, i.e. the same fat por-
tions as in the peace-offering (chap. iii. 3, 4, 3?n _ '3 is the subject
to D"!!' in ver. 10), and burn it upon the altar of burnt-offering.
— Vers. 11, 12. The skin of the bullock, and all the flesh, to-
gether with the head and the shank and the entrails (chap. i. 9)
and the foeces, in fact the whole bullock, was to be carried out
by him (the sacrificing priest) to a clean place before the camp,
to which the ashes of the sacrifices were carried from the ash-
heap (chap. i. 16), and there burnt on the wood with fire. (On
the construction of vers. 11 and 12 see Ges. § 145, 2).
The different course, adopted with the blood and flesh of the
sin-offerings, from that prescribed in the ritual of the other sacri-
fices, was founded upon the special signification of these offer-
ings. As they were presented to effect the expiation of sins, the
offerer transferred the consciousness of sin and the desire for
forgiveness to the head of the animal that had been brought
in his stead, by the laying on of his hand ; and after this the
animal was slaughtered, and suffered death for him as the wages
of sin. But as sin is not wiped out by the death of the sinner,
unless it be forgiven by the grace of God, so devoting to death
an animal laden with sin rendered neither a real nor symbolical
satisfaction or payment for sin, by which the guilt of it could be
wiped away ; but the death which it endured in the sinner's
stead represented merely the fruit and effect of sin. To cover
the sinner from the holiness of God because of his sin, some of
pent. — VOL. II. tr
Digitized by
Google
s
306 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
the blood of the sacrifice was sprinkled seven times before Jeho-
vah in the holy place ; and the covenant fellowship, which had
been endangered, was thereby restored. After this, however,
the soul, which was covered in the sacrificial blood, was given up
to the grace of God that prevailed in the altar, by means of the
sprinkling of the blood upon the horns of the altar of incense,
that it might receive the forgiveness of sins and reconciliation
with God, and the full enjoyment of the blessings of the cove-
nant be ensured to it once more. But the sin, that had been laid
upon the animal of the sin-offering, lay upon it still. The next
thing done, therefore, was to burn the fat portions of its inside
upon the altar of burnt-offering. Now, if the flesh of the victim
represented the body of the offerer as the organ of his soul, the
fat portions inside the body, together with the kidneys, which
were regarded as the seat of the tenderest and deepest emotions,
can only have set forth the better part or inmost kernel of the
man, the &rw avdpayirtx; (Bom. vii. 22 ; Eph. iii. 16). By burn-
ing the fat portions upon the altar, the better part of human
nature was given up in symbol to the purifying fire of the Holy
Spirit of God, that it might be purified from the dross of sin,
and ascend in its glorified essence to heaven, for a sweet savour
unto the Lord (ver. 31). The flesh of the sin-offering, however,
or " the whole bullock," was then burned in a clean place outside
the camp, though not merely that it might be thereby destroyed
in a clean way, like the flesh provided for the sacrificial meals,
which had not been consumed at the time fixed by the law (chap.
vii. 17, viii. 32, xix. 6 ; Ex. xii. 10, xxix. 34), or the flesh of the
sacrifices, which had been defiled by contact With unclean
objects (chap. vii. 19) ; for if the disposal of the flesh formed an
integral part of the sacrificial ceremony in the case of all the
other sacrifices, and if, in the case of the sin-offerings, the blood
of which was not brought into the interior of the sanctuary, the
priests were to eat the flesh in a holy place, and that not "as a
portion assigned to them by God as an honourable payment,'
but, according to the express declaration of Moses, " to bear and
take away (nNfc>?) the iniquity of the congregation, to make
atonement for them" (chap. x. 17), the burning of the flesh of
the sin-offerings, i.e. of the animal itself, the blood of which was
not brought into the holy place, cannot have been without signi-
ficance, or simply the means adopted to dispose of it in a fitting
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. IV. 18-21. 307
manner, but must also have formed one factor in the ceremony
of expiation. The burning outside the camp was rendered
necessary, because the sacrifice had respect to the expiation of
the priesthood, and the flesh or body of the bullock, which had
been made nwsn by the laying on of the hand, could not be eaten
by the priests as the body of sin, that by the holiness of their
official character they might bear and expiate the sin imputed to
the sacrifice (see at chap. x. 17). In this case it was necessary
that it should be given up to the effect of sin, viz. to death or
destruction by fire, and that outside the camp ; in other words,
outside the kingdom of God, from which everything dead was
removed. But, inasmuch as it was sacrificial flesh, and therefore
most holy by virtue of its destination ; in order that it might not
be made an abomination, it was not to be burned in an unclean
place, where carrion and other abominations were thrown (chap,
xiv. 40, 45), but in the clean place, outside the camp, to which
the ashes of the altar of burnt-offering were removed, as being
the earthly sediment and remains of the sacrifices that had
ascended to God in the purifying flames of the altar-fire. 1
Vers. 13-21. Sin of the whole congregation. — This is still
further defined, as consisting in the fact that the thing was hid
(P?^f from the eyes of the congregation, i.e. that it was a sin
1 The most holy character of the flesh of the sin-offering (chap. vi. 18
sqq.) furnishes no valid argument against the correctness of this explanation
of the burning ; for, in the first place, there is an essential difference between
real or inherent sin, and sin imputed or merely transferred ; and secondly,
the flesh of the sin-offering was called most holy, not in a moral, but only
in a liturgical or ritual sense, as subservient to the most holy purpose of
wiping away sin ; on which account it was to be entirely removed from all
appropriation to earthly objects. Moreover, the idea that sin was imputed
to the sin-offering, that it was made sin by the laying on of the hand, has
a firm basis in the sacrifice of the red cow (Num. xix.), and also occurs
among the Greeks (see Odder in Herzog's Cycl.).
2 In the correct editions Q^pj has dagesh both here and in chap. v. 2, 4,
as Delitzsch informs me, according to an old rule in pointing, which re-
quired that every consonant which followed a syllable terminating with a
guttural should be pointed with dagesh, if the guttural was to be read with
a quiescent sheva and not with chateph. This is the case in 'idjw in Gen.
xlvi. 29, Ex. xiv. 6, D^VPI in Ps. x. 1, and other words in the critical edi-
tion of the Psalter which has been carefully revised by B&r according to the
Masora, and published with an introduction by Delitzsch. In other passages,
such as «1;»"?33 Ps. ix. 2, S3^ J ?y Ps. xv. 8, etc., the dagesh is introduced
Digitized by
Google
308 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
which was not known to be such, an act which really violated a
commandment of God, though it was not looked upon as sin.
Every transgression of a divine command, whether it took place
consciously or unconsciously, brought guilt, and demanded a sin-
offering for its expiation ; and this was to be presented as soon
, as the sin was known. The sin-offering, which the elders had to
offer in the name of the congregation, was to consist of a young
ox, and was to be treated like that of the high priest (vers. 14-
23 compared with vers. 3-12), inasmuch as " the whole congre-
gation" included the priesthood, or at any rate was on an equa-
lity with the priesthood by virtue of its calling in relation to the
Lord. Kt?n with ?V signifies to incur guilt upon (on the founda-
tion of) sin (chap. v. 5, etc.) ; it is usually construed with an
accusative (vers. 3, 28, chap. v. 6, 10, etc.), or with 3, to sin with
a sin (ver. 23 ; Gen. xlii. 22). The subject'of en^l (ver. 15) is
one of the elders. " The bullock for a sin-offering :" sc. the one
which the anointed priest offered for his sin, or as it is briefly
and clearly designated in ver. 21, "the former bullock" (ver. 12).
— Ver. 20. " And let the priest make an atonement for them, that it
may be forgiven them" or, " so will they be forgiven." This
formula recurs with all the sin-offerings (with the exception of
the one for the high priest), viz. vers. 26, 31, 35, v. 10, 13;
Num. xv. 25, 26, 28 ; also with the trespass-offerings, chap. v.
16, 18, 26, xix. 22, — the only difference being, that in the sin-
offerings presented for defilements cleansing is mentioned, instead
of forgiveness, as the effect of the atoning sacrifice (chap. xii. 7,
8, xiv. 20, 53 ; Num. viii. 21).
Vers. 22-26. The sin of a ruler.— Ver. 22. "if« : ore, when.
WW is the head of a tribe, or of a division of a tribe (Num. iii.
24,'30, 35).— Ver. 23. " If (ta, see Ges. § 155, 2) his sin is made
known to him" i.e. if any one called his attention to the fact
that he had transgressed a commandment of God, he was to
bring a he-goat without blemish, and, having laid his hand upon
it, to slay it at the place of burnt- offering ; after which the
priest was to put some of the blood upon the horns of the altar
of burnt-offering, and pour out the rest of the blood at the foot
to prevent the second letter from being lost in the preceding one through the
rapidity of reading. — EwaltTs conjectures and remarks about this " dagesh,
which is found in certain MSS.," is a proof that he was not acquainted with
this' rule which the Masora recognises.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. IV. 27-83, V. 1-1& 309
of the altar, and then to burn the whole of the fat upon the
altar, as in the case of the peace-offering (see chap. iii. 3, 4),
and thos to make atonement for the prince on account of his
sin. tMIj> W, or TP& alone (lit. hairy, shaggy, Gen. xxvii. 11),
is the buck-goat, which is frequently mentioned as the animal
sacrificed as a sin-offering : e.g., that of the tribe-princes (Num.
vii. 16 sqq., xv. 24), and that of the nation at the yearly fes-
tivals (chap. xvi. 9, 15, xxiii. 19; Num. xxviii. 15, 22, 30,
xxix. 5, 16 sqq.) and at the consecration of the tabernacle (chap.
ix. 3, 15, x. 16). It is distinguished in Num. vii. 16 sqq. from
the attudim, which were offered as peace-offerings, and fre-
quently occur in connection with oxen, rams, and lambs as
burnt-offerings and thank-offerings (Ps. 1. 9, 13, lxvi. 15 ; Isa.
i. 11, xxxiv. 6; Ezek. xxxix. 18). According to Knolel, "> , JK5'
0'*?, or 1 , V^ > , was an old he-goat, the hair of which grew longer
with age, particularly about the neck and back, and D^? nTVb
(ver. 28, chap. v. 16) an old she-goat; whilst *WIJ> was the
younger he-goat, which leaped upon the does (Gen. xxxi. 10,
12), and served for slaughtering like lambs, sheep, and goats
(Deut. xxxii. 14 ; Jer. li. 40). But as the OW "W'f was also
slaughtered for food (Gen. xxxvii. 31), and the skins of quite
young he-goats are called fiv$9 (Gen. xxvii. 23), the difference
between I'J'B' and "WW is hardly to be sought in the age, but
more probably, as Bochart supposes, in some variety of species, in
which case seir and seirah might denote the rough-haired, shaggy
kind of goat, and attvd the buck-goat of stately appearance.
Vers. 27-35. In the case of the sin of a common Israelite
(" of the people of the land," i.e. of the rural population, Gen.
xxiii. 7), that is to say, of an Israelite belonging to the people,
as distinguished from the chiefs who ruled over the people (2
Kings xi. 18, 19, xvi. 15), the sin-offering was to consist of a
shaggy she-goat without blemish, or a ewe-sheep (ver. 32).
The ceremonial in both cases was the same as with the he-goat
(vers. 23 sqq.). — " According to the offerings made by fire unto
the Lord" (ver. 35) : see at chap. iii. 5.
Chap. v. 1-13. There follow here three special examples of
sin on the part of the common Israelite, all sins of omission and
rashness of a lighter kind than the cases mentioned in chap. iv.
27 sqq.; in which, therefore, if the person for whom expiation
was to be made was in needy circumstances, instead of a goat
Digitized by
Google
y
310 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
or ewe-sheep, a pair of doves could be received as a sacrificial
gift, or, in cases of still greater poverty, the tenth of an ephah
of fine floor. The following were the cases. The first (ver. 1),
when any one had heard the voice of an oath (an oath spoken
aloud) and was a witness, i.e. was in a condition to give evidence,
whether he had seen what took place or had learned it, that is
to say, had come to the knowledge of it in some other way. In
this case, if he did not make it known, he was to bear his offence,
i.e. to bear the guilt, which he had contracted by omitting to
make it known, with all its consequences. n?N does not mean a
curse in general, but an oath, as an imprecation upon one's self
(= the " oath of cursing" in Num. v. 21) ; and the sin referred
to did not consist in the fact that a person heard a curse, impre-
cation, or blasphemy, and gave no evidence of it (for neither the
expression u and is a witness," nor the words " hath seen or
known of it," are in harmony with this), but in the fact that one
who knew of another's crime, whether he had seen it, or had come
to the certain knowledge of it in any other way, and was there-
fore qualified to appear in court as a witness for the conviction
of the criminal, neglected to do so, and did not state what he
had seen or learned, when he heard the solemn adjuration of the
judge at the public investigation of the crime, by which all per-
sons present, who knew anything of the matter, were urged to
come forward as witnesses (vid. Oehler in Herzotfs Cycl.). KJM
fitf, to bear the offence or sin, i.e. to take away and endure its con-
sequences (see Gen. iv. 13), whether they consisted in chastise-
ments and judgments, by which God punished the sin (chap. vii.
18, xvii. 16, xix. 17), such as diseases or distress (Num. v. 31,
xiv. 33, 34), childlessness (chap. xx. 20), death (chap. xxii. 9),
or extermination (chap. xix. 8, xx. 17 ; Num. ix. 13), or in
punishment inflicted by men (chap. xxiv. 15), or whether they
could be expiated by sin-offerings (as in this passage and ver. 17)
and other kinds of atonement.. In this sense Ktpn Kfeo is also
sometimes used (see at chap. xix. 17). — Vers. 2, 3. The second
was, if any one had touched the carcase of an unclean beast, or
cattle, or creeping thing, or the uncleanness of a man of any
kind whatever (" with regard to all his uncleanness, with which
he defiles himself," i.e. any kind of defilement to which a man is
exposed), and " it is hidden from him" sc. the uncleanness or
defilement ; .that is to say, if he had unconsciously defiled hira-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. V. 7-10. 311
self by touching unclean objects, and had consequently neglected
the purification prescribed for such cases. In this case, if he
found it out afterwards, he had contracted guilt which needed
expiation. — Ver. 4. The third was, if any one should " swear to
prate with the lips" i.e. swear in idle, empty words of the lips, —
"to do good or evil," i.e. that he would do anything whatever
(Num. xxiv. 13 ; Isa. xli. 23), — " with regard to all that he speaks
idly with an oath" i.e. if it related to something which a man had
affirmed with an oath in thoughtless conversation, — " and it is
hidden from him," i.e. if he did not reflect that he might commit
sin by such thoughtless swearing, and if he perceived it after-
wards and discovered his sin, and had incurred guilt with regard
to one of the things which he had thoughtlessly sworn. — Vers.
5, 6. If any one therefore (the three cases enumerated are com-
prehended under the one expression '? nvn, for the purpose of in-
troducing the apodosis) had contracted guilt with reference to one
of these (the things named in vers. 1-4), and confessed in what he
had sinned, he was to offer as his guilt (trespass) to the Lord,
for the sin which he had sinned, a female from the flock — for a
sin-offering, that the priest might make atonement for him on
account of his sin. SB'S (ver. 6) does not mean either guilt-
offering or debitum (Knobel), but culpa, delictum, reatus, as in
ver. 7 : " as his guilt," i.e. for the expiation of his guilt, which
he had brought upon himself.
Vers. 7-10. "But if his hand does not reach what is sufficient
for a sheep," i.e. if he could not afford enough to sacrifice a
sheep (" his hand" is put for what his hand acquires), he was to
bring two turtle-doves or two young pigeons, one for the sin-
offering, the other for the burnt-offering. The pigeon intended
for the sin, i.e. for the sin-offering, he was to bring first of all
to the priest, who was to offer it in the following manner. The
head was to be pinched off from opposite to its neck, i.e. in the
nape just below the head, though without entirely severing it,
that is to say, it was to be pinched off sufficiently to kill the.
bird and allow the blood to flow out. He was then to sprinkle
of the blood upon the wall of the altar, which could be effected
by swinging the bleeding pigeon, and to squeeze out the rest of
the blood against the wall of the altar, because it was a sin-
offering ; for in the burnt-offering he let all the blood flow out
against the wall of the altar (chap. i. 15). What more was done
Digitized by
Google
312 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
with the pigeon is not stated. Hence it cannot be decided with
certainty, whether, after the crop and its contents were removed
and thrown upon the ash-heap, the whole of the bird was burned
upon the altar, or whether it fell to the priest, as the Mishnah
affirms (Seb. vi. 4), so that none of it was placed upon the altar.
One circumstance which seems to favour the statement in the
Talmud is the fact, that in the sin-offering of pigeons, a second
pigeon was to be offered as a burnt-offering, and, according to
ver. 10, for the purpose of making an atonement ; probably for
no other purpose than to burn it upon the altar, as the dove of
the sin-offering was not burned, and the sacrifice was incomplete
without some offering upon the altar. In the case of sin-offer-
ings of quadrupeds, the fat portions were laid upon the altar, and
the flesh could be eaten by the priest by virtue of his office ;
but in that of pigeons, it was not possible to separate fat por-
tions from the flesh for the purpose of burning upon the altar
by themselves, and it would not do to divide the bird in half,
and let one half be burned and the other eaten by the priest,
as this would have associated the idea of halfness or incomplete-
ness with the sacrifice. A second pigeon was therefore to be
sacrificed as a burnt-offering, BBfB3, according to the right laid'
down in chap. i. 14 sqq., that the priest might make atonement
for the offerer on account of his sin, whereas in the sin-offering
of a quadruped one sacrificial animal was sufficient to com-
plete the expiation. 1
Vers. 11—13. But if any one could not afford even two
pigeons, he was to offer the tenth of an ephah of fine flour as a
sin-offering, tv i^feTi for fP JPW (ver. 7) : his hand reaches to
anything, is able to raise it, or with an accusative, obtains,
gets anything (used in the same sense in chap. xiv. 30, 31), or
else absolutely, acquires, or gets rich (chap. xxv. 26, 47). ' But
it was to be offered without oil and incense, because it was a
sin-offering, that is to say, " because it was not to have the cha-
racter of a minchaJi" (Oehler.) But the reason why it was not
to have this character was, that only those who were in a state
' From the instructions to offer two pigeons in order to obtain expia-
tion, it is perfectly evident that the eating of the flesh of the sin-offering on
the part of the priest formed an essential part of the act of expiation, and
was not merely a kind of honourable tribute, which God awarded to His
servants who officiated at the sacrifice.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. V. H-26. 313
of grace could offer a minchah, and not a man who had fallen
from grace through sin. As such a man could not offer to the
Lord the fruits of the Spirit of God and of prayer, he was not
allowed to add oil and incense, as symbols of the Spirit and
praise of God, to the sacrifice with which he sought the for-
giveness of sin. The priest was to take a handful of the meal
offered, and burn it upon the altar as a memorial, and thus make
atonement for the sinner on account of his sin. — On " his hand-
ful" and " a memorial" (azcarah), see chap. ii. 2. " In one of
these" (ver. 13 as in ver. 5) : cf . chap. iv. 2. " And let it (the
remainder of the meal offered) belong to the priest like the meat-
offering :" i.e. as being most holy (chap. ii. 3).
Chap. v. 14-26 (chap. v. 14-vi. 7). 1 The Tbespass-offer-
ings. — These were presented for special sins, by which a person
had contracted guilt, and therefore they are not included in
the general festal sacrifices. Three kinds of offences are men-
tioned in this section as requiring trespass-offerings. The first
is, " if a soul commit a breach of trust, and sin in going wrong
in the holy gifts of Jehovah." ?VO, lit. to cover, hence T 1 }!^ the
cloak, over-coat, signifies to act secretly, unfaithfully, especially
against Jehovah, either by falling away from Him into idolatry,
by which the fitting honour was withheld from Jehovah (chap,
xxvi, 40 ; Deut. xxxii. 51 ; Josh. xxii. 16), or by infringing upon
His rights, abstracting something that rightfully belonged to
Him. Thus in Josh. vii. 1, xxii. 20, it is applied to fraud in
relation to that which had been put under the ban ; and in Num.
v. 12, 27, it is also applied to a married woman's unfaithfulness
to her husband : so that sin was called ?VP, when regarded as a
violation of existing rights. " The holy things of Jehovah" were
the holy gifts, sacrifices, first-fruits, tithes, etc., which were to
be offered to Jehovah, and were assigned by Him to the priests
for their revenue (see chap. xxi. 22). Ktpn with JO is con-
structs prwgnans : to sin in anything by taking away from
Jehovah that which belonged to Him. l "VJ t ?'?> in error ■ (see
chap. iv. 2) : i.e. in a forgetful or negligent way. Whoever
sinned in this way was to offer to the Lord as his guilt (see ver.
1 In the original the division of verses in the Hebrew text is followed ;
but we have thought it better to keep to the arrangement adopted in our
English version. — Tr.
Digitized by
Google
314 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
6) a ram from the flock without blemish for a trespass-offering
(lit. guilt-offering\ according to the estimate of Moses, whose
place was afterwards taken by the officiating priest (chap, xxvii.
12 ; Num. xviii. 16). Eyi^ 1D3 " money of shekels" i.e. several
shekels in amount, which Abenezra and others have explained,
no doubt correctly, as meaning that the ram was to be worth
more than one shekel, two shekels at least. The expression is
probably kept indefinite, for the purpose of leaving some margin
for the valuation, so that there might be a certain proportion
between the value of the ram and the magnitude of the trespass
committed (see Oehler ut sup. p. 645). u In the holy shekel:"
see Ex. xxx. 13. At the same time, the culprit was to make
compensation for the fraud committed in the holy thing, and add
a fifth (of the value) over, as in the case of the redemption of
the first-born, of the vegetable tithe, or of what had been vowed
to God (chap, xxvii. 27, 31, and xxvii. 13, 15, 19). The cere-
mony to be observed in the offering of the ram is described in
chap. vii. 1 sqq. It was the same as that of the sin-offerings,
whose blood was not brought into the holy place, except with
regard to the sprinkling of the blood, and in this the trespass-
offering resembled the burnt-offerings and peace-offerings.
The second case (vers. 17-19), from its very position between
the other two, which both refer to the violation of rights, must
belong to the same category; although the sin is introduced
with the formula used in chap. iv. 27 in connection with those
sins which were to be expiated by a sin-offering. But the viola-
tion of right can only have consisted in an invasion of Jehovah's
rights with regard to Israel, and not, as Knobel supposes, in an
invasion of the rights of private Israelites, as distinguished from
the priests; an antithesis of which there is not the slightest
indication. This is evident from the fact, that the case before
us is linked on to the previous one without anything intervening;
whereas the next case, which treats of the violation of the rights
of a neighbour, is separated by a special introductory formula.
The expression, " and wist it not" refers to ignorance of the sin,
and not of the divine commands ; as may be clearly seen from
ver. 18 : " the priest shall make an atonement for him concern-
ing his error, which he committed without knowing it" The
trespass-offering was the same as in the former case, and was
also to be valued by the priest ; but no compensation is men-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. V. 14-26. 315
tioned, probably because the violation of right, which consisted
in the transgression of one of the commands of God, was of such
a kind as not to allow of material compensation.
The third case (chap. vi. 1-7, or vers. 20-26) is distinguished
from the other two by a new introductory formula. The sin
and unfaithfulness to Jehovah are manifested in this case in a
violation of the rights of a neighbour. "If a man deny to his
neighbour (K»n3 with a double 3 obj., to deny a thing to a person)
a pikkadon (i.e. a deposit, a thing entrusted to him to keep, Gen.
xli. 36), or T .WMBfei, "a thing placed in hit hand" (handed over to
him as a pledge) "or 7J3, a thing robbed" (i.e. the property of a
neighbour unjustly appropriated, whether a well, a field, or
cattle, Gen. xxi. 25 ; Micah ii. 2 ; Job xxiv. 2), " or if he have
oppressed his neighbour" (i.e. forced something from him or with-
held it unjustly, chap. xix. 13 ; Deut. xxiv. 14 : Hos. xii. 8 ;
Mai. iii. 5), " or have found a lost thing and denies it, and thereby
swears to his lie" (i.e. rests his oath upon a lie), "on account of
one of all that a man is accustomed to do to sin therewith:" the
false swearing here refers not merely to a denial of what is
found, but to all the crimes mentioned, which originated in
avarice and selfishness, but through the false swearing became
frauds against Jehovah, adding guilt towards God to the injus-
tice done to the neighbour, and requiring, therefore, not only
that a material restitution should be made to the neighbour, but
that compensation should be made to God as well. Whatever
had been robbed, or taken by force, or entrusted or found, and
anything about which a man had sworn falsely (vers. 23, 24),
was to be restored "according to its sum" (cf. Ex. xxx. 12,
Num. i. 2, etc.), i.e. in its full value; beside 1 which, he was to
" add its fifths" (on the plural, see (?«*.,§ 87, 2; Ew. § 186 e),
i.e. in every one of the things abstracted or withheld unjustly
the fifth part of the value was to be added to the full amount
(as in ver. 16). "To him to whom it (belongs), shall he give it"
inoipK DVa : in the day when he makes atonement for his tres-
pass, i.e. offers his trespass-offering. The trespass (guilt) against
Jehovah was to be taken away by the trespass-offering accord-
ing to the valuation of the priest, as in vers. 15, 16, and 18, that
he might receive expiation and forgiveness on account of what
he had done.
If now, in order to obtain a clear view of the much canvassed
Digitized by
Google
316 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
difference between the sin-offerings and trespass-offerings, 1 we
look at once at the other cases, for which trespass-offerings were
commanded in the law ; we find in Num. v. 5-8 not only a tres-
pass against Jehovah, but an unjust withdrawal of the property
of a neighbour, clearly mentioned as a crime, for which material
compensation was to be made with the addition of a fifth of its
value, just as in vers. 2-7 of the present chapter. So also the
guilt of a man who had lain with the slave of another (Lev. xix.
20-22) did not come into the ordinary category of adultery, but
into that of an unjust invasion of the domain of another's pro-
perty ; though in this case, as the crime could not be estimated
in money, instead of material compensation being made, a civil
punishment (viz. bodily scourging) was to be inflicted ; and for
the same reason nothing is said about the valuation of the sacri-
ficial ram. Lastly, in the trespass-offerings for the cleansing of
a leper (chap. xiv. 12 sqq.), or of a Nazarite who had been de-
filed by a corpse (Num. vi. 12), it is true we cannot show in what
definite way the rights of Jehovah were violated (see the expla-
nation of these passages), but the sacrifices themselves served
to procure the restoration of the persons in question to certain
covenant rights which they had lost ; so that even here the tres-
pass-offering, for which moreover only a male sheep was de-
manded, was to be regarded as a compensation or equivalent
for the rights to be restored. From all these cases it is perfectly
evident, that the idea of satisfaction for a right, which had been
violated but was about to be restored or recovered, lay at the
foundation of the trespass-offering,* and the ritual also points to
this. The animal sacrificed was always a ram, except in the
cases mentioned in chap. xiv. 12 sqq. and Num. vi. 12. This
fact alone clearly distinguishes the trespass-offerings from the
sin-offerings, for which all kinds of sacrifices were offered from
1 For the different views, see BShr's Symbolik ; Winer's WW. R. W. ;
Kurtz on Sacrificial Worship ; Riekm, iheol. Stud. undKrit. 1854, pp. 98 sqq.;
Rinck, id. 1855, p. 369 ; Oeliler in Herzog's Cycl.
1 Even in the case of the trespass-offering, which those who had taken
heathen wives offered at Ezra's instigation (Ezra x. 18 sqq.), it had refer-
ence to a trespass (cf. vers. 2 and 10), an act of unfaithfulness to Jehovah,
which demanded satisfaction. And so again the Philistines (1 Sam. vi. 3
sqq.), when presenting gifts as a trespass-offering for Jehovah, rendered
satisfaction for the robbery committed upon Him by the removal of the ark
of the covenant.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VI. 8-13. 317
an ox to a pigeon, the choice of the animal being regulated by
the position of the sinner and the magnitude of his sin. But
they are distinguished still more by the fact, that in the case of
all the sin-offerings the blood was to be put upon the horns of
the altar, or even taken into the sanctuary itself, whereas the
blood of the trespass-offerings, like that of the burnt and peace-
offerings, was merely swung against the wall of the altar (chap,
vii. 2). Lastly, they were also distinguished by the fact, that
in the trespass-offering the ram was in most instances to be
valued by the priest, not for the purpose of determining its
actual value, which could not vary very materially in rams of
the same kind, but to fix upon it symbolically the value of the
trespass for which compensation was required. Hence there
can be no doubt, that as the idea of the expiation of sin, which
was embodied in the sprinkling of the blood, was most prominent
in the sin-offering ; so the idea of satisfaction for the restoration
of rights that had been violated or disturbed came into the fore-
ground in the trespass-offering. This satisfaction was to be
actually made, wherever the guilt admitted of a material valua-
tion, by means of payment or penance ; and in addition to this,
the animal was raised by the priestly valuation into the
authorized bearer of the satisfaction to be rendered to the rights
of God, through the sacrifice of which the culprit could obtain
the expiation of his guilt.
2. Special Instructions concerning the Sacrifices for the Priests.
—Chap. vi. and vh.
The instructions contained in these two chapters were made
known to " Aaron and his sons " (chap. vi. 9, 20, 25), i.e. to
the priests, and relate to the duties and rights which devolved
upon, and pertained to, the priests in relation to the sacrifices.
Although many of the instructions are necessarily repeated from
the general regulations, as to the different kinds of sacrifice and
the mode of presenting them ; most of them are new, and of great
importance in relation to the institution of sacrifice generally.
Chap. vi. 8-13 (Heb. vers. 1-6). The Law of the
Burnt-offering commences the series, and special reference
is made to the daily burnt-offering (Ex. xxix. 38-42). — Ver. 2.
u It, the burnt-offering, \shall (burn) upon the hearth upon the
Digitized by
Google
318 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
altar the whole night till the morning, and the fire of tJie altar be
kept burning with it." The verb ipn is wanting in the first
clause, and only introduced in the second ; but it belongs to the
first clause as well. The pronoun wn at the opening of the
sentence cannot stand for the verb to be in the imperative. The
passages, which Knobel adduces in support of this, are of a
totally different kind. The instructions apply primarily to the
burnt-offering, which was offered every evening, and furnished
the basis for all the burnt-offerings (Ex. xxix. 38, 39 ; Num.
xxxiii. 3, 4). — Vers. 3, 4. In the morning of every day the
priest was to put on his linen dress (see Ex. xxviii. 42) and the
white drawers, and lift off, i.e. clear away, the ashes to which
the fire had consumed the burnt-offering upon the altar (??s is
construed with a double accusative, to consume the sacrifice to
ashes), and pour them down beside the altar (see chap. i. 16).
The \ in fat? is not to be regarded as the old form of the con-
necting vowel, as in Gen. i. 24 {Ewald, § 211 b; see Ges. §
90, 3b), but as the suffix, as in 2 Sam. xx. 8, although the use
of the suffix with the governing noun in the construct state can
only be found in other cases in the poetical writings (cf. Ges.
§ 121 b ; Ewald, 291 b). He was then to take off his official
dress, and having put on other (ordinary) clothes, to take away
the ashes from the court, and carry them out of the camp to a
clean place. The priest was only allowed to approach the altar
in his official dress ; but he could not go out of the camp with
this. — Ver. 12. The fire of the altar was also to be kept burning
" with it " (13, viz. the burnt-offering) the whole day through
without going out. For this purpose the priest was to burn
wood upon it (the altar-fire), and lay the burnt-offering in order
upon it, and cause the fat portions of the peace-offerings to
ascend in smoke, — that is to say, whenever peace-offerings were
brought, for they were not prescribed for every day. — Ver. 13.
Eire was to be kept constantly burning upon the altar without
going out, not in order that the heavenly fire, which proceeded
from Jehovah when Aaron and his sons first entered upon the
service of the altar after their consecration, and consumed the
burnt-offerings and peace-offerings, might never be extinguished
(see at chap. ix. 24) ; but that the burnt-offering might never
go out, because this was the divinely appointed symbol and
visible sign of the uninterrupted worship of Jehovah, which the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VL U-23. ' 319
covenant nation could never suspend either day or night, with-
out being unfaithful to its calling. For the same reason other
nations also kept perpetual fire burning upon the altars of their
principal gods. (For proofs, see RosenmUlUr and Knobel ad h. I.)
Vers. 14-18. The Law op the Meat-offering. — The
regulations in vers. 14, 15, are merely a repetition of chap. ii.
2 and 3; but in vers. 16-18 the new instructions are intro-
duced with regard to what was left and had not been burned
upon the altar. The priests were to eat this as unleavened, i.e.
to bake it without leaven, and to eat it in a holy place, viz. in
the court of the tabernacle. »W? TtiSD in ver. 16 is explained by
"it shall not be bahen with leaven" in ver. 17. It was the
priests' share of the firings of Jehovah (see chap. i. 9), and as
such it was most holy (see chap. ii. 3), like the sin-offering and
trespass-offering (vers. 25, 26, chap. vii. 6), and only to be eaten
by the male members of the families of the priests. This was
to be maintained as a statute for ever (see at chap. iii. 17).
" Every one that touches them (the most holy offerings) becomes
holt/" vhp. does not mean he shall be holy, or shall sanctify
himself (LXX., Vulg., Luth., a Lap., etc.), nor he is consecrated
to the sanctuary and is to perform service there (Theodor., Knobel,
and others). In this provision, which was equally applicable to
the sin-offering (ver. 27), to the altar of the burnt-offering (Ex.
xxix. 37), and to the most holy vessels of the tabernacle (Ex.
xxx. 29), the word is not to be interpreted by Num. xvii. 2, 3,
or Deut xxii. 9, or by the expression " shall be holy " in chap.
xxvii. 10, 21, and Num. xviii. 10, but by Isa. lxv. 5, "touch me
not, for I am holy." The idea is this, every layman who touched
these most holy things became holy through the contact, so
that henceforth he had to guard against defilement in the same
manner as the sanctified priests (chap. xxi. 1-8), though with-
out sharing the priestly rights and prerogatives. This neces-
sarily placed him in a position which would involve many incon-
veniences in connection with ordinary life.
Vers. 19-23. The Meat-offering of the Priests is in-
troduced, as a new law, with a special formula, and is inserted
here in its proper place in the sacrificial instructions given for
the priests, as it would have been altogether out of place among
Digitized by
Google
320 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
the general laws for the laity. In " the day of his anointing"
(nBipn, construed as a passive with the accusative as in Gen.
iv. 18), Aaron and his sons were to offer a corban as " a perpetual
meat-offering" (minchah, in the absolute instead of the construct
state : cf. Ex. xxix. 42, Num. xxviii. 6 ; see Ges. § 116, 6,
Note b) ; and this was to be done in all future time by u the
priest who was anointed of his sons in his stead" that is to say,
by every high priest at the time of his consecration. " In the
day of his anointing : " when the anointing was finished, the
seven were designated as " the day" like the seven days of
creation in Gen. ii. 4. This minchah was not offered during
the seven days of the anointing itself, but after the consecration
was finished, Le., in all probability, as the Jewish tradition as-
sumes, at the beginning of the eighth day, when the high priest
entered upon his office, viz. along with the daily morning sacri-
fices (Ex. xxix. 38, 39), and before the offering described in
chap. ix. It then continued to be offered, as "a perpetual
minchah" every morning and evening during the whole term
of his office, according to the testimony of the Book of Wisdom
(chap. xlv. 14, where we cannot suppose the daily burnt-offering
to be intended) and also of Josephus (Ant. iii. 10, 7). 1 It was
to consist of the tenth of an ephah of fine flour, one half of
which was to be presented in the morning, the other in the
evening ; — not as flour, however, but made in a pan with oil,
" roasted " and O'RB nrop 'i'STl (" broken pieces of a minchah of
crumbs "), Le. in broken pieces,' like a minchah composed of
crumbs. Jl33"iD (ver. 14 and 1 Chron. xxiii. 29) is no doubt
synonymous with n?#"!P rob, and to be understood as denoting
fine flour sufficiently burned or roasted in oil ; the meaning
mixed or mingled does not harmonise with chap. vii. 12, where
1 Vid. Lundius, jUd. Heiliylhiimer, B. 3, c 9, § 17 and 19 ; ThaVtofer vl
supra, p. 139 ; and Delitzsch on the Epistle to the Hebrews. The text evi-
dently enjoins the offering of this minchah upon Aaron alone ; for though
Aaron and his sons are mentioned in ver. 13, as they were consecrated to-
gether, in ver. 15 the priest anointed of his sons in Aaron's stead, i.e. the
successor of Aaron in the high-priesthood, is commanded to offer it. Conse-
quently the view maintained by Maimonides, Abarbanel, and others, which
did not become general even among the Rabbins, viz. that every ordinary
priest was required to'offer this meat-offering when entering upou his office,
has no solid foundation in the law (see Selden de success, in pontif. ii. c. 9 ;
V Empereur ad Middoth 1, 4, Not. 8 ; and Thalhofer, p. 160).
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VI 24-30. 321
the mixing or kneading with oil is expressed by J0#3 r6*?3. The
hapax legomenon '^BFJ signifies either broken or baked, according
as we suppose the word to be derived from the Arabic j\
diminuit, or, as Gesenius and the Rabbins do, from HBK to bake,
a point which can hardly be decided with certainty. This
minchah, which was also instituted as a perpetual ordinance, was
to .be burnt entirely upon the altar, like every meat-offering
presented by a priest, because it belonged to the category of the
burnt-offerings, and of these meat-offerings the offerer himself
had no share (chap. ii. 3, 10). Origen observes in his homil.
iv. in Leoit. ; In cceteris quidem prceceptis pontifex in offerendis
sacri/iciis populo prcebet officium, in hoc vero mandate qua pro-
pria sunt curat et quod ad se spectat exequitur. It is also to be
observed that the high priest was to offer only a bloodless
minchah for himself, and not a bleeding sacrifice, which would
have pointed to expiation. As the sanctified of the Lord, he
was to draw near to the Lord every day with a sacrificial gift,
which shadowed forth the fruits of sanctification.
Vers. 24-30. The Law op the Sin-offering, which is
introduced with a new introductory formula on account of the
interpolation of vers. 19-23, gives more precise instructions,
though chiefly with regard to the sin-offerings of the laity, first
as to the place of slaughtering, as in chap. iv. 24, and then as
to the most holy character of the flesh and blood of the sacrifices.
The flesh of these sin-offerings was to be eaten by the priest
who officiated at a holy place, in the fore-court (see ver. 16).
Whoever touched it became holy (see at ver. 18) ; and if
any one sprinkled any of the blood upon his clothes, whatever
the blood was sprinkled upon was to be washed in a holy
place, in order that the most holy blood might not be carried
out of the sanctuary into common life along with the sprinkled
clothes, and thereby be profaned. The words " thou shalt
wash" in ver. 20 are addressed to the priest. — Ver. 28. The
flesh was equally holy. The vessel, in which it was boiled for
the priests to eat, was to be broken in pieces if it were of earthen-
ware, and scoured (p~p Pual) and overflowed with water, i.e.
thoroughly rinsed out, if it were of copper, lest any of the most
holy flesh should adhere to the vessel, and be desecrated by its
pent. — VOL. II. x
Digitized by
Google
322 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
being used in the preparation of common food, or for other
earthly purposes. It was possible to prevent this desecration
in the case of copper vessels by a thorough cleansing ; but not
so with earthen vessels, which absorb the fat, so that it can-
not be removed by washing. The latter therefore were to be
broken in pieces, i.e. thoroughly destroyed. On the other
hand, earthen vessels that had been defiled were also ordered to
be broken to pieces, though for the very opposite reason (see
chap. xi. 33, 35).— Vers. 29, 30. The flesh of the sin-offering
was to be eaten after it had been boiled, like the meat-offering
(vers. 16 and 18), by the males among the priests alone. Sut
this only applied to the sin-offerings of the laity (chap. iv.
22-v. 13). The flesh of the sin-offerings for the high priest
and the whole congregation (chap. iv. 1-21), the blood of which
was brought into the tabernacle " to make atonement in the
sanctuary," i.e. that the expiation with the blood might be com-
pleted there, was not to be eaten, but to be burned with fire
(chap. iv. 12, 21). — On the signification of this act of eating
the flesh of the sin-offering, see at chap. x. 17.
Chap. vii. 1-10. The Law of the Trespass-offering
embraces first of all the regulations as to the ceremonial con-
nected with the presentation. — Ver. 2. The slaughtering and
sprinkling of the blood were the same as in the case of the
burnt-offering (chap. i. 5) ; and therefore, no doubt, the signifi-
cation was the same. — Vers. 3-5. The fat portions only were to
be burned upon the altar, viz. the same as in the sin and peace-
offerings (see chap. iv. 8 and iii. 9) ; but the flesh was to be
eaten by the priests, as in the sin-offering (chap. vi. 22), inas-
much as there was the same law in this respect for both the sin-
offering and trespass-offering ; and these parts of-the sacrificial
service must therefore have had the same meaning, every tres-
pass being a sin (see chap. vi. 26). — Certain analogous in-
structions respecting the burnt-offering and meat-offering are
appended in vers. 8-10 by way of supplement, as they ought pro-
perly to have been given in chap, vi., in the laws relating to the
sacrifices in question. — Ver. 8. In the case of the burnt-offering,
the skin of the animal was to fall to the lot of the officiating
priest, viz. as payment for his services. ]\}bn is construed
absolutely : " as for the priest, who offer eth — the skin of the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VIL 11-36. 323
burnt-offering which, he offereth shall belong to the priest" (for
" to him"). This was probably the case also with the trespass-
offerings and sin-offerings of the laity; whereas the skin of the
peace-offerings belonged to the owner of the animal (see Mishnah,
Sebach. 12, 3). — In versi 9, 10, the following law is laid down
with reference to the meat-offering, that everything baked in
the oven, and everything prepared in a pot or pan, was to belong
to the priest, who burned a portion of it upon the altar ; and that
everything mixed with oil and everything dry was to belong to
all the sons of Aaron, i.e. to all the priests, to one as much as
another, so that they were all to receive an equal share. The'
reason for this distinction is not very clear. That all the meat-
offerings described in chap. ii. should fall to the sons of Aaron
(i.e. to the priests), with the exception of that portion which was
burned upon the altar as an azcarah, followed from the fact that
they were most holy (see at chap. ii. 3). As the meat-offerings,
which consisted of pastry, and were offered in the form of pre-
pared food (ver. 9), are the same as those described in chap. ii.
4-8, it is evident that by those mentioned in ver. 10 we are to
understand the kinds described in chap. ii. 1-3 and 14-16, and
by the u dry," primarily the "*P% MS, which consisted of dried
grains, to which oil was to be added (jnj chap. ii. 15), though
not poured upon it, as in the case of the offering of flour (chap,
ii. 1), and probably also in that of the sin-offerings and jealousy-
offerings (chap. v. 11, and Num. v. 15), which consisted simply
of flour (without oil). The reason therefore why those which
consisted of cake and pastry fell to the lot of the officiating
priest, and those which consisted of flour mixed with oil, of dry
corn, or of simple flour, were divided among all the priests, was
probably simply this, that the former were for the most part
offered only under special circumstances, and then merely in
small quantities, whereas the latter were the ordinary forms in
which the meat-offerings were presented, and amounted to more
than the officiating priests could possibly consume, or dispose of
by themselves.
Vers. 11-36. The Law op the Peace-offerings, "which
he shall offer to Jehovah" (the subject is to be supplied from the
'verb), contains instructions, (1) as to the bloodless accompani-
ment to these sacrifices (vers. 12-14), (2) as to the eating of the
Digitized by
Google
324 THE THIRD BOOK OP HOSES.
flesh of the sacrifices (vers. 15-21), with the prohibition against
eating fat and blood (vers. 22-27), and (3) as to Jehovah's
share of these sacrifices (vers. 28-36). — In vers. 12 and 16
three classes of slielamim are mentioned, which differ according
to their occasion and design, viz. whether they were brought
rrrirnv, upon the ground of praise, i.e. to praise God for blessings
received or desired, or as vow-offerings, or thirdly, as freewill-
offerings (ver. 16). To (lit. upon, in addition to) the sacrifice of
thanksgiving (ver. 12, "sacrifice of thanksgiving of his peace-
offerings," vers. 13 and 15) they were to present "unleavened
cakes kneaded with oil, and flat cakes anointed with oil (see at
chap. ii. 4), and roasted fine flour (see vi. 14) mixed as cakes with
oil" i.e. cakes made of fine flour roasted with oil, and thoroughly
kneaded with oil (on the construction, see Ges. § 139, 2 ; Ewdld
§ 284 a). This last kind of cakes kneaded with oil is also called
oil-bread-cake (" a cake of oiled bread," chap. viii. 26 ; Ex. xxix.
23), or " cake unleavened, kneaded with oil " (Ex. xxix. 2), and
probably differed from the former simply in the fact that it was
more thoroughly saturated with oil, inasmuch as it was not only
made of flour that had been mixed with oil in the kneading, but
the flour itself was first of all roasted in oil, and then the dough
was moistened still further with oil in the process of kneading.
— Vers. 13, 14. This sacrificial gift the offerer was to present
upon, or along with, cakes of leavened bread (round, leavened
bread-cakes), and to offer " tJiereof one out of the whole oblation"
namely, one cake of each of the three kinds mentioned in ver.
12, as a heave-offering for Jehovah, which was to fall to the
priest who sprinkled the blood of the peace-offering. According
to chap. ii. 9, an azcarah of the unleavened pastry was burned
upon the altar, although this is not specially mentioned here any
more than at vers. 9 and 10 ; whereas none of the leavened bread-
cake was placed upon the altar (chap. ii. 12), but it was simply
used as bread for the sacrificial meal. There is nothing here to
suggest an allusion to the custom of offering unleavened sacri-
ficial cakes upon a plate of leavened dough, as J. D. Michaelu,
Winer, and others suppose. — Vers. 15-18. The flesh of the
praise-offering was to be eaten on the day of presentation, and
none of it was to be left till the next morning (cf. chap. xxii.
29, 30) ; but that of the vow and freewill-offerings might be
eaten on both the first and second days. Whatever remained
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VII. U-86. 325
after that was to be burnt on the third day, i.e. to be destroyed
by burning. If any was eaten on the third day, it was not
well-pleasing (pTW " gpod pleasure," see chap. i. 4), and was
" not reckoned to the offerer," sc. as a sacrifice well-pleasing to
God ; it was " an abomination" 7WB, an abomination, is only
applied to the flesh of the sacrifices (chap. xix. 7 ; Ezek. iv. 14 ;
Isa. lxv. 4), and signifies properly a stench ; — compare the tal-
mudic word «B foetidum reddere. Whoever ate thereof would
bear his sin (see chap. v. 1). " The soul that eateth " is not to
be restricted, as Knobel supposes, to the other participators in
the sacrificial meal, but applies to the offerer also, in fact to
every one who partook of such flesh. The burning on the third
day was commanded, not to compel the offerer to invite the
poor to share in the meal (Theodoret, Clericus, etc.), but to
guard against the danger of a desecration of the meal. The
sacrificial flesh was holy (Ex. xxix. 34) ; and in chap. xix. 8,
where this command is repeated, 1 eating it on the third day is
called a profanation of that which was holy to Jehovah, and
ordered to be punished with extermination. It became a de-
secration of what was holy, through the fact that in warm
countries, if flesh is not most carefully preserved by artificial
means, it begins to putrefy, or becomes offensive (-^3B) on the
third day. But to eat flesh that was putrid or stinking, would
be like eating unclean carrion, or the n?33 with which putrid
flesh is associated in Ezek. iv. 14. It was for this reason that
burning was commanded, as Philo (de vict. p. 842) and Maimo-
nides (More Neboch iii. 46) admit ; though the former also asso-
ciates with this the purpose mentioned above, which we decidedly
reject (cf. Outram I.e. p. 185 seq., and Bdhr, ii. pp. 375-6).
Vers. 19-21. In the same way all sacrificial flesh that had
come into contact with what was unclean, and been defiled in
consequence, was to be burned and not eaten. Ver. 19 J, which
is not found in the Septuagint and Vulgate, reads thus: " and as
1 There is no foundation for KnobeVs assertion, that in chap. xix. 5 sqq.
another early lawgiver introduces a milder regulation with regard to the
thank-offering, and allows all the thank-offerings to be eaten on the second
day. For chap. xix. 5 sqq. does not profess to lay down a universal rule
with regard to all the thank-offerings, but presupposes our law, and simply
enforces its regulations with regard to the vow and freewill-offeringB, and
threatens transgressors with severe punishment.
Digitized by
Google
326 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
*
for the flesh, every clean person shall eat flesh" i.e. take part in
the sacrificial meal. — Ver. 20. On the other hand, " the soul
■which eats flesh of the peace-offering, and his uncleanness is upon
him (for " whilst uncleanness is upon him ;" the suffix is to be
understood as referring to B>M construed as a masculine, see
chap. ii. 1), " shall be cut off" (see Gen. xvii. 14). This was to
be done, whether the uncleanness arose from contact with an
unclean object (any unclean thing), or from the uncleanness of
man (cf. chap. 12-15), or from an unclean beast (see at chap,
xi. 4-8), or from any other unclean abomination, Y$%, abomina-
tion, includes the unclean fishes, birds, and smaller animals, to
which this expression is applied in chap. xi. 10-42 (cf. Ezek.
viii. 10, and Isa. lxvi. 17). Moreover contact with animate that
were pronounced unclean so far as eating was concerned, did not
produce uncleanness so long as they were alive, or if they had
been put to death by man ;. but contact with animals that had
died a natural death, whether they belonged to the edible animals
or not, that is to say, with carrion (see at chap. xi. 8).
There is appended to these regulations, as being substantially
connected with them, the prohibition of fat and blood as articles
of food (vers. 22-27). By " the fat of ox, or of sheep, or of
goat," i.e. the three kinds of animals used in sacrifice, or " the
fat of the beast of which men offer a firing to Jehovah" (ver.
25), we are to understand only those portions of fat which are
mentioned in chap. iii. 3, 4, 9 ; not fat which grows in with the
flesh, nor the fat portions of other animals, which were clean but
not allowed as sacrifices, such as the stag, the antelope, and other
kinds of game. — Ver. 24. The fat of cattle that had fallen
( n ???)> or Deen torn to pieces (viz. by beasts of prey), was not to
be eaten, because it was unclean and defiled the eater (chap,
xvii. 15, xxii. 8); but it might be applied " to all kinds of uses,"
i.e. to the common purposes of ordinary life. Knobel observes
on this, that " in the case of oxen, sheep, and goats slain in the
regular way, this was evidently not allowable. But the law does
not say what was to be done with the fat of these animals."
Certainly it does not disertis verbis ; but indirectly it does so
clearly enough. According to chap. xvii. 3 sqq., during the
journey through the desert any one who wanted to slaughter
an ox, sheep, or goat was to bring the animal to the tabernacle
as a sacrificial gift, that the blood might be sprinkled against
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VII. 11-86. 327
the altar, and the fat burned upon it. By this regulation every
ordinary slaughtering was raised into a sacrifice, and the law
determined what was to be done with the fat. Now if after-
wards, when the people dwelt in Canaan, cattle were allowed to
be slaughtered in any place, and the only prohibition repeated
was that against eating blood (Deut. xii. 15, 16, 21 sqq.),
whilst the law against eating fat was not renewed; it follows
as a matter of course, that when the custom of slaughtering at
the tabernacle was restricted to actual sacrifices, the prohibition
against eating the fat portions came to an end, so far as those
animals were concerned which were slain for consumption and
net as sacrifices. The reason for prohibiting fat from being
eaten was simply this, that so long as every slaughtering was a
sacrifice, the fat portions, which were to be handed over to
Jehovah and burned upon the altar, were not to be devoted to
earthly purposes, because they were gifts sanctified to God. The
eating of the fat, therefore, was neither prohibited on sanitary
or social grounds, viz. because fat was injurious to health, as
Maimonides and other Rabbins maintain, nor for the purpose of
promoting the cultivation of olives, as Michaelis supposes, nor
to prevent its being put into the unclean mouth of man, as
Knobel imagines ; but as being an illegal appropriation of what
was sanctified to God, a wicked invasion of the rights of Jehovah,
which was to be punished with extermination according to the
analogy of Num. xv. 30, 31. The prohibition of blood in vers.
26, 27, extends to birds and cattle ; fishes not being mentioned,
because the little blood which they possess is not generally eaten.
This prohibition Israel was to observe in all its dwelling-places
(Ex. xii. 20, cf. chap. x. 23), not only so long as all the slaughter-
ings had the character of sacrifices, but for all ages, because the
blood was regarded as the soul of the animal, which God had
sanctified as the medium of atonement for the soul of man (chap,
xvii. 11), whereby the blood acquired a much higher degree of
holiness than the fat.
Vers. 28-36. Jehovah's share of the peace-offerings. — Ver. 29.
The offerer of the sacrifice was to bring his gift (corbari) to
Jehovah, i.e. to bring to the altar the portion which belonged to
Jehovah. — Vers. 30, 31. Hid hands were to bring the firings of
Jehovah, i.e, the portions to be burned upon the altar (chap.
i. 9), viz. " the fat (the fat portions, chap. iii. 3, 4) with the
Digitized by
Google
328 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
, breast" — the former to be burned upon the altar, the latter " to
wave as a- wave-offering before Jehovah." ntn, to arnOwtov
(LXX.), i.e., according to Pollux, t&v artfi&v to fiio~ov, pectus-
culum or pectus (Vulg. cf. chap. ix. 20, 21, x. 15), signifies the
breast, the breast-piece of the sacrificial animals, 1 the brisket,
which consists for the most part of cartilaginous fat in the case
of oxen, sheep, and goats, and is one of the most savoury parts ;
so that at the family festivities of the ancients, according to
Athen. Deipnos. ii. 70, ix. 10, anjffwia traykwv apvuov were
dainty bits. The breast-piece was presented to the Lord as a
wave-offering (tenuphah), and transferred by Him to Aaron and
his sons (the priests). fBUFi, from *|U, 1*3(1, to swing, to move to
and fro (see Ex. xxxv. 22), is the name applied to a ceremony
peculiar to the peace-offerings and the consecration-offerings : the
priest laid the object to be waved upon the hands of the offerer,
and then placed his own hands underneath, and moved the
hands of the offerer backwards and forwards in a horizontal
direction, to indicate by the movement forwards, i.e. in the direc-
tion towards the altar, the presentation of the sacrifice, or the
symbolical transference of it to God, and by the movement
backwards, the reception of it back again, as a present which
God handed over to His servants the priests. 2 In the peace-
offerings the waving was performed with the breast-piece, which
was called the " wave-breast" in consequence (ver. 34, chap. x.
14, 15 ; Num. vi. 20, xviii. 18 ; Ex. xxix. 27). At the conse-
cration of the priests it was performed with the fat portions,
the right leg, and with some cakes, as well as with the breast of
the fill-offering (chap. viii. 25-29 ; Ex. xxix. 22-26). The cere-
mony of waving was also carried out with the sheaf of first-
1 The etymology of the word is obscure. According to Winer, Gesenius,
and others, it signifies adspectui patens; whilst Meier and Knobel regard
it as meaning literally the division, or middle-piece; and Dietrich attributes
to it the fundamental signification, " to be, moved," viz. the breast, as being
the part moved by the heart.
s In the Talmud (cf. Gemar. Kiddush 36, 2, Gem. Succa 37, 2, and
Tosaphta Menach. 7, 17), which Maimonides and Rashi follow, tenuphah
is correctly interpreted ducebat et reducebat ; but some of the later Rabbins
(vid. Outram ut sup.) make it out to have been a movement in the direction
of the four quarters of the heavens, and Witsius and others find an allu-
sion in this to the omnipresence of God, — an allusion which is quite out of
character with the occasion.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VII. 11-36. 329
fruits at the feast of Passover ; with tire loaves of the first-
fruits, and thank-offering lambs, at the feast of Pentecost (chap,
xxiii. 11, 20); with the shoulder and meat-offering of the Naza-
rite (Num. vi. 20) ; with the trespass-offering of the leper (chap.
xiv. 12, 24); with the jealousy-offering (Num. v. 25) ; and lastly
with the Levites, at their consecration (Num. viii. 11 sqq.). In
the case of all these sacrifices, the object waved, after it had
been offered symbolically to the Lord by means of the waving,
became the property of the priests. But of the lambs, which
were waved at the feast of Pentecost before they were slaugh-
tered, and of the lamb which was brought as a trespass-offering
by the leper, the blood and fat were given up to the altar-fire ;
of the jealousy-offering, only an azcarah ; and of the fill-offer-
ing, for special reasons, the fat portions and leg, as well as the
cakes. Even the Levites were given by Jehovah to the priests
to be their own (Num. viii. 19). The waving, therefore, had
nothing in common with the porricere of the Romans, as the
portions of the sacrifices which were called porricice were pre-
cisely those which were not only given up to the gods, but burned
upon the altars. In addition to the wave-breast, which the Lord
gave up to His servants as their share of the peace-offerings, the
officiating priest was also to receive for his portion the right leg
as a terumah, or heave-offering, or lifting off. fW is the thigh
in the case of a man (Isa. xlvii. 2 ; Song of Sol. v. 15), and there-
fore in the case of an animal it is not the fore-leg, or shoulder
(fipaxiap, armus), which is called Jftt, or the arm (Num. vi. 19 ;
Deut. xviii. 3), but the hind-leg, or rather the upper part of it or
ham, which is mentioned in 1 Sam. ix. 24 as a peculiarly choice
portion (Knobel). As a portion lifted off from the sacrificial
gifts, it is often called " the heave-leg" (ver. 34, chap. x. 14, 15 ;
Num. vi. 20; Ex. xxix. 27), because' it was lifted or heaved off
from the sacrificial animal, as a gift of honour for the officiat-
ing priest, but without being waved like the breast-piece, —
though the more general phrase, " to wave a wave-offering be-
fore Jehovah" (chap. x. 15), includes the offering of the heave-
leg (see my Archasologie i. pp. 244-5). — Ver. 34. The wave-
breast and heave-leg Jehovah had taken of the children of Israel,
from off the sacrifices of their peace-offerings : i.e. had imposed
it upon them as tribute, and had given them to Aaron and his
sons, i.e. to the priests, " as a statute for ever," — in other words, as
Digitized by
Google
330 THE THIBD BOOK OF MOSES.
a right which they could claim of the Israelites for all ages (cf .
Ex. xxvii. 21). — With vers. 35, 36, the instructions concerning
the peace-offerings are brought to a close. " This (the wave-
breast and heave-leg) is the share of Aaron and his sons from the
firings of Jehovah in the day (i.e. which Jehovah assigned to them
in the day) when He caused them to draw near to become priests
to Jehovah" i.e., according to the explanation in ver. 36, " in the
day of their anointing." The word nneto in ver. 35, like n ntSTp
in Num. xviii. 8, signifies not " anointing," but share, portio,
literally a measuring off, as in Aramaean and Arabic, from npo
to stroke the hand over anything, to measure, or measure off.
The fulness with which every point in the sacrificial meal is
laid down, helps to confirm the significance of the peace-offerings,
as already implied in the name nsr sacrificial slaughtering, slain-
offering, viz. as indicating that they were intended for, and cul-
minated in a liturgical meal. By placing his hand upon the
head of the animal, which had been brought to the altar of Je-
hovah for the purpose, the offerer signified that with this gift,
which served to nourish and strengthen his own life, he gave up
the substance of his life to the Lord, that he might -thereby be
strengthened both body and soul for a holy walk and conversa-
tion. To this end he slaughtered the victim and had the blood
sprinkled by the priest against the altar, and the fat portions
burned upon it, that in these altar-gifts his soul and his inner
man might be grounded afresh in the gracious fellowship of the
Lord. He then handed over the breast-piece by the process of
waving, also the right leg, and a sacrificial cake of each kind,
as a heave-offering from the whole to the Lord, who transferred
these portions to the priests as His servants, that they might
take part as His representatives in the sacrificial meal. In con-
sequence of this participation of the priests, the feast, which the
offerer of the sacrifice prepared for himself and his family from
the rest of the flesh, became a holy covenant meal, a meal of
love and joy, which represented domestic fellowship with the
Lord, and thus shadowed forth, on the one hand, rejoicing be-
fore the Lord (Deut. xii. 12, 18), and on the other, the blessed-
ness of eating and drinking in the kingdom of God (Luke xiv.
15, xxii. 30). Through the fact that one portion was given up
to the Lord, the. earthly food was sanctified as a symbol of the
true spiritual food, with which the Lord satisfies and refreshes
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VII. 37, 38. v 331
the citizens of His kingdom. This religious aspect of the sacri-
ficial meal will explain the instructions given, viz. that not only
the flesh itself, but those who took part in the meal, were all to
be clean, and that whatever remained of the flesh was to be
burned, on the second or third day respectively, that it might
not pass into a state of decomposition. The burning took place
a day earlier in the case of the praise-offering than in that of
the vow and freewill-offerings, of which the offerer was allowed
a longer enjoyment, because they were the products of his own
spontaneity, which covered any defect that might attach to the
gift itself.
With vers. 37 and 38 the whole of the sacrificial law (chap,
i.-vii.) is brought to a close. Among the sacrifices appointed, the
fill-offering (D^tWBii) is also mentioned here ; though it is not
first instituted in these chapters, but in Ex. xxix. 19, 20 (vers.
22, 26, 27, 31). The name may be explained from the phrase
to "fill the hand" which is not used in the sense of installing
a. man, or giving him authority, like ^3 }TU "commit into his
hand " in Isa. xxii. 21 (Knobel), but was applied primarily to the
ceremony of consecrating the priests, as described in chap. viii.
25 sqq., and was restricted to the idea of investiture with the
priesthood (cf. chap. viii. 33, xvi. 32 ; Ex. xxviii. 41, xxix. 9,
29, 33, 35 ; Num. iii. 3 ; Judg. xvii. 5, 12). This gave rise to
the expression "to fill the hand for Jehovah," i.e. to provide
something to offer to Jehovah (1 Chron. xxix. 5 ; 2 Chron. xxix.
31, cf. Ex. xxxii. 29). Hence D^iWO denotes the filling of the
hand with sacrificial gifts to be offered to Jehovah, and was
used primarily of the particular sacrifice through which the
priests were symbolically invested at their consecration with the
gifts they were to offer, and were empowered, by virtue of this
investiture, to officiate at the sacrifices ; and secondly, in a less
restricted sense, of priestly consecration generally (chap. viii.
33, "the days of your consecration"). The allusion to the
place in ver. 38, viz. " in the wilderness of Sinai," points on the
one hand back to Ex. xix. 1, and on the other hand forward to
Num. xxvi. 63, 64, and xxxvi. 13, " in the plains of Moab " (cf.
Num. i. 1, 19, etc.).
The sacrificial law, therefore, with the five species of sacri-
fices which it enjoins, embraces every aspect in which Israel
was to manifest its true relation to the Lord its God. Whilst
Digitized by
Google
332 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES,
the sanctification of the whole man in self-surrender to the Lord
was shadowed forth in the burnt-offerings, the fruits of this
sanctification in the meat-offerings, and the blessedness of the
possession and enjoyment of saving grace in the peace-offerings ,
the expiatory sacrifices furnished the means of removing the
barrier which sins and trespasses had sep up between the sinner
and the holy God, and procured the forgiveness of sin and guilt,
so that the sinner could attain once more to the unrestricted
enjoyment of the covenant grace. For, provided only that the
people of God drew near to their God with sacrificial gifts, in
obedience to His commandments and in firm reliance upon His
word, which had connected the forgiveness of sin, strength for
sanctification, and the peace of fellowship with Him, with these
manifestations of their piety, the offerers would receive in truth
> the blessings promised them by the Lord. Nevertheless these
sacrifices could not make those who drew near to God with them
and in them " perfect as pertaining to the conscience " (Heb. ix.
9, x. 1), because the blood of bulls and of goats could not
possibly take away sin (Heb. x. 4). The forgiveness of sin
which the atoning sacrifices procured, was only a irdpecm of past
sins through the forbearance of God (Rom. iii. 25, 26), in anti-
cipation of the true sacrifice of Christ, of which the animal
sacrifices were only a type, and by which the justice of God is
satisfied, and the way opened for the full forgiveness of sin and
complete reconciliation with God. So also the sanctification
and fellowship set forth by the burnt-offerings and peace-offer-
ings, were simply a sanctification of the fellowship already
established by the covenant of the law between Israel and its
covenant God, which pointed forward to the true sanctification
and blessedness that grow out of the righteousness of faith, and
expand through the operation of the Holy Spirit into the true
righteousness and blessedness of the divine peace of reconcilia-
tion. The effect of .the sacrifices was in harmony with the
nature of the old covenant. The fellowship with God, estab-
lished by this covenant, was simply a faint copy of that true and
living fellowship with God, which consists in God's dwelling in
our hearts through His Spirit, transforming our spirit, soul, and
body more and more into His own image and His divine nature,
and making us partakers of the glory and blessedness of His
divine life. However intimately the infinite and holy God
Digitized by
Google
chap. nil. 333
connected Himself with His people in the earthly sanctuary of
the tabernacle and the altar of burnt-offering, yet so long as this
sanctuary stood, the God who was enthroned in the most holy
place was separated by the veil from His people, who could only
appear before Him in the fore-court, as a proof that the sin which
separates unholy man from the holy God had not yet been taken
out of the way. Just as the old covenant generally was not in-
tended to secure redemption from sin, but the law was designed
to produce the knowledge of sin ; so the desire for reconciliation
with God was not to be truly satisfied by its sacrificial ordinances, ,
but a desire was to be awakened for that true sacrifice which
cleanses from all sins, and the way to be prepared for the ap-
pearing of the Son of God, who would exalt the shadows of the
Mosaic sacrifices into a substantial reality by giving up His own
life as a propitiation for the sins of the whole world, and thus
through the one offering of His own holy body would perfect all
the manifold sacrifices of the Old Testament economy.
INDUCTION OF AARON AND HIS SONS INTO THE PRIESTLY
OFFICE. — CHAP. VIII.-X.
To the law of sacrifice there is appended first of all an account
of the fulfilment of the divine command to sanctify Aaron and
his sons as priests, which Moses had received upon the mount
along with the laws concerning the erection of the sanctuary of
the tabernacle (Ex. xxviii. and xxix.). This command could
not properly be carried out till after the appointment and regu-
lation of the institution of sacrifice, because most of the laws of
sacrifice had some bearing upon this act. The sanctification of
the persons, whom God had called to be His priests, consisted
in a solemn consecration of these persons to their office by investi-
ture, anointing, and sacrifice (chap, viii.), — their solemn entrance
upon their office by sacrifices for themselves and the people (chap,
ix.), — the sanctification of their priesthood by the judgment of
God upon the eldest sons of Aaron, when about to offer strange
fire, — and certain instructions, occasioned by this occurrence,
concerning the conduct of the priests in the performance of their
service (chap. x.).
Chap. viii. CONSECRATION OF THE PRIESTS AND THE
f
Digitized by
Google
334 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
Sanctuary (cf. Ex. xxix. 1—37).— The consecration of Aaron
and his sons as priests was carried out by Moses according to
the instructions in Ex. xxix. 1-36, xl. 12-15 ; And the anointing
of the tabernacle, with the altar and its furniture, as prescribed
in Ex. xxix. 37, xxx. 26-29, and xl. 9-11, was connected with it
(vers. 10, 11). — Vers. 1-5 contain an account of the preparations
for this holy act, the performance of which was enjoined upon
Moses by Jehovah after the publication of the laws of sacrifice
(ver. 1). Moses brought the persons to be consecrated, the offi-
cial costume that had been made for them (Ex. xxviii.), the
anointing oil (Ex. xxx. 23 sqq.), and the requisite sacrificial
offerings (Ex. xxix. 1-3), to the door of the tabernacle (i.e. into
the court, near the altar of burnt-offering), and then gathered
" the whole congregation" — that is to say, the nation in the per-
sons of its elders — there also (see my Archdologie ii. p. 221).
The definite article before the objects enumerated in ver. 2 may
be explained on the ground that they had all been previously
and more minutely described. The " basket of the unleaverted"
contained, according to Ex. xxix. 2, 3, (1) unleavened bread,
which is called n?n in ver. 26, i.e. round flat bread-cakes, and
Dl $ "•?? (loaf of bread) in Ex. xxix. 23, and was baked for the
purpose of the consecration (see at vers. 31, 32) ; (2) unleavened
oil-cakes ; and (3) unleavened flat cakes covered with oil (see
at chap. ii. 4 and vii. 12). — Ver. 5. When the congregation was
assembled, Moses said, " This is the word which Jehovah com
manded you to do." His meaning was, the substance or essential
part of the instructions in Ex. xxviii. 1 and xxix. 1-37, which
he had published to the assembled congregation before the com-
mencement of the act of consecration, and which are not repeated
here as being already known from those chapters. The congre-
gation had been summoned to perform this act, because Aaron
and his sons were to be consecrated as priests for them, as stand-
ing mediators between them and the Lord. — Vers. 6-9. After
this the act of consecration commenced. It consisted of two
parts : first, the consecration of the persons themselves to the
office of the priesthood, by washing, clothing, and anointing (vers.
6—13) ; and secondly, the sacrificial rites, by which the persons
appointed to the priestly office were inducted into the functions
and prerogatives of priests (vers. 16-36).
Vers. 6-13. The washing, clothing, and anointing. — -Ver. 6.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VIII. 6-18. 335
" Moses brought Aaron and his sons, and washed them with water ; "
i.e. directed them to wash themselves, no doubt all over, and not
merely their hands and feet. This cleansing from bodily un-
cleanness was a symbol of the putting away of the filth of sin ;
the washing of the body, therefore, was a symbol of spiritual
cleansing, without which no one could draw near to God, and
least of all those who were to perform the duties of reconciliation.
— Vers. 7-9. Then followed the clothing of Aaron. Moses put
upon him the body-coat (Ex. xxviii. 39) and girdle (Ex. xxviii.
39 and xxxix. 22), then clothed him with the meil (Ex. xxviii.
31—35) and ephod (Ex. xxviii. 6-14), and the choshen with the
Urim and Thummim (Ex. xxviii. 15-30), and put the cap (Ex.
xxviii. 39) upon his head, with the golden diadem over his fore-
head (Ex. xxviii. 36-38). This investiture, regarded as the
putting on of an important official dress, was a symbol of his
endowment with the character required for the discliarge of the
duties of his office, the official costume being the outward sign
of installation in the office which he was to fill. — Vers. 10-12.
According to the directions in Ex. xxx. 26-30 (cf. chap. xl. 9-
11), the anointing was performed first of all upon " the tabernacle
and everything in it" i.e. the ark of the covenant, the altar of in-
cense, the candlestick, and table of shew-bread, and their furni-
ture ; and then upon the altar of burnt-offering and its furniture,
and upon the laver and its pedestal ; and after this, upon Aaron
himself, by the pouring of the holy oil*upon his head. This was
followed by the robing and anointing of Aaron's sons, the former
only of which is recorded in ver. 13 (according to Ex. xxviii. 40),
the anointing not being expressly mentioned, although it had not
only been commanded, in Ex. xxviii. 41 and xl. 15, but the per-
formance of it is taken for granted in chap. vii. 36, x. 7, and
Num. iii. 3. According to the Jewish tradition, the anointing
of Aaron (the high priest) was different from that of the sons of
Aaron (the ordinary priests), the oil being poured upon the head
of the former, whilst it was merely smeared with the finger upon
the forehead in the case of the latter (cf. Relandi Antiqq. ss. ii.
1 , 5, and 7, and Selden, de succ. in pontif. ii. 2). There appears
to be some foundation for this, as a distinction is assumed be-
tween the anointing of the high priest and that of the ordinary
priests, not only in the expression, " he poured of the anointing
oil upon Aaron's head" (ver. 12, cf. Ex. xxix. 7; Ps. cxxxiii. 2),
Digitized by
Google
336 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
which is applied to Aaron only, but also in chap. xxi. 10, 12 ;
although the further statement of the later Talmudists and
Rabbins, that Aaron was also marked upon the forehead with the
sign of a Hebrew 1 (the initial letter of 1^3), has no support in
the law (vid. Selden, ii. 9 ; Vilringa, observe, ss. ii. c. 15, 9). — On
the mode in which the tabernacle and its furniture were anointed,
all that is stated is, that the altar of burnt-offering was anointed
by being sprinkled seven times with the anointing oil ; from
which we may safely conclude, that the other portions and
vessels of the sanctuary were anointed in the same way, but that
the sprinkling was not performed more than once in their case.
The reason why the altar was sprinkled seven times with the
holy anointing oil, is to be sought for in its signification as the
place of worship. The anointing, both of the sacred things and
also of the priests, is called K^i? " to sanctify," in vers. 10-12, as
well as in Ex. xl. 9-11 and 13 ; and in Ex. xl. 10 the following
stipulation is added with regard to the altar of burnt-offering:
" and it sliall be niost holt/," — a stipulation which is not extended
to the dwelling and its furniture, although those portions of the
sanctuary were most holy also, that the altar of burnt-offering,
which was the holiest object in the court by virtue of its appoint-
ment as the place of expiation, might be specially guarded from
being touched by unholy hands (see at Ex. xl. 16). To im-
press upon it this highest grade of holiness, it was sprinkled
seven times with anointing oil ; and in the number seven, the
covenant number, the seal of the holiness of the covenant of
reconciliation, to which it was to be subservient, was impressed
upon it. To sanctify is not merely to separate to holy purposes,
but to endow or fill with the powers of the sanctifying Spirit of
God. Oil was a fitting symbol of the Spirit, or spiritual prin-
ciple of life, by virtue of its power to sustain and fortify the vital
energy ; and the anointing oil, which was prepared according to
divine instructions, was therefore a symbol of the Spirit of God,
as the principle of spiritual life which proceeds from God and
/fills the natural being of the creature with the powers of divine
life. The anointing with oil, therefore, was a symbol of endow-
ment with the Spirit of God (1 Sam. x. 1, 6, xvi. 13, 14 ; Isa.
lxi. 1) for the- duties of the office to which a person was conse-
crated. The holy vessels also were not only consecrated, through
the anointing, for the holy purposes to which 'they were to be
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VIII. 6-13. 337
devoted (Ktwbel), but were also furnished in a symbolical sense
with powers of the divine Spirit, which were to pass from them,
to the people who came to the sanctuary. The anointing was
not only to sanctify the priests as organs and mediators of the
Spirit of God, but the vessels of the sanctuary also, as channels
and vessels of the blessings of grace and salvation, which God
as the Holy One would bestow upon His people, through the
service of His priests, and in the holy vessels appointed by Him.
On these grounds the consecration of the holy things was asso-
ciated with the consecration of the priests. The notion that
even vessels, and in fact inanimate things in general, can be en-
dowed with divine and spiritual powers, was very widely spread
in antiquity. We meet with it in the anointing of memorial
stones (Gen. xxviii. 18, xxxv. 14), and it occurs again in the
instructions concerning the expiation of the sanctuary on the
annual day of atonement (chap. xvi.). It contains more truth
than some modern views of the universe, which refuse to admit
that any influence is exerted by the divine Spirit except upon
animated beings, and thus leave a hopeless abyss between spirit
and matter. According to Ex. xxix. 9, the clothing and anoint-
ing of Aaron and his sons were to be "a priesthood to them for a
perpetual statute," i.e. to secure the priesthood to them for all
ages; for the same thought is expressed thus in Ex. xl. 15:
u their anointing shall surely be an everlasting priesthood through-
out their generations." When the Talmudists refer these words
to the sons of Aaron or the ordinary priests, to the exclusion of
Aaron or the high priest, this is opposed to the distinct context,
according to which the sons of Aaron were to be anointed like
their father Aaron. The utter want of foundation for the rabbi-
nical assumption, that the anointing of the sons of Aaron, per-
formed by Moses, availed not only for themselves, but for their
successors also, and therefore for the priests of every age, is also
the more indisputable, because the Talmudists themselves infer
from chap. vi. 15 (cf. Ex. xxix. 29), where the installation of
Aaron's successor in his office is expressly designated an anoint-
ing, the necessity for every successor of Aaron in the high-priest-
hood to be anointed. The meaning of the words in question is
no doubt the following: the anointing of Aaron and his sons
was to stand as a perpetual statute for the priesthood, and to
guarantee it to the sons of Aaron for all time ; it being assumed
PENT. — VOL. II. T
Digitized by
Google
338 THE THIRD BOOK OF HOSES.
as self-evident, according to chap. vi. 15, that as every fresh
generation entered upon office, the anointing would be repeated
or renewed.
Vers. 14-32. The sacrificial ceremony with which the conse-
cration was concluded, consisted of a threefold sacrifice, the ma-
terials for which were not supplied by the persons about to be
installed, but were no doubt provided by Moses at the expense
of the congregation, for which the priesthood was instituted.
Moses officiated as the mediator of the covenant, through whose
service Aaron and his sons were to be consecrated as priests of
Jehovah, and performed every part of the sacrificial rite, — the
slaughtering, sprinkling of the blood, and burning of the altar
gifts, — just as the priests afterwards did at the public daily and
festal sacrifices, the persons to be consecrated simply laying their
hands upon the sacrificial animals, to set them apart as tKeir
representatives. — Vers. 14-17. The first sacrifice was a sin-offer-
ing, for which a young ox was taken (Ex. xxix. 1), as in the case
of the sin-offerings for the high priest and the whole congrega-
tion (chap. iv. 3, 14) : the highest kind of sacrificial animal,
which corresponded to the position to be occupied by the priests
in the Israelitish kingdom of God, as the eickorfr) of the covenant
nation. Moses put some of the blood with his finger upon the
horns of the altar of burnt-offering, and poured the rest at the
foot of the altar. The fat portions (see chap. iii. 3, 4) he burned
upon the altar ; but the flesh of the ox, as well as the hide and
dung, he burned outside the camp. According to the general
rule of the sin-offerings, whose flesh was burnt outside the camp,
the blood was brought into the sanctuary itself (chap. vi. 23) ;
but here it was only put upon the altar of burnt-offering to make
this sin-offering a consecration-sacrifice. Moses was to take the
blood to "purify (Ntsn)) and sanctify the altar, to expiate it." As
the altar had been sanctified immediately before by the anoint-
ing with holy oil (ver. 11), the object of the cleansing or
sanctification of it through the blood of the sacrifice cannot have
been to purify it a second time from uncleanness, that still ad-
hered to it, or was inherent in it ; but just as the purification or
expiation of the vessels of worship generally applied only to the
sins of the nation, by which these vessels had been defiled (chap,
xvi. 16, 19), so here the purification of the altar with the blood
of the sin-offering, upon which the priests had laid their hands,
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VIII. 14-82. 339
had reference simply to pollutions, with which the priests defiled
the altar when officiating at it, through the uncleanness of their
sinful nature. As the priests could not be installed in the func-
tions of the priesthood, notwithstanding the holiness communi-
cated to them through the anointing, without a sin-offering to
awaken the consciousness in both themselves and the nation that
the sinfulness which lay at the root of human nature was not
removed by the anointing, but only covered in the presence of
the holy God, and that sin still clung to man, and polluted all
his doings and designs; so the altar, upon which they were
henceforth to offer sacrifices, still required to be purified through
the blood of the bullock, that had been slaughtered as a sin-
offering for the expiation of their sins, to sanctify it for the
service of the priests, i.e. to cover up the sins by which they
would defile it when performing their service. For this sanctifi-
cation the blood of the sin-offering, that had been slaughtered
for them, was taken, to indicate the fellowship which was hence-
forth to exist between them and the altar, and to impress upon
them the fact, that the blood, by which they were purified, was
also to serve as the means of purifying the altar from the sins
attaching to their service. Although none of the blood of this
sin-offering was carried into the holy place, because only the
anointed priests were to be thereby inducted into the fellowship
of the altar, the flesh of the animal could only be burnt outside
the camp, because the sacrifice served-to purify the priesthood
(see chap. iv. 11, 12). For the rest, the remarks made on p. 306
are also applicable to the symbolical meaning of this sacrifice. — i
Vers. 18-21. The sin-offering, through which the priests and the
altar had been expiated, and every disturbance of the fellowship
existing between the holy God and His servants at the altar, in
consequence of the sin of those who were to be consecrated, had
been taken away, was followed by a burnt-offering, consisting of
a ram, which was offered according to the ordinary ritual of the
burnt-offering (chap. i. 3-9), and served to set^ forth the priests,
who had appointed it as their substitute through the laying on
of hands, as a living, holy, and well-pleasing sacrifice to the
Lord, and to sanctify them to the Lord with all the faculties of
both body and soul.
Vers. 22-29. This was followed by the presentation of a peace-
offering, which also consisted of a ram, called " the ram of the
Digitized by
Google
340 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
filling" or u of the fill-offering" from the peculiar ceremony per-
formed with the flesh, by which this sacrifice became a consecra-
tion-offering, inducting the persons consecrated into the possession
and enjoyment of the privileges of the priesthood. A ram was
offered as a peace-offering, by the nation as a whole (chap. ix. 4,
18), the tribe-princes (Num. vii. 17 sqq.), andaNazarite(Num. vi.
14, 17), who also occupied a higher position in the congregation
(Amos ii. 11, 12) ; but it was never brought by a private Israelite
for a peace-offering. The offering described here differed from
the rest of the peace-offerings, first of all, in the ceremony per-
formed with the blood (vers. 23 and 24, cf. Ex. xxix. 20, 21).
Before sprinkling the blood upon the altar, Moses put some of it
upon the tip of the right ear, upon the right thumb, and upon
the great toe of the right foot of Aaron and his sons. Thus he
touched the extreme points, which represented the whole, of the
ear, hand, and foot on the right, or more important and principal
side : the ear, because the priest was always to hearken to the
word and commandment of God ; the hand, because he was to
discharge the priestly functions properly ; and the foot, because
he was to walk correctly in the sanctuary. Through this mani-
pulation the three organs employed in the priestly service were
placed, by means of their tips, en rapport with the sacrificial
blood; whilst through the subsequent sprinkling of the blood
upon the altar they were introduced symbolically within the
sphere of the divine grace, by virtue of the sacrificial blood, which
represented the soul as the principle of life, and covered it in the
presence of the holiness of God, to be sanctified by that grace to
the rendering of willing and righteous service to the Lord. The
sanctification was at length completed by Moses' taking some of
the anointing oil and some of the blood upon the altar, and
sprinkling Aaron and his sons, and also their clothes ; that is to
say, by his sprinkling the persons themselves, as bearers of the
priesthood, and their clothes, as the insignia of the priesthood,
with a mixture of holy anointing oil and sacrificial blood taken
from the altar (ver. 30). The blood taken from the altar sha-
dowed forth the soul as united with God through the medium of
the atonement, and filled with powers of grace. The holy
anointing oil was a symbol of the Spirit of God. Consequently,
through this sprinkling the priests were endowed, both soul and
spirit, with the higher powers of the divine life. The sprinkling,
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VIII. 14-82. 341
however, was performed, not upon the persons alone, but also
upon their official dress. For it had reference to the priests, not
in their personal or individual relation to the Lord, but in their
official position, and with regard to their official work in the con-
gregation of the Lord. 1
In addition to this, the following appointment is contained in
Ex. xxix. 29, 30 : "The holy garments of Aaron shall be his sons'
after him," i.e. pass to his successors in the high-priesthood, " to
anoint them therein and fill their hands therein. Seven days
shall the priest of his sons in his stead put them on (0^3?'. with
the suffix D— as in Gen. xix. 19), who shall go into the taber-
nacle to serve in the sanctuary." Accordingly, at Aaron's death
his successor Eleazar was dressed in his robes (Num. xx. 26-28).
It by no means follows from this, that a formal priestly conse-
cration was repeated solely in the case of the high priest as the
head of the priesthood, and that with the common priests the first
anointing by Moses sufficed for all time. We have already ob-
served at p. 337 that this is not involved in Ex. xl. 15 ; and the
fact that it is only the official costume of the high priest which
is expressly said to have passed to his successor, may be ex-
plained on the simple ground, that as his dress was only worn
when he was discharging certain special functions before Jeho-
vah, it would not be worn out so soon as the dress of the ordi-
nary priests, which was worn in the daily service, and therefore
would hardly last long enough to be handed down from father
to son. 4
The ceremony performed with the flesh of this sacrifice
was also peculiarly significant (vers. 25-29). Moses took the
fat portions, which were separated from the flesh in the case
1 In the instructions in Ex. xxix. 21 this ceremony is connected with the
sprinkling of the blood upon the altar ; but here, on the contrary, it is men-
tioned after the burning of the flesh. Whether because it was not performed
till after this, or because it is merely recorded here in a supplementary form,
it is difficult to decide. The latter is the more probable, because the blood
upon the altar would soon run off ; so that if Moses wanted to take any of
it off, it could not be long delayed.
2 It no more follows from the omission of express instructions concern-
ing the repetition of the ceremony in the case of every priest who had to be
consecrated, that the future priests were not invested, anointed, and in all
respects formally consecrated, than the fact that the anointing is not men-
tioned in ver. 13 proves that the priests were not anointed at all
Digitized by
Google
342 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
of the ordinary peace-offerings and burned upon the altar,
and the right leg, which was usually assigned to the officiating
priest, and then laid by the pieces of flesh (or upon them) an-
other cake of each of the three kinds of pastry, which fell to
the portion of the priest in other cases, as a heave-offering for
Jehovah, and put all this into the hands of Aaron and his sons,
and waved it as a wave-offering for Jehovah, after which he
took it from their hands and burned it upon the altar, " as a
filling (D'K?!?) for a savour of satisfaction, as a firing for Jehovah"
These last words, which are attached to the preceding without a
conjunction, and, as the Dfi and wn show, form independent
clauses (lit. "filling are they ... a firing is it for Jehovah"),
contain the reason for this unusual proceeding, so that Luther's
explanation, is quite correct, "for it is a fill-offering," etc. The
ceremony of handing the portions mentioned to Aaron and his
sons denoted the filling of their hands with the sacrificial gifts,
which they were afterwards to offer to the Lord in the case of
the peace-offerings, viz. the fat portions as a firing upon the
altar, the right leg along with the bread-cake as a wave-offering,
which the Lord then relinquished to them as His own servants.
The filling of their hands with these sacrificial gifts, from which
the offering received the name of fill-offering, signified on the
one hand the communication of the right belonging to the priest
to offer the fat portions to the Lord upon the altar, and on the
other hand the enfeoffment of the priests with gifts, which they
were to receive in future for their service. This symbolical sig-
nification of the act in question serves to explain the circumstance,
that both the fat portions, which were to be burned upon the
altar, and also the right leg with the bread-cakes which formed
the priests' share of the peace-offerings, were merely placed in
the priests' hands in this instance, and presented symbolically to
the Lord by waving, and then burned by Moses upon the altar.
For Aaron and his sons were not only to be enfeoffed with what
they were to burn unto the Lord, but also with what they would
receive for their service. And as even the latter was a pre-
rogative bestowed upon them by the Lord, it was right that at
their consecration they should offer it symbolically to the Lord
by waving, and actually by burning upon the altar. But as the
right leg was devoted to another purpose in this case, Moses re-
ceived the breast-piece, which was presented to the Lord by
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VIII. 83-86. 343
waving (ver. 29), and which afterwards fell to the lot of the
priests, as his portion for the sacrificial meal, which formed the
conclusion of this dedicatory offering, as it did of all the peace-
offerings. In Ex. xxix. 27, 28, we also find the command, that
the wave-breast of the ram of the fill-offering, and the heave-leg
which had been lifted off, should afterwards belong to Aaron and
his sons on the part of the children of Israel, as a perpetual
statute, i.e. as a law for all time ; - and the following reason is
assigned : "for it is a heave-offering (terumah, a lifting off), and
shall be a heave-offering on the part of the children of Israel of
their peace-offerings, their heave-offering for Jehovah" i.e. which
they were to give to the Lord from their peace-offerings for the
good of His servants. The application of the word terumah to
both kinds of offering, the wave-breast and the heave-shoulder,
may be explained on the simple ground, that the gift to be waved
had to be lifted off from the sacrificial animal before the waving
could be performed. — Vers. 31, 32. For the sacrificial meal, the
priests were to boil the flesh in front of the door of the taber-
nacle, or, according to Ex. xxix. 31, " at the holy place," we. in
the court, and eat it with the bread in the fill-offering basket ;
and no stranger (i.e. layman or non-priest) was to take part in
the meal, because the flesh and bread were holy (Ex. xxix. 33),
that is to say, had served to make atonement for the priests, to
fill their hands and sanctify them. Atoning virtue is attributed
to this sacrifice in the same sense as to the burnt-offering in chap,
i. 4. Whatever was left of the flesh and bread until the follow-
ing day, that is to say, was not eaten on the day of sacrifice, was
to be burned with fire, for the reason explained at chap. vii. 17.
The exclusion of laymen from participating in this sacrificial
meal is to be accounted for in the same way as the prohibition
of unleavened bread, which was offered and eaten in the case of
the ordinary peace-offerings along with the unleavened sacrificial
cakes (see at chap. vii. 13). The meal brought the consecration
of the priests to a close, as Aaron and his sons were thereby re-
ceived into that special, priestly covenant with the Lord, the bless-
ings and privileges of which were to be enjoyed by the consecrated
priests alone. At this meal the priests were not allowed to eat
leavened bread, any more than the nation generally at the feast
of Passover (Ex. xii. 8 sqq.).
Vers. 33-36 (cf. Ex. xxix. 35-37). The consecration was to
Digitized by
Google
344 THE THIBD BOOK OF MOSES..
last seven days, during which time the persons to be consecrated
were not to go away from the door of the tabernacle, but to re-
main there day and night, and watch the watch of the Lord
that they might not die. "For the Lord will Jill your hand seven
days. As they have done on this (the first) day, so has Jehovah
commanded to do to make atonement for you" (ver. 34). That is
to say, the rite of consecration which has been performed upon
you to-day, Jehovah has commanded to be performed or repeated
for seven days. These words clearly imply that the whole cere-
mony, in all its details, was to be repeated for seven days ; and
in Ex. xxix. 36, 37, besides the filling of the hands which was
to be continued seven days, and which presupposes the daily
repetition of the consecration-offering, the preparation of the
sin-offering for reconciliation and the expiation or purification
and anointing of the altar are expressly commanded for each of
the seven days. This repetition of the act of consecration is to
be regarded as intensifying the consecration itself ; and the limi-
tation of it to seven days is to be accounted for from the signi-
fication and holiness of the number seven as the sign of the
completion of the works of God. The commandment not to
leave the court of the tabernacle during the whole seven days,
is of course not to be understood" literally (as it is by some of
the Rabbins), as meaning that the persons to be consecrated
were not even to go away from the spot for the necessities of
nature (cf . Lund. jud. Heiligth. p. 448) ; but when taken in
connection with the clause which follows, " and keep the charge
of the Lord" it can only be understood as signifying that during
these days they were not to leave the sanctuary to attend to
any earthly avocation whatever, but uninterruptedly to observe
the charge of the Lord, m. the consecration commanded by
the Lord. WiDEfe ""?E>, lit. to watch the watch of a person or
thing, i.e. to attend to them, to do whatever was required for
noticing or attending to them (cf . Gen. xxvi. 5, and Hengstenberg,
Christology).
Chap. ix. Entrance of Aaron and his Sons upon their
Office. — Vers. 1-7. On the eighth day, i.e. on the day after
the seven days' consecration, Aaron and his sons entered upon
their duties with a solemn sacrifice for themselves and the nation,
to which the Lord had made Himself known by a special revela-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. IX. 8-21. "345
tion of His glory, to bear solemn witness before the whole na-
tion that their service at the altar was acceptable to Him, and
to impress the divine seal of confirmation upon the consecration
they had received. To this end Aaron and his sons were to
bring to the front of the tabernacle a young calf as a sin-offering
for themselves, and a ram for a burnt-offering ; and the people
were to bring through their elders a he-goat for a sin-offering,
a yearling calf and yearling sheep for a burnt-offering, and an
ox and ram for a peace-offering, together with a meat-offering
of meal mixed with oil ; and the congregation (in the persons of
its elders) was to stand there before Jehovah, i.e. to assemble
together at the sanctuary for the solemn transaction (vers. 1-5).
If, according to this, even after the manifold expiation and con-
secration, which Aaron had received through Moses during the
seven days, he had still to enter upon his service with a sin-
offering and burnt-offering, this fact clearly showed that the
offerings of the law could not ensure perfection (Heb. x. 1 sqq.).
It is true that on this occasion a young calf was sufficient for a
sin-offering for the priests, not a mature ox as in chap. viii. 14
and iv. 3 ; and so also for the burnt-offerings and peace-offerings
of the people smaller sacrifices sufficed, either smaller in kind or
fewer in number than at the leading feasts (Num. xxviii. 11
sqq.). Nevertheless, not one of the three sacrifices could be
omitted ; and if no special peace-offering was required of Aaron,
this may be accounted for from the fact, that the whole of the
sacrificial ceremony terminated with a national peace-offering, in
which the priests took part, uniting in this instance with the
rest of the nation in the celebration of a common sacrificial
meal, to make known their oneness with them. — Vers. 6, 7.
After everything had been prepared for the solemn ceremony,
Moses made known to the assembled people what Jehovah had
commanded them to do in order that His glory might appear
(see at Ex. xvi. 10). Aaron was to offer the sacrifices that had
been brought for the reconciliation of himself and the nation.
Vers. 8-21. Accordingly, he offered first of all the sin-
offering and burnt-offering for himself, and then (vers. 15—21)
the offerings of the people. The sin-offering always went first,
because it served to remove the estrangement of man from the
holy God arising from sin, by means of the expiation of the
sinner, and to clear away the hindrances to his approach to
Digitized by
Google
346 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
God. Then followed the burnt-offering, as an expression of
the complete surrender of the person expiated to the Lord ; and
lastly the peace-offering, on the one hand as the utterance of
thanksgiving for mercy received, and prayer for its further con-
tinuance, and on the other hand, as a seal of covenant fellowship
with the Lord in the sacrificial meal. But when Moses says in
ver. 7, that Aaron is to make atonement for himself and the
nation with his sin-offering and burnt-offering, the atoning
virtue which Aaron's sacrifice was to have for the nation also,
referred not to sins which the people had committed, but to the
guilt which the high priest, as the head of the whole congre-
gation, had brought upon the nation by his sin (chap. iv. 3).
In offering the sacrifices, Aaron was supported by his sons, who
handed him the blood to sprinkle, and the sacrificial portions to
burn upon the altar. The same course was adopted with Aaron's
sin-offering (vers. 8-11) as Moses had pursued with the sin-
offering at the consecration of the priests (chap. viii. 14-17).
The blood was not taken into the sanctuary, but only applied to
the horns of the altar of burnt-offering ; because the object was
not to expiate some particular sin of Aaron's, but to take away
the sin which might make his service on behalf of the congre-
gation displeasing to God ; and the communion of the congre-
gation with the Lord was carried on at the altar of burnt-
offering. The flesh and skin of the animal were burnt outside
the camp, as in the case of all the sin-offerings for the priest-
hood (chap. iv. 11, 12). — Vers. 12-14. The burnt-offering was
presented according to the general rule (chap. i. 3-9), as in
chap. viii. 18—21. tfwri (ver. 12) : to cause to attain ; here, and
in ver. 18, to present, hand over, ^n™?, according to its pieces,
into which the burnt-offering was "divided (chap. i. 6), and
which they offered to Aaron one by one. No meat-offering was
connected with Aaron's burnt-offerings, partly because the law
contained in Num. xv. 2 sqq. had not yet been given, but more
especially because Aaron had to bring the special meat-offering
commanded in chap. vi. 13, and had offered this in connection
with the morning burnt-offering mentioned in ver. 17 ; though
this offering, as being a constant one, and not connected with
the offerings especially belonging to the consecration of the
priests, is not expressly mentioned. — Vers. 15 sqq. Of the sacri-
fices of the nation, Aaron presented the sin-offering in the same
Digitized by
Google
i
CHAP. IX 22-24. 347
manner as the first, i.e. the one offered for himself (vers. 8 sqq.).
The blood of this sin-offering, which was presented for the
congregation, was not brought into the holy place according to
the rule laid down in chap. iv. 16 sqq., but only applied to the
horns of the altar of burnt-offering ; for the same reason as in
the previous case (vers. 8 sqq.), viz. because the object was not
to expiate any particular sin, or the sins of the congregation
that had been committed in the course of time and remained
unatoned for, but simply to place the sacrificial service of the
congregation in its proper relation to the Lord. Aaron was
reproved by Moses, however, for having burned the flesh (chap,
x. 16 sqq.), but was able to justify it (see at chap. x. 16-20).
The sin-offering (ver. 16) was also offered " according to the
right" (as in chap. v. 10). Then followed the meat-offering
(ver. 17), of which Aaron burned a handful upon the altar
(according to the rule in chap. ii. 1, 2). He offered this in
addition to the morning burnt-offering (Ex. xxix. 39), to which
a meat-offering also belonged (Ex. xxix. 40), and With which,
according to chap. vi. 12 sqq., the special meat-offering of the
priests was associated. Last of all (vers. 18—21) there followed
the peace-offering, which was also carried out according to the
general rule. In IMpn, « the covering" (ver. 19), the two fat
portions mentioned in chap. iii. 3 are included. The fat por-
tions were laid upon the breast-pieces by the sons of Aaron, and
then handed by them to Aaron, the fat to be burned upon, the
altar, the breast to be waved along with the right leg, according
to the instructions in chap. vii. 30-36. The meat-offering of
pastry^ which belonged to the peace-offering according to chap,
vii. 12, 13, is not specially mentioned.
Vers. 22-24. When the sacrificial ceremony was over, Aaron
blessed the people from the altar with uplifted hands (cf. Num.
vi. 22 sqq.), and then came down : sc. from the banksurround-
ing the altar, upon which he had stood while offering the sacri-
fice (see at Ex. xxvii. 4, 5). — Ver. 23. After this Moses went
with him into the tabernacle, to introduce him into the sanctuary,
in which he was henceforth to serve the Lord, and to present
him to the Lord : not to offer incense, which would undoubtedly
have been mentioned ; nor yet for the special purpose of praying
for the manifestation of the glory of Jehovah, although there can
be no doubt that they offered prayer in the sanctuary, and prayed
Digitized by
Google
348 THE THIBD BOOK OF MOSES
for the blessing of the Lord for the right discharge of the office
entrusted to them in a manner well-pleasing to Him. On coming
out again they united in bestowing that blessing upon the people
which they had solicited for them in the sanctuary. " Then the
glory of Jehovah appeared to all the people, and fire came out from
before the face of Jehovah and consumed the burnt-offering and fat
portions upon the altar" (i.e. the sin and peace-offerings, not the
thank-offerings merely, as Knobel supposes, according to his mis-
taken theory). The appearance of the glory of Jehovah is
probably to be regarded in this instance, and also in Num. xvi.
19, xvii. 7, and xx. 6, as the sudden flash of a miraculous light,
which proceeded from the cloud that covered the tabernacle,
probably also from the cloud in the most holy place, or as a
sudden though very momentary change of the cloud, which
enveloped the glory of the Lord, into a bright light, from which
the Are proceeded in this instance in the form of lightning, and
consumed the sacrifices upon the altar. The fire issued " from
before the face of Jehovah," i.e. from the visible manifestation
of Jehovah. It did not come down from heaven, like the fire of
Jehovah, which consumed the sacrifices of David and Solomon
(1 Chron. xxi. 26 ; 2 Chron. vii. 1).
The Rabbins believe that this divine fire was miraculously
sustained upon the altar until the building of Solomon's temple,
at the dedication of which it fell from heaven afresh, and then
continued until the restoration of the temple-worship under
Manasseh (2 Chron. xxxiii. 16 ; cf. Buxtorf exercitatt. ad histor.
ignis sacri, c. 2) ; and the majority of them maintain still further,
that it continued side by side with the ordinary altar-fire, which
was kindled by the priests (chap. i. 7), and, according to chap,
vi. 6, kept constantly burning by them. The earlier Christian
expositors are for the most part of opinion, that the heavenly
fire, which proceeded miraculously from God and burned the
first sacrifices of Aaron, was afterwards maintained by the priests
by natural means (see J. Marckii sylloge diss, philol. theol. ex.
vi. ad Lev. vi. 13). But there is no foundation in the Scrip-
tures for either of these views. There is not a syllable abont
any miraculous preservation of the heavenly fire by the side of
the fire which the priests kept burning by natural means. And
even the modified opinion of the Christian theologians, that the
heavenly fire was preserved by natural means, rests upon the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. IX. 22-24. 349
assumption, which there is nothing to justify, that the sacrifices
offered by Aaron were first burned by the fire which issued from
Jehovah, and therefore that the statements in the text, with refer-
ence to the burning of the fat portions and burnt-offerings, or
causing them to ascend in smoke (vers. 10, 13, 17, and 20), are
to be regarded as anticipations (per anticipationem accipienda, C.
a Jjap.\ i.e. are to be. understood as simply meaning, that when
Aaron officiated at the different sacrifices, he merely laid upon
the altar the pieces intended for it, but without setting them on
fire. The fallacy of this is proved, not only by the verb "WJpil,
but by the fact implied in ver. 17, that the offering of these
sacrifices, with which Aaron entered upon his office, was preceded
by the daily morning burnt-offering, and consequently that at
the time when Aaron began to carry out the special sacrifices of
this day there was fire already burning upon the altar, and in fact
a continual fire, that was never to be allowed to go out (chap. vi.
6). Even, therefore, if we left out of view the fire of the daily
morning and evening sacrifice, which had been offered from the
first day on which the tabernacle was erected (Ex. xl. 29), there
were sacrifices presented every day during the seven days of the
consecration of the priests (chap, viii.) ; and according to chap. i.
7, Moses must necessarily have prepared the fire for these. If
it had been the intention of God, therefore, to originate the altar-
fire by supernatural means, this would no doubt have taken place
immediately after the erection of the tabernacle, or at least at
the consecration of the altar, which was connected with that of
the priests, and immediately after it had been anointed (chap,
viii. 11). But as God did not do this, the burning of the altar-
sacrifices by a fire which proceeded from Jehovah, as related in
this verse, cannot have been intended to give a sanction to the
altar-fire as having proceeded from God Himself, which was to
be kept constantly burning, either by miraculous preservation, or
by being fed in a natural way. The legends of the heathen,
therefore, about altar-fires which had been kindled by the gods
themselves present no analogy to the fact before us (cf. Serv. ad
jEn. xii. 200; Solin. v. 23; Pausan. v. 27, 3 ; Bochart, Hieroz.
lib. ii. c. 35, pp. 378 sqq. ; Dougtaei analeet. ss. pp. 79 sqq.).
The miracle recorded in this verse did not consist in the fact
that the sacrificial offerings placed upon the altar were burned
by fire which proceeded from Jehovah, but in the fact that the
r
Digitized by
Google
350 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
sacnfices^hich were already on fire, were suddenly consumed
si n„ F V Ith °S the verb *9* admits of both meanings,
^v iw. an J d , burn 1 1 1 n g U P ( see Jad S- * 21, and 1 Kin?
xviii. 38), the word literally denotes consuming or burning up
and must be taken in the stricter and more literal sense m the
case before us inasmuch as there was already fire upon the altar
when the sacrifices were placed upon it. God caused this miracle,
not to generate a supernatural altar-fire, but ut ordinem sacerdl
Mem legis veteru a se imUtutum et suas de sacrifiei* lege, hoc
mtraculoconjirmaret et quasi obsignaret ( C. a Lap.), or to express
it inore briefly, to give a divine consecration to the altar, oriel
to h! ^ IT" aDd his SOnS > throu g h which a way was
to be opened for the people to His throne of grace, and whereby
moreover, the altar-fire was consecrated eo ipVoin* a dhXS
dmnely appointed, means of reconciliation to the community.
iSfW n fn n / ej0 r d at this g lorious manifestation of the
TiTZ 1*f WitH tWs the fiFSt Sacrifice of *• consecrated
pneste, and fell down upon their faces to give thanks to the Lord
ior JUis mercy.
both the Act and ^d of G0D._Vers. 1-3. The Lord
fiadonly j U8 t confirmed and Wtified the sacrificial service of
kts 1 Tf bya J Udgment 5\ Nada ° and Abih?, the
tie offiT^ ^T (EX ' VL 23 >' °n l&punt of their abusing
the office they had received, and to vindicate Himself before
menLfff °? " ?™ wh ° WOuId not s "fc r His command-
ments to be broken with impunity.-Ver. 1. jSadab and Abihu
n LnT.^T* ^^ E " «* 38 >> anXving prit fire
m them placed incense thereon, and brought straVge fire before
dear wt'^ Ch ^ ^ M -mmanded thernHft is not ver^
clear what the offence of which they were guilty tally waT
the S 21 e ^° Sit0rS SUpP ° Se the 8in tfhavefconsisted in
the fact, that they did not take the fire for the inceie from the
ahar^re But this had not yet been commanded & God; and
ncensl^ff ?"" T"f nded * *"' exCe P* with 4"* *> the "
flojy place on the day of atonement (chap, xvi 12} Ahoueh we
may certainly infer from this, that LJZ£\^rZ
i
I
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. X. 1-8. 351
daily incense-offering. By the fire which they offered before
Jehovah, we are no doubt to understand the firing of the in-
cense-offering. This might be called u strange fire " if it. was
not offered in the manner prescribed in the law, just as in Ex.
xxx. 9 incense not prepared according to the direction of God
is called "strange incense." The supposition that they pre-
sented an incense-offering that was not commanded in the law,
and apart from the time of the morning and evening sacrifice,
and that this constituted their sin, is supported by the time at
which their illegal act took place. It is perfectly obvious from
vers. 12 sqq. and 16 sqq. that it occurred in the interval between
the sacrificial transaction in chap. ix. and the sacrificial meal
which followed it, and therefore upon the day of their inaugura-
tion. For in ver. 12 Moses commands Aaron and his remaining
sons Eleazar and Ithamar to eat the meat-offering that was left
from the firings of Jehovah, and inquires in ver. 16 for the
goat of the sin-offering, which the priests were to have eaten in
a holy place. ltnobeTs opinion is not an improbable one, there-
fore, that Nadab and Abihu intended to accompany the shouts
of the people with an incense-offering to the praise and glory of
God, and presented an incense-offering not only at an improper
time, but not prepared from the altar-fire, and committed such
a sin by this will-worship, that they were smitten by the fire
which came forth from Jehovah, even before their entrance
into the holy place, and so died " before Jehovah." The ex-
pression " before Jehovah " is applied to the presence of God,
both in the dwelling (viz. the holy place and the holy of holies,
e.g. chap. iv. 6, 7, xvi. 13) and also in the court (e.g. chap. i. 5,
etc.). It is in the latter sense that it is to be taken here, as is
evident from ver. 4, where the persons slain are said to have
lain " before the sanctuary of the dwelling," i.e. in the court of
the tabernacle. The fire of the holy God (Ex. xix. 18), which
had just sanctified the service of Aaron as well-pleasing to God,
brought destruction upon his two eldest sons, because they had
not sanctified Jehovah in their hearts, but had taken upon
themselves a self-willed service ; just as the same gospel is to
one a savour of life unto life, and to another a savour of death
unto death (2 Cor. ii. 16). — In ver. 3 Moses explains this judg-
ment to Aaron : " This is it that Jehovah spake, saying, I will
sanctify Myself in him that is nigh to Me, and will glorify My-
Digitized by
Google
352 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
self in the face of all the people!' "t33N is unquestionably to be
taken in the same sense as in Ex. xiv. 4, 17 ; consequently E^jSN
is to be taken in, a reflective and not in a passive sense, as in
Ezek. xxxviii. 16. The imperfects are used as aorists, in the
sense of what God does at all times. But these words of Moses
are no " reproof to Aaron, who had not restrained the untimely
zeal of his sons " (Knobet), nor a reproach which made Aaron
responsible for the conduct of his sons, but a simple explanation
of the judgment of God, which should be taken to heart by
every one, and involved an admonition to all who heard it, not
to Aaron only but to the whole nation, to sanctify God con-
tinually in the proper way. Moreover Jehovah had not com-
municated to Moses by revelation the words which he spoke
here, but had made the fact known by the position assigned to .
Aaron and his sons through their election to the priesthood.
By this act Jehovah had brought them near to Himself (Num.
xvi. 5), made them 'tfip = fiirrp D , 3 1 ij? "persons standing near to
Jehovah. " (Ezek. xlii. 13, xliii. 19), and sanctified them to Him-
self by anointing (chap. viii. 10, 12; Ex. xxix. 1, 44, xl. 13, 15),
that they might sanctify Him in their office and life. If they
neglected this sanctification, He sanctified Himself in them by
a penal judgment (Ezek. xxxviii. 16), and thereby glorified
Himself as the Holy One, who is not to be mocked. "And
Aaron held his peace." He was obliged to acknowledge the
righteousness of the holy God.
Vers. 4—7. Moses then commanded Mishael and Elzaphan,
the sons of Uzziel Aaron's paternal uncle, Aaron's cousins
therefore, to carry their brethren (relations) who had been slain
from before the sanctuary out of the camp, and, as must natu-
rally be supplied, to bury them there. The expression, " before
the sanctuary" (equivalent to " before the tabernacle of the
congregation" in chap. ix. 5), shows that they had been slain in
front of the entrance to the holy place. They were carried out
in their priests' body-coats, since they had also been defiled by
the judgment. It follows from this, too, that the fire of Je-
hovah had not burned them up, but had simply killed them as
with a flash of lightning. — Vers. 6 sqq. Moses prohibited Aaron
and his remaining sons from showing any sign of mourning on
account of this fatal calamity. "Uncover not your heads" i.e.
do not go about with your hair dishevelled, or flowing free and
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. X. 4-7. 353
in disorder (chap. xiii. 45). B*&<1 JHB does not signify merely
uncovering the head by taking off the head-band (LXX.,
Vulg., Kimehi, etc.), or by shaving off the hair (Ges. and others ;
see on the other hand Knobel on chap. xxi. 10), but is to be
taken in a similar sense to 'iWth "ipfe* JHB, the free growth of the
hair, not cut short with scissors (Num. vi. 5 ; Ezek. xliv. 20).
It is derived from JHB, to let loose from anything (Prov. i. 25,
iv. 5, etc.), to let a people loose, equivalent to giving them the
reins (Ex. xxxii. 25), and signifies solvere erines, eapellos, to
leave the hair in disorder, which certainly implies the laying
aside of the head-dress in the case of the priest, though without
consisting in this alone. On this sign of mourning among the
Roman and other nations, see M. Geier de Ebrceorum luctu
viii. 2. The Jews observe the same custom still, and in times
of deep mourning neither wash themselves, nor cut their hair,
nor pare their nails (see Buxtorf, Syrwg. jud. p. 706). They
were also not to rend their clothes, i.e. not to make a rent in the
clothes in front of the breast, — a very natural expression of grief,
by which the sorrow of the heart was to be laid bare, and one
which was not only common among the Israelites (Gen. xxxvii.
29, xliv. 13 ; 2 Sam. i. 11, iii. 31, xiii. 31), but was very widely
spread among the other nations of antiquity (cf. Geier I.e. xxii.
9). CiB, to rend, occurs, in addition to this passage, in chap. xiii.
45, xxi. 10 ; in other places JHij, to tear in pieces, is used. Aaron
and his sons were to abstain from these expressions of sorrow,
" lest they should die and wrath come upon all the people."
Accordingly, we are not to seek the reason for this prohibition
merely in the fact, that they would defile themselves by contact
with the corpses, a reason which afterwards led to this prohibi-
tion being raised into a general law for the high priest (chap,
xxi. 10, 11). The reason was simply this, that^any manifesta-
tion of grief on account of the death that had occurred, would
have indicated dissatisfaction with the judgment of God ; and
Aaron and his sons would thereby not only have fallen into
mortal sin themselves, but have brought down upon the congre-
gation the wrath of God, which fell upon it through every act
of sin committed by the high priest in his official position (chap,
iv. 3). " Your brethren, (namely) the whole house of Israel, may
' bewail this burning" (the burning of the wrath of Jehovah).
Mourning was permitted to the nation, as an expression of sor-
pent. — VOL. II. z
Digitized by
Google
354 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
row on account of the calamity which had befallen the whole
nation in the consecrated priests. For the nation generally did
not stand in such close fellowship with Jehovah as the priests,
who had been consecrated by anointing. — Ver. 7. The latter
were not to go away from the door (the entrance or court of the
-tabernacle), sc. to take part in the burial of the dead, lest they
should die, for the anointing oil of Jehovah was upon them.
The anointing oil was the symbol of the Spirit of God, which
is a Spirit of life, and therefore has nothing in common with
death, but rather conquers death, and sin, which is the source
of death (cf. chap. xxi. 12).
Vers. 8-11. Jehovah still further commanded Aaron and his
sons not to drink wine and strong drink when they entered the
tabernacle to perform service there, on pain of death, as a per-
petual statute for their generations (Ex. xii. 17), that they might
be able to distinguish between the holy and common, the clean
and unclean, and also to instruct the children of Israel in all the
laws which God had spoken to them through Moses (1 ... X, vers.
10 and 11, el,. . el, both . . . and also). Shecar was an intoxi-
cating drink made of barley and dates or honey, ^n, pro/anus,
common, is a wider or more comprehensive notion than KQB, un-
clean. Everything was common (profane) which was not fitted
for the sanctuary, even what was allowable for daily use and
enjoyment, and therefore was to be regarded as clean. The
motive for laying down on this particular occasion a prohibition
which was to hold good for all time, seems to lie in the event
recorded in ver. 1, although we can hardly infer from this, as
some commentators have done, that Nadab and Abihu offered
the unlawful incense-offering in a state of intoxication. The
connection between their act and this prohibition consisted
simply in the rashness, which had lost the clear and calm re-
flection that is indispensable to right action.
Vers. 12-20. After the directions occasioned by this judg-
ment of God, Moses reminded Aaron and his sons of the gene-
ral laws concerning the consumption of the priests' portions of
the sacrifices, and their relation to the existing circumstances :
first of all (vers. 12, 13), of the law relating to the eating of the
meat-offering, which belonged to the priests after the azearah
had been lifted off (chap. ii. 3, vi. 9-11), and then (vers. 14, 15)
of that relating to the wave-breast and heave-leg (chap. vii.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. X. 12-20. 355
32—34). By the minchah in ver. 12 we are to understand the
meal and oil, which were offered with the burnt-offering of the
nation (chap. ix. 4 and 7) ; and by the D^K in vers. 12 and 15,
those portions of the burnt-offering, meat-offering, and peace-
offering of the nation which were burned upon the altar (chap.
ix. 13, 17, and 20). He then looked for " the he-goat of the sin-
offering," — i.e. the flesh of the goat which had been brought for
a sin-offering (chap. ix. 15), and which was to have been eaten
by the priests in the holy place along with the sin-offerings,
whose blood was not taken into the sanctuary (chap. vi. 19,
22) ; — " and, behold, it uras burned" (?$&, 3 perf. Pual). Moses
was angry at this, and reproved Eleazar and Ithamar, who had
attended to the burning : " Wherefore have ye not eaten the sin-
offering in a holy place f" he said ; "for it is most holy, and He
(Jehovah) hath given it you to bear the iniquity of the congre-
gation, to make atonement for it before Jehovah," as its blood had
not been brought into the holy place (K?* n construe'd as a pas-
sive with an accusative, as in Gen. iv. 18, etc.). " To bear the
iniquity" does not signify here, as in chap. v. 1, to bear and
atone for the sin in its consequences, but, as in Ex. xxviii. 38, to
take the sin of another upon one's self, for the purpose of can-
celling it, to make expiation for it. As, according to Ex. xxviii.
38, the high priest was to appear before the Lord with the
diadem upon his forehead, as the symbol of the holiness of his
office, to cancel, as the mediator of the nation and by virtue
of his official holiness, the sin which adhered to the holy
gifts of the nation (see the note on this passage), so here
it is stated with regard to the official eating of the most holy
flesh of the sin-offering, which had been enjoined upon the
priests, that they were thereby to bear the sin of the con-
gregation, to make atonement for it. This effect or signi-
fication could only be ascribed to the eating, by its being
regarded as an incorporation of the victim laden with sin,
whereby the priests actually took away the sin by virtue of
the holiness and sanctifying power belonging to their office,
and not merely declared it removed, as Oehler explains the
words (Herzog's Cycl. x. p. 649). Ex. xxviii. 38 is decisive in
opposition to the declaratory view, which does not embrace
the meaning of the words, and is not applicable to the pas-
sage at all. " Incorporabant quasi peccatum populique reatum
Digitized by
Google
356 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
in se recipiebant" (Dei/ling observe. 88. i. 45, 2). 1 — Vers. 19,
20. Aaron excused his sons, however, by saying, " Behold, this
day have they offered their sin-offering and their burnt-offering,
and this has happened to me," i.e. the calamity recorded in vers. 1
sqq. has befallen me (*OiJ = JVJiJ, as in Gen. xlii. 4) ; " and if I
had eaten the sin-offering to-day, would it have been well-pleasing
to Jehovah V '111 "Wattt is a conditional clause, as in Gen. xxxiii.
13, cf . Ewald, § 357. Moses rested satisfied with this answer.
Aaron acknowledged that the flesh of the sin-offering ought to
have been eaten by the priest in this instance (according to
chap. vi. 19), and simply adduced, as the reason why this had
not been done, the calamity which had befallen his two eldest
sons. Arid this might really be a sufficient reason, as regarded
both himself and his remaining sons, why the eating of the sin-
offering should be omitted. For the judgment in question was
so solemn a warning, as to the sin which still adhered to them
even after the presentation of their sin-offering, that they might
properly feel " that they had not so strong and overpowering a
holiness as was required for eating the general sin-offering"
(M. Baumgarten). This is the correct view, though others find
the reason in their grief at the death of their sons or brethren,
which rendered it impossible to observe a joyous sacrificial meal.
But this is not for a moment to be thought of, simply because
the eating of the flesh of the sin-offering was not a joyous meal
at all (see at chap. vi. 19). a
1 C. a Lapide has given this correct interpretation of the passage : " ut
scilicet cum hostiis populi pro peccato simul eliam populi peccata in vos quasi
recipiatis, ut ilia expietis." There is no foundation for the objection
offered by Oehler, that the actual removal of guilt and the atonement it-
self were effected by the offering of the blood. For it by no means follows
from Lev. xvii. 11, that the blood, as the soul of the sacrificial animal,
covered or expiated the soul of the sinner, and that the removal and ex-
tinction of the sin had already taken place with the covering of the soul
before the holy God, which involved the forgiveness of the sin and the
reception of the sinner to mercy.
2 Upon this mistaken view of the excuse furnished by Aaron, Knobel
has founded his assertion, that " this section did not emanate from the
Elohist, because he could not have written in this way," an assertion which
falls to the ground when the words are correctly explained.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XL 357
LAWS RELATING TO CLEAN AND UNCLEAN ANIMALS. — CHAP. XI.
(Cf. Deut. xiv. 3-20.)
The regulation of the sacrifices and institution of the priest-
hood, by which Jehovah opened up to His people the way of
access to His grace and the way to sanctification of life in
fellowship with Him, were followed by instructions concerning
the various things which hindered and disturbed this living
fellowship with God the Holy One, as being manifestations and
results of sin, and by certain rules for avoiding and removing
these obstructions. For example, although sin has its origin and
proper seat in the soul, it pervades the whole body as the organ
of the soul, and shatters the life of the body, even to its com-
plete dissolution in death and decomposition ; whilst its effects
have spread from man to the whole of the earthly creation, inas-
much as not only did man draw nature with him into the service
of sin, in consequence of the dominion over it which was given
him by God, but God Himself, according to a holy law of His
wise and equitable government, made the irrational creature
subject to " vanity " and " corruption " on account of the sin of
man (Rom. viii. 20, 21), so that not only did the field bring
forth thorns and thistles, and the earth produce injurious and
poisonous plants (see at Gen. iii. 18), but the animal kingdom
in many of its forms and creatures bears the image of sin and
death, and is constantly reminding man of the evil fruit of his
fall from God. It is in this penetration of sin into the material
creation that we may find the explanation of the fact, that from
the very earliest times men have neither used every kind of herb
nor every kind of animal as food ; but that, whilst they have, as
it were, instinctively avoided certain plants as injurious to health
or destructive to life, they have also had a horror naturalis, i.e.
an inexplicable disgust, at many of the animals, and have avoided
their flesh as unclean. A similar horror must have been pro-
duced upon man from the very first, before his heart was alto-
gether hardened, by death as the wages of sin, or rather by the
effects of death, viz. the decomposition of the body ; and differ-
ent diseases and states of the body, that were connected with
symptoms of corruption and decomposition, may also have been
Digitized by
Google
358 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES. '
regarded as rendering unclean. Hence in all the nations and
all the religions of antiquity we find that contrast between clean
and unclean, which was developed in a dualistic form, it is true,
in many of the religious systems, but had its primary root in the
corruption that had entered the world through sin. This con-
trast was limited in the Mosaic law to the animal food of the
Israelites, to contact with dead animals and human corpses, and
to certain bodily conditions and diseases that are associated with
the decomposition, pointing oat most minutely the unclean ob-
jects and various defilements within these spheres, and prescrib-
ing the means for avoiding or removing them.
The instructions in the chapter before us, concerning the
clean and unclean animals, are introduced in the first place as
laws of food (ver. 2) ; but they pass beyond these bounds by pro-
hibiting at the same time all contact with animal carrion (vers.
8, 11, 24 sqq.), and show thereby that they are connected in
principle and object with the subsequent laws of purification
(chap, xii.-xv.), to which they are to be regarded as a prepara-
tory introduction.
Vers. 1-8. The law3 which follow were given to Moses and
Aaron (ver. 1, chap. xiii. 1, xv. 1), as Aaron had been sanctified
through the anointing to expiate the sins and uncleannesses of
the children of Israel. — Vers. 2-8 (cf. Deut. xiv. 4-8). Of the
larger quadrupeds, which are divided in Gen. i. 24, 25 into
beasts of the earth (living wild) and tame cattle, only the cattle
(behemah) are mentioned here, as denoting the larger land ani-
mals, some of which were reared by man as domesticated animals,
and others used as food. Of these the Israelites might eat
" whatsoever parteth the hoof and is cloven-footed, and cheweth the
cud among the cattle" nb">S 3N?|> njJDB>, literally " tearing (hav-
ing) a rent in the hoofs," according to Deut. xiv. 5 into " two
claws," i.e. with a hoof completely severed in two. rna, rumi-
nation, /jurjpvKU7fjL6<; (LXX.), from Til (cf. "W ver. 7), to draw
(Hab. i. 15), to draw to and fro ; hence to bring up the food
again, to ruminate, fTTJ n?J|» is connected with the preceding
words with vav cop. to indicate the close connection of the two
regulations, viz. that there was to be the perfectly cloven foot as
well as the rumination (cf. vers. 4 sqq.). These marks are com-
bined in the oxen, sheep, and goats, and also in the stag and
gazelle. The latter are expressly mentioned in Deut. xiv. 4, 5,
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XL 1-8. 359
where — in addition to the common stag (?JK) and gazelle (^V,
Sop/ca?, LXX.), or dorcas-antehpe, which is most frequently met
with in Palestine, Syria, and Arabia, of the size of a roebuck,
with a reddish brown back and white body, horns sixteen inches
long, and fine dark eyes, and the flesh of which, according to
Avicenna, is the best of all the wild game — the following five are
also selected, viz. : (1) "NBn?, not ftovfiako<;, the buffalo (LXX.,
and Luther), but Damhirsch, a stag which is still much more com-
mon in Asia than in Europe and Palestine (see v. Schubert, R.
iii. p. 118) ; (2) ^pK, probably, according to the Chaldee, Syriac,
etc., the Capricorn (Steinbock), which is very common in Pales-
tine, not rpwye\a<f>o<: (LXX., Vulg.), the buck-stag (Bockhirsch),
an animal lately discovered in Nubia (cf. Leyrer in Herzotfs
Cycl. vi. p. 143) ; (3) ftfa, according to the LXX. and Vulg.
vvpapyos, a kind of antelope resembling the stag, which is met
with in Africa (Herod. 4, 192), — according to the Chaldee and
Syriac, the buffalo-antelope, — according to the Samar. and Arabic,
the mountain-stag ; (4) ^KFi, according to the Chaldee the wild
ox, which is also met with in Egypt and Arabia, probably the
oryx (LXX., Vulg.), a species of antelope as large as a stag ;
and (5) IDT, according to the LXX. and most of the ancient ver-
sions, the giraffe, but this is only found in the deserts of Africa,
and would hardly be met with even in Egypt, — it is more pro-
bably caprece sylvestris species, according to the Chaldee. — Vers.
4, 5. Any animal which was wanting in either of these marks
was to be unclean, or not to be eaten. This is the case with the
camel, whose flesh is eaten by the Arabs ; it ruminates, but it has
not cloven hoofs. Its foot is severed, it is true, but not tho-
roughly cloven, as there is a ball behind, upon which it treads.
The hare and hyrax (Klippdachs) were also unclean, because,
although they ruminate, they have not cloven hoofs. It is true
that modern naturalists affirm that the two latter do not rumi-
nate at all, as they have not the four stomachs that are common
to ruminant animals ; but they move the jaw sometimes in a
manner which looks like ruminating, so that even Linnceus
affirmed that the hare chewed the cud, and Moses followed the
popular opinion. According to Bochart, Oedmann, and others,
the shaphan is the jerboa, and according to the Rabbins and
Luther, the rabbit or coney. But the more correct view is, that
it is the wabr of the Arabs, which is still called tsofun in Southern
Digitized by
Google
360 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
Arabia (hyrax Syriacus), an animal which feeds on plants, a
native of the countries of the Lebanon and Jordan, also of
Arabia and Africa. They live in the natural caves and clefts
of the rocks (Ps. civ. 18), are very gregarious, being often seen
seated in troops before the openings to their caves, and extremely
timid as they are quite defenceless (Prov. xxx. 26). They are
about the size of rabbits, of a brownish grey or brownish yellow
colour, but white under the belly ; they have bright eyes, round
ears, and no tail. The Arabs eat them, but do not place them
before their guests. 1 — Ver. 7. The swine has cloven hoofs, bat
does not ruminate; and many of the tribes of antiquity ab-
stained from eating it, partly on account of its uncleanliness, and
partly from fear of skin-diseases. — Ver. 8. "Of tlieir flesh shall ye
not eat (i.e. not slay these animals as food), and their carcase
(animals that had died) shall ye not touch." The latter applied
to the clean or edible animals also, when they had died a natural
death (ver. 39).
Vers. 9-12 (cf. Dent. xiv. 9 and 10). Of water dnimak,
everything in the water, in seas and brooks, that had fins and
scales was edible. Everything else that swarmed in the water
was to be an abomination, its flesh was not to be eaten, and its
carrion was to be avoided with abhorrence. Consequently, not
only were all water animals other than fishes, such as crabs,
salamanders, etc., forbidden as unclean ; but also fishes without
scales, such as eels for example. 'Numa laid down this law for
the Romans: ut pisces qui squamosi non essent ni pollicerent
(sacrificed) : Plin. h. n. 32, c. 2, s. 10. In Egypt fishes without
scales are still regarded as unwholesome (Lane, Manners and
Customs).
Vers. 13-19 (cf. Deut. xiv. 11-18). Of birds, twenty va-
rieties are prohibited, including the bat, but without any common
mark being given ; though they consist almost exclusively of
birds which live upon flesh or carrion, and are most of them
natives of Western Asia. 2 The list commences with the eagle,
1 See Shaw, iii. p. 301 ; Seetzen, ii. p. 228 ; Robinson 1 ! Biblical Re-
searches, p. 387; and Roediger on Gesenius thesaurus, p. 1467.
* The list is " hardly intended to be exhaustive, but simply mentions
those which were eaten by others, and in relation to which, therefore, it was
necessary that the Israelites should receive a special prohibition against eat-
ing them " (Knobel), Hence in Deuteronomy Moses added the nKl and
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XI. 18-19. 361
as the king of the birds. Nesher embraces all the species of
eagles proper. The idea that the eagle will not touch carrion
is erroneous. According to the testimony of Arabian writers
(Damiri in Bochart, ii. p. 577), and several naturalists who
have travelled (e.g. Forskal. I.e. p. 12, and Seetzen, 1, p. 379),
they will eat carrion if it is still fresh and not decomposed ; so
that the eating of carrion could very properly be attributed to
them in such passages as Job xxxix. 30, Prov. xxx. 17, and
Matt. xxiv. 28. But the bald-headedness mentioned in Micah i.
16 applies, not to the true eagle, but to the carrion-kite, which is
reckoned, however, among the different species of eagles, as well '
as the bearded or golden vulture. The. next in the list is peres,
from paras =parash to break, ossifragw, i.e. either the bearded
or golden vulture, gypaetos barbatus, or more probably, as Schultz
supposes, the sea-eagle, which may have been the species in-
tended in the ypv>fr = ypviraUroii of the LXX. and gryphus of
the Vulgate, and to which the ancients seem sometimes to have
applied the name ossifraga (Lucret. v. 1079). By the next,
r«TJf, we are very probably to understand the bearded or golden
vulture. For this word is . no doubt connected with the Arabic
word for beard, and therefore points to the golden vulture,
which has a tuft of hair or feathers on the lower beak, and
which might very well be associated with the eagles so far as
the size is concerned, having wings that measure 10 feet from
tip to tip. As it really belongs to the family of vultures, it
forms a very fitting link of transition to the other species of
vulture and falcon (ver. 14). HOT (JDeut. IW, according to a
change which is by no means rare when the aleph stands between
two vowels : cf. JKfa in 1 Sam. xxi. 8, xxii. 9, and Jrtl in 1 Sam.
xxii. 18, 22), from HOT to fly, is either the kite, or the glede,
which is very common in Palestine (y. Schubert, Reiie iii. p. 120),
and lives on carrion. It is a gregarious bird (cf. Isa. xxxiv.
15), which other birds of prey are not, and is "used by many
different tribes as food (Oedmann, iii. p. 120). The conjecture
that the black glede-kite is meant, — a bird which is particularly
common in the East, — and that the name is derived from niw to
be dark, is overthrown by the use of the word WD? in Deuter-
enumerated twenty-one varieties; and no doubt, under other circumstances,
he could have made the list still longer. In Deut. xiv. 11 liax is used, as
synonymous with tf\y in ver. 20.
■s
Digitized by
Google
362 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
onomy, which shows that ntO is intended to denote the whole
genus. rPK, which is referred to in Job xxviii. 7 as sharp-
sighted, is either the falcon, several species of which are natives
of Syria and Arabia, and which is noted for its keen sight and
the rapidity of its flight, or according to the Vulgate, Schultz, etc.,
vultur, the true vulture (the LXX. have IktIv, the kite, here, and
ypvyjr, the griffin, in Dent, and Job), of which there are three
species in Palestine (Lynch, p. 229). In Deut. xiv. 13 nion i 8
also mentioned, from HKn to see. Judging from the name, it was
a keen-sighted bird, either a falcon or another species of vulture
(Vulg. ixion). — Ver. 15. "Every raven after his kind," i.e. the
whole genus of ravens, with the rest of the raven-like birds, such
as crows, jackdaws, and jays, which are all of them natives of
Syria and Palestine. The omission of ^ before OK, which is
found in several MSS. and editions, is probably to be regarded
as the true reading, as it is not wanting before any of the other
names. — Ver. 16. njjwj na, i.e. either daughter of screaming
(Bocliart), or daughter of greediness (Gesenius, etc.), is used ac-
cording to all the ancient versions for the ostrich, which is more
frequently described as the dweller in the desert (Isa. xiii. 21,
sxxiv. 13, etc.), or as the mournful screamer (Micah i. 8 ; Job
xxxix. 39), and is to be understood, not as denoting the female
ostrich only, but as a noun of common gender denoting the ostrich
generally. It does not devour carrion indeed, but it eats vege-
table matter of the most various kinds, and swallows greedily
stones, metals, and even glass. It is found in Arabia, and some-
times in Hauran and Belka (Seetzen and Burckhardt), and has
been used as food not only by the Struthiophagi of Ethiopia
(Diod. Sic. 3, 27; Strabo, xvi. 772) and Numidia (Leo Afric. p.
766), but by some of the Arabs also (Seetzen, iii. p. 20 ; Burck-
hardt, p. 178), whilst others only eat the eggs, and make use of
the fat in the preparation of food. DDITTl, according to Bochart,
Gesenius, and others, is the male ostrich ; but this is very impro-
bable. According to the LXX., Vulg., and others, it is the owl
( Oedmann, iii. pp. 45 sqq.) ; but this is mentioned later under
another name. According to Saad. Ar. Erp. it is the swallow ;
but this is called D*D in Jer. viii. 7. Knobel supposes it to be the
cuckoo, which is met with in Palestine (Seetzen, 1, p. 78), and de-
rives the name from Don, violenter egit, supposing it to be so called
from the violence with which it is said to turn out or devour the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XI. 13-19. 363
eggs and young of other birds, for the purpose of laying its own
eggs in the nest (Aristot. hist. an. 6, 7; 9, 29; Ael. not. an. 6, 7).
int? is the \dpot, or slender gull, according to the LXX. and
Vulg. Knobel follows the Arabic, however, and supposes it to be
a species of hawk, which is trained in Syria for hunting gazelles,
hares, etc. ; but this is certainly included in the genus Y}. Y},
from Yty to fly, is the hawk, which soars very high, and spreads
its wings towards the south (Job xxxix. 26). It stands in fact,
as VUw shows, for the hawk-tribe generally, probably the tepof,
aceipiter, of which the ancients enumerate many different species.
Di3, which is mentioned in Ps. cii. 7 as dwelling in ruins, is an
owl according to the ancient versions, although they differ as to
the kind. In Knobel's opinion it is either the screech-owl, which
inhabits ruined buildings, walls, and clefts in the rock, and the
flesh of which is said to be very agreeable, or the little screech-
owl, which also lives in old buildings and walls, and raises a
mournful cry at night, and the flesh of which is said to be
savoury. ^H?, according to the ancient versions an aquatic bird,
and therefore more in place by the side of the heron, where it
stands in Deuteronomy, is called by the LXX. KarappaxTt^ ;
in the Targ. and Syr. WW W, extrdhens pisces. It is not the
gull, however (lai-us catarractes), which plunges with violence,
for according to Oken this is only seen in the northern seas, but
a species of pelican, to be found on the banks of the Nile and
in the islands of the Bed Sea, which swims well, and also dives,
frequently dropping perpendicularly upon fishes in the water.
The flesh has an oily taste, but it is eaten for all that. IWfoj :
from ^tW to snort, according to Isa. xxxiv. 11, dwelling in ruins,
no doubt a species of owl ; according to the Chaldee and Syriac,
the uhu, which dwells in old ruined towers and castles upon the
mountains, and cries uhupuhu. HDK'jn, which occurs again in
ver. 30 among the names of the lizards, is, according to Damiri,
a bird resembling the uhu, but smaller. Jonathan calls it
uthya = otTOi, a night-owl. The primary meaning of the word
DIM is essentially the same as that of ^EO, to breathe ^or blow, so
called because many of the owls have a mournful cry, and blow
and snort in addition ; though it cannot be decided whether the
strix otus is intended, a bird by no means rare in Egypt, which
utters a whistling blast, and rolls itself into a ball and then
spreads itself out again, or the strix fiammea, a native of Syria,
Digitized by
Google
364 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
which sometimes utters a mournful cry, and at other times
snores like a sleeping man, and the flesh of which is said to be
by no means unpleasant, or the hissing owl (stria; stridula), which
inhabits the ruins in Egypt and -Syria, and is sometimes called
massusu, at other times bane, a very voracious bird, which is said
to fly in at open windows in the evening and kill children that
are left unguarded, and which is very much dreaded in conse-
quence. nKj?, which also lived in desolate places (Isa. xxxiv. 11 ;
Zeph. ii. 14), or in the desert itself (Ps. cii. 7), was not the
kata, a species of partridge or heath-cock, which is found in
Syria (Robinson, ii. p. 620), as this bird always flies in large
flocks, and this is not in harmony with Isa. xxxiv. 11 and Zeph.
ii. 14,- but the pelican (veXe/cav, LXX.), as all the ancient ver-
sions render it, which Ephraem (on Num. xiv. 17) describes as a
marsh-bird, very fond of its young, inhabiting desolate places, and
uttering an incessant cry. It is the true pelican of the ancients
(pelecanw graculus), the Hebrew name of which seems to have
been derived from *tfp to spit, from its habit of spitting out the
fishes it has caught, and which is found in Palestine and the
reedy marshes of Egypt (Robinson, Palestine). Drn, in Deut.
Horn, is kvkpoi, the swan, according to the Septuagint porphyrio,
the fish-heron, according to the Vulgate; a marsh-bird there-
fore, possibly vultur percnopterus (Saad. Ar. Erp.\ which is very
common in Arabia, Palestine, and Syria, and was classed by the
ancients among the different species of eagles (Plin. h. n. 10, S),
but which is said to resemble the vulture, and was also called
6pei,ireXapyo<i, the mountain-stork (Arist. h. an. 9, 32). It is a
stinking and disgusting bird, of the raven kind, with black
pinions ; but with this exception it is quite white. It is also
bald-headed, and feeds on carrion and filth. But it is eaten not-
withstanding by many of. the Arabs (Burckhardt, Syr. p. 1046).
It received its name of " tenderly loving " from the tenderness
with which it watches over its young (Bochart, iii. pp. 56, 57).
In this respect it resembles the stork, rn^pn, avis pia, a bird of
passage according to Jer. viii. 7, which builds its nest upon the
cypresses (Ps. civ. 17, cf. Bochart, iii. pp. 85 sqq.). In the East
the stork builds its nest not only upon high towers and the roofs
of houses, but according to Kazwini and others mentioned by
Bochart (iii. p. 60), upon lofty trees as well. 1 n ?JK, according
1 Oedmann (v. 58 sqq.)> Knobel, and others follow the Greek translation
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XL 13-19. 365
to the LXX. and Vulgate yapaZpiot, a marsh-bird of the snipe
kind, of which there are several species in Egypt (Haaselquist,
p. 308). This is quite in accordance with the expression " after
her kind," which points to a numerous genns. The omission of
nto before nWNJi, whereas it is found before the name of every
other animal, is very striking ; but as the name is preceded by
the copulative van in Deuteronomy, and stands for a particular
bird, it may be accounted for either from a want of precision on
the part of the author, or from an error of the copyist like the
omission of the } before TIN in ver. 15. 1 JlBWl : according to
the LXX., Vulg., and others, the lapwing, which is found in
Syria, Arabia, and still more commonly in Egypt (Forsk, Russel,
Sonnini), and is eaten in some places, as its flesh is said, to be
fat "and savoury in autumn (Sonn. 1, 204). But it has a dis-
agreeable smell, as it frequents marshy districts seeking worms
and insects for food, and according to a common belief among
the ancients, builds its nest of human dung. Lastly, IpBV.n is
the bat (Isa. ii. 20), which the Arabs also classified among the
birds.
of Leviticus and the Psalms, and the Vulgate rendering of Leviticus, the
Psalms, and Job, and suppose the reference to be to the ipahoi, herodius,
the heron : but the name chasidah points decidedly, to the stork, which was
generally regarded by the ancients as pietatis cultrix (Petron. 55, 6), whereas,
with the exception of the somewhat indefinite passage in Aelian (Nat.
an. 8, 23), »*l raii; ipaiiov; dtova vomii rainoii (i.e. feed their young by
spitting out their food) koX roiif irtktx.&»*{ fttrroi, nothing is said about the
parental affection of the heron. And the testimony of Bellonius, " Ciconix
quae estate in Europa sunt, magna Jiyemis parte ut in Aegypto sic etiam circa
Antiochiam et juxta Amanum montem degunt," is a sufficient answer to
Knobel's assertion, that according to 'Seetzen there are no storks in Mount
Lebanon.
1 On account of the omission of DK1 Knobel would connect ilMKn as an
adjective with rtTDnn, and explain spR as derived from rpy frons, rpy
frondens, and signifying bushy. The herons were called " the bushy chasidah,"
he supposes, because they hare a tuft of feathers at the back'of their head,
or long feathers hanging down from their neck, which are wanting in the
other marsh-birds, such as the flamingo, crane, and ibis. But there is this
important objection to the explanation, that the change of K for y in such a
word as tpjj, frons, which occurs as early as chap, xxiii. 40, and has re-
tained ite y eren in the Aramsean dialects, is destitute of all probability.
In addition to this, there is the improbability of the chasidah being the only
bird to which a special epithet was applied, or of its being restricted by
anaphah to the different species of heron, with three of which the ancients
Digitized by
Google
366 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
Vers. 20-23 (cf. Deut. xiv. 19). To the birds there are
appended flying animals of other kinds : " all swarms of fowl
that go upon fours" i.e. the smaller winged animals with four
feet, which are called slierez, " swarms," on account of their
multitude. These were not to be eaten, as they were all abomi-
nations, with the exception of those " which have two shank-feet
above their feet (i.e. springing feet) to leap with " (t6 for fa as in
Ex. xxi. 8). Locusts are the animals referred to, four varieties
being mentioned with their different species (" after his kind") ;
but these cannot be identified with exactness, as there is still a
dearth of information as to the natural history of the oriental
locust. It is well known that locusts were eaten by many of
the nations of antiquity both in Asia and Africa, and even the
ancient Greeks thought the Cicades very agreeable in flavour
{Arist. h. an. 5, 30). In Arabia they are sold in the market, some-
times strung upon cords, sometimes by measure ; and they are
also dried, and kept in bags for winter use. For the most part,
however, it is only by the poorer classes that they are eaten, and
many of the tribes of Arabia abhor them (Robinson, ii. p. 628) ;
and those who use them as food do not eat all the species indis-
criminately. They are generally cooked over hot coals, or on a
plate, or in an oven, or stewed in butter, and eaten either with
salt or with spice and vinegar, the head, wings, and feet being
thrown away. They are also boiled in salt and water, and eaten
with salt or butter. Another process is to dry them thoroughly,
were acquainted (Aristot. h. an. 9, 2 ; Plin. h. n. 10, 60). If chasidah de-
noted the heron generally, or the white heron, the epithet anaphah would
be superfluous. It would be necessary to assume, therefore, that chasidah
denotes the whole tribe of marsh-birds, and that Moses simply intended to
prohibit the heron or bushy marsh-bird. But either of these is very im-
probable : the former, because in every other passage of the Old Testament
chasidah stands for one particular kind of bird ; the latter, because Moses
could hardly have excluded storks, ibises, and other marsh-birds that live
on worms, from his prohibition. All that remains, therefore, is to separate
ha-anaphah from the preceding word, as in Deuteronomy, and to under-
stand it as denoting the plover (?) or heron, as there were several species of
both. Which is intended, it is impossible to decide, as there is nothing
certain to be gathered from either the ancient versions or the etymology.
Bocharfs reference of the word to a fierce bird, viz. a species of eagle,
which the Arabs call Tummaj, is not raised into a probability by a com-
parison with the similarly sounding dvovxlct of Od. 1, 320, by which Aris-
tarchus understands a kind of eagle.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XI. 20-28. 367
and then grind them into meal and make cakes of them. The
Israelites were allowed to eat the arbeh, i.e., according to Ex. x.
13, 19, Nahum iiL 17, etc., the flying migratory locust, gryllus
migratorius, which still bears this name, according to Niebuhr,
in Maskat and Bagdad, and is poetically designated in Ps.
lxxviii. 46, cv. 34, as Vpn, the devourer, and P?', the eater-up ; but
Knobel is mistaken in supposing that these names are applied
to certain species of the arbeh. MOT, according to the Chaldee,
deglutivit, abeorpsit, is unquestionably a larger and peculiarly
voracious species of locust. This is all that can be inferred from
the rashon of the Targums and Talmud, whilst the arTcucrfi and
attacus of the LXX. and Vulg. are altogether unexplained.
7nn : according to the Arabic, a galloping, i.e. a hopping, not a
flying species of locust. This is supported by the Samaritan,
also by the LXX. and Vulg., ctyto/ta^qf, opkiomachus. Accord-
ing to Hesychius and Suidas, it was a species of locust without
wings, probably a very large kind ; as it is stated in Mishnah,
Shabb. vi. 10, that an egg of the chargol was sometimes sus-
pended in. the ear, as a remedy for earache. Among the different
species of locusts in Mesopotamia, Niebuhr (Arab. p. 170) saw
two of a very large size with springing feet, but without wings.
3JH, a word of uncertain etymology, occurs in Num. xiii. 33,
where the spies are described as being like chagabim by the side
of the inhabitants of the country, and in 2 Chron. vii. 13, where
the chagab devours the land. -From these passages we may infer
that it was a species of locust without wings, small but very
numerous, probably the arreXa/So?, which is often mentioned
along with the axpk, but as a distinct species, hcustarum minima
sine pennis (Plin. h. n. 29, c. 4, s. 29), or parva locusta modicis
pennis reptans potius quam volitans semperque subsiliens (Jerome
on Nahum iii. 17). 1
1 In Deut. xiv. 19 the edible kinds of locusts are passed over, because
it was not the intention of Moses to repeat every particular of the earlier
laws in these addresses. But when Knobel (on Lev. pp. 455 and 461) gives
this explanation of the omission, that the eating of locusts is prohibited in
Deuteronomy, and the Deuteronomist passes them over because in his more
advanced age there was apparently no longer any necessity for the pro-
hibition, this arbitrary interpretation is proved to be at variance with
historical truth by the fact that locusts were eaten by John the Baptist,
inasmuch as this proves at all events that a more advanced age had not
given up the custom of eating locusts.
Digitized by
Google
368 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
In vers. 24-28 there follow still further and more precise
instructions, concerning defilement through contact with the
carcases (i.e. the carrion) of the animals already mentioned.
These instructions relate first of all (vers. 24 and 25) to aquatic
and winged animals, which were not to be eaten because they
were unclean (the expression "for these" in ver. 24 relates to
them) ; and then (vers. 26-28) to quadrupeds, both cattle that
have not the hoof thoroughly divided and do not ruminate (ver.
26), and animals that go upon their hands, i.e. upon paws, and
have no hoofs, such as cats, dogs, bears, etc. — Vers. 27, 28.
The same rule was applicable to all these animals : " whoever
toucheth the carcase of them shall be unclean until the even" i.e.
for the rest of the day ; he was then of course to wash himself.
Whoever carried their carrion, viz. to -take it away, was also
unclean till the evening, and being still more deeply affected by
the defilement, he was to wash his clothes as well.
Vers. 29-38. To these there are attached analogous instruc-
tions concerning' defilement through contact- with the smaller
creeping animals (sherez), which formed the fourth class of the
animal kingdom; though the prohibition against eating these
animals is not introduced till vers. 41, 42, as none of these were
usually eaten. Sherez, the swarm, refers to animals which
swarm together in great numbers (see at Gen. i. 21), and is
synonymous with remes (cf. Gen. vii. 14 and vii.21), "the
creeping;" it denotes the smaller land animals which move
without feet, or with feet that are hardly perceptible (see at
Gen. i. 24). Eight of the creeping animals are named, as de-
filing not only the men with whom they might come in contact,
but any domestic utensils and food upon which they might fall ;
they were generally found in houses, therefore, or in the abodes
of men. *Ph is not the mole (according to Saad. Ar. Abys.,
etc.), although the Arabs still call this chuld, but the weasel
(LXX., OnL, etc.), which is common in Syria and Palestine,
and is frequently mentioned by the Talmudists in the feminine
form TTOn, as an animal which caught birds (Mishn. Cholin iii.
4), which would run over the wave-loaves with a sherez in its
mouth (Mishn. Tohor. iv. 2), and which could drink water out
of a vessel (Mishn. Para ix. 3). ">33? is the mouse (according
to the ancient versions and the Talmud), and in 1 Sam. vi. 5
the field-mouse, the scourge of the fields, not the jerboa, as Knobel
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XI. 29-88. 369
supposes; for this animal lives in holes in the ground, is very-
shy, and does not frequent houses as is assumed to be' the case
with the animals mentioned here. 3* is a kind of lizard, but
whether the thav or dsabb, a harmless yellow lizard of 18 inches
in length, which is described by Seetzen, iii. pp. 436 sqq., also by
Hasselguist under the name of hxcerta ^Egyptia, or the waral,
as Knobel supposes, a large land lizard reaching as much as four
feet in length, which is also met with in Palestine {Robinson, ii.
160) and is called el worran by Seetzen, cannot be determined.
— Ver. 30. The early translators tell us nothing certain as to
the three following names, and it is still undecided how they
should be rendered. «"ljMK is translated fivydXr) by the LXX.,
i.e. shrew-mouse ; but the oriental versions render it by various
names for a lizard. Bochart supposes it to be a species of lizard
with a sharp groaning voice, because P3K signifies to breathe
deeply, or groan. RosenmUller refers it to the hxcerta Gecko,
which is common in Egypt, and utters a peculiar cry resembling
the croaking of frogs, especially in the night. Leyrer imagines
it to denote the whole family of monitores ; and Knobel, the large
and powerful river lizard, the water-waral of the Arabs, called
hxcerta Nihtka in Hasselguist, pp. 361 sqq., though he has failed
to observe, that Moses could hardly have supposed it possible
that an animal four feet long, resembling a crocodile, could
drop down dead into either pots or dishes. nta is not the
chameleon (LXX.), for this is called tinshemeth, but the char-
daun {Arab.), a lizard which is found in old walls in Natolia,
Syria, and Palestine, hxcerta stellio, or hxcerta coslordilos {HasseU
quist, pp. 351-2). Knobel supposes it to be the frog, because
coach seems to point to the crying or croaking of frogs, to which
the Arabs apply the term huh, the Greeks tcodlj, the Romans
coaxare. But this is very improbable, and the frog would be
quite out of place in the midst of simple lizards. n ?t?f, accord-
ing to the ancient versions, is also a lizard. Leyrer supposes it
to be the nocturnal, salamander-like family of geckons ; Knobel,
on the contrary, imagines it to be the tortoise, which creeps
upon the earth {terra adharet), because the Arabic verb sig-
nifies terra adhasit. This is very improbable, however. Bph
(LXX.), o-avpa, Vulg. lacerta, probably the true lizard, or, as
Leyrer conjectures, the anguis {Luth. Blindschleiche, bKnd-
worm), or zygnis, which forms the link between lizards and
PENT. — VOL. II. 2 A
Digitized by
Google
370 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
snakes. The rendering "snail" (Sam. Rashi, etc.) is not so
probable, as this is called wag* in Ps. lviii. 9 ; although the
purple snail and all the marine species are eaten in Egypt and
Palestine. Lastly, HOB^n, the self-inflating animal (see at ver.
18), is no doubt the chameleon, which frequently inflates its belly,
for example, when enraged, and remains in this state for several
hours, when it gradually empties itself and becomes quite thin
again. Its flesh was either cooked, or dried and rednced to
powder, and used as a specific for corpulence, or a cure for
fevers, or as a general medicine for sick children (Plin. h. n.
28, 29). The flesh of many of the lizards is also eaten by
the Arabs (Leyrer, pp. 603, 604).— Ver. 31. The words, " these
are unclean to you among all swarming creatures" are neither to
be understood as meaning, that the eight species mentioned were
the only swarming animals that were unclean and not allowed
to be eaten, nor that they possessed and communicated a larger
amount of uncleanness ; but when taken in connection with the
instructions which follow, they can only mean, that such animals
would even defile domestic utensils, clothes, etc., if they fell
down dead upon them. Not that they were more unclean than
others, since all the unclean animals would defile not only per-
sons, but even the clothes of those who carried their dead bodies
(vers. 25, 28) ; but there was more fear in their case than in
that of others, of their falling dead upon objects in common use,
and therefore domestic utensils, clothes, and so forth, could be
much more easily defiled by them than by the larger quadrupeds,
by water animals, or by birds. " When they be dead," lit. " in
their dying ; " i.e. not only if they were already dead, but if they
died at the time when they fell upon any object. — Ver. 32. In
either case, anything upon which one of these animals fell became
unclean, " whether a vessel of wood, or raiment, or skin." Every
vessel (y? in the widest sense, as in Ex. xxii. 6), " wherein any
work is done," i.e. that was an article of common use, was to be
unclean till the evening, and then placed in water, that it might
become clean again. — Ver. 33. Every earthen vessel, into which
(lit. into the midst of which) one of them fell, became unclean,
together with the whole of its contents, and was to be broken,
i.e. destroyed, because the uncleanness was absorbed by the
vessel, and could not be entirely removed by washing (see at
chap. vi. 21). Of course the contents of such a vessel, supposing
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XI. 39-47 371
there were any, were not to be used. — Ver. 34. " Every edible
food (JD before hh partitive, as in cbap. iv. 2) upon which water
comes" — that is to say, which was prepared with water, — and
" every drink that is drunk . . . becomes unclean in every vessel,"
sc. if such an animal should fall dead upon the food, or into the
drink. The traditional rendering of ver. 34a, " every food upon
which water out of such a vessel comes," is untenable ; because
D*D without an article cannot mean such water, or this water.
— Ver. 35. Every vessel also became unclean, upon which the
body of such an animal fell : such as "WW, the earthen baking-
pot (see chap. ii. 4), and 2TV 3 > the covered pan or pot. 1*3, a
boiling or roasting vessel (1 Sam. ii. 14), can only signify, when
used in the dual, a vessel consisting of two parts, i.e. a pan or
pot with a lid. — Ver. 36. Springs and wells were not denied,
because the uncleanness would be removed at once by the fresh
supply of water. But whoever touched the body of the animal,
to remove it, became unclean. — Vers. 37, 38. All seed-corn that
was intended to be sown remained clean, namely, because the
uncleanness attaching to it externally would be absorbed by the
earth. But if water had been put upon the seed, i.e. if the
grain had been softened by water, it was to be unclean, because
in that case the uncleanness would penetrate the softened grains
and defile the substance of the seed, which would therefore pro-
duce uncleanness in the fruit.
Vers. 39-47. Lastly, contact with edible animals, if they
had not been slaughtered, but had died a natural death, and had
become carrion in consequence, is also said to defile (cf . vers. 39,
40 with vers. 24-28). This was the case, too, with the eating
of the swarming land animals, whether they went upon the belly, 1
as snakes and worms, or upon four feet, as rats, mice, weasels,
etc., or upon many feet, like the insects (vers. 41-43). Lastly
(vers. 44, 45), the whole law is enforced by an appeal to the
calling of the Israelites, as a holy nation, to be holy as Jehovah
• their God, who had brought them out of Egypt to be a God to
them, was holy (Ex. vi. 7, xxix. 45, 46). — Vers. 46, 47, contain
the concluding formula to the whole of this law.
If we take a survey, in closing, of the animals that are enu-
1 The large i in flnj (ver. 42) shows that this vav is the middle letter of
the Pentateuch.
f
Digitized by
Google
372 THE THIED BOOK OF MOSES.
merated as unclean and not suitable for food, we shall find that
among the larger land animals they were chiefly beasts of prey,
that seize upon other living creatures and devour them in their
blood ; among the water animals, all snake-like fishes and slimy
shell-fish ; among birds, the birds of prey, which watch for the
life of other animals and kill them, the marsh-birds, which live
on worms, carrion, and all kinds of impurities, and such mongrel
creatures as the ostrich, which lives in the desert, and the bat,
which flies about in the dark ; and lastly, all the smaller animals,
with the exception of a few graminivorous locusts, but more
especially the snake-like lizards, — partly because they called to
mind the old serpent, partly because they crawled in the dust,
seeking their food in mire and filth, and suggested the thought
of corruption by the slimy nature of their bodies. They com-
prised, in fact, all such animals as exhibited more or less the
darker type of sin, death, and corruption ; and it was on this
ethical ground alone, and not for all kinds of sanitary reasons,
or even from political motives, that the nation of Israel, which
was called to sanctification, was forbidden to eat them. It is
true there are several animals mentioned as unclean, e.g. the ass,
the camel, and others, in which we can no longer recognise this
type. But we must bear in mind, that the distinction between
clean animals and unclean goes back to the very earliest times
(Gen. vii. 2, 3), and that in relation to the large land animals,
as well as to the fishes, the Mosaic law followed the marks laid
down by tradition, which took its rise in the primeval age,
whose childlike mind, acute perception, and deep intuitive in-
sight into nature generally, discerned more truly and essentially
the real nature of the animal creation than we shall ever be able
to do, with thoughts and perceptions disturbed as ours are by
the influences of unnatural and ungodly culture. 1
LAWS OF PURIFICATION. — CHAP. XII.-XV.
The laws concerning defilement through eating unclean ani-
mals, or through contact with those that had died a natural death,
are followed by rules relating to defilements proceeding from the
1 " In its <lirect and deep insight into the entire nexus of the physical,
psychical, and spiritual world, into the secret correspondences of the cosmos
and nomos, this sense for nature anticipated discoveries which we shall never
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIL-XV. 373
human body, in consequence of which persons contaminated by
them were excluded for a longer or shorter period from the fel-
lowship of the sanctuary, and sometimes even from intercourse
with their fellow-countrymen, and which had to be removed by
washing, by significant lustrations, and by expiatory sacrifices.
They comprised the uncleanness of a woman in consequence of
child-bearing (chap, xii.), leprosy (chap. xiii. and xiv.), and both
natural and diseased secretions from the sexual organs of either
male oc female (emissio seminis and gonorrhoea, also menses and
flux : chap, xv.) ; and to these there is added in Num. xix. 11-
22, defilement proceeding from a human corpse. Involuntary
emission defiled the man ; voluntary emission, in sexual inter-
course, both the man and the woman and any clothes upon
which it might come, for an entire day, and this defilement was
to be removed in the evening by bathing the body, and by wash-
ing the clothes, etc. (chap. xv. 16-18). Secretions from the
sexual organs, whether of a normal kind, such as the menses and
those connected with child-birth, or the result of disease, rendered
not only the persons affected with them unclean, but even their
couches and seats, and any persons who might sit down upon
them ; and this uncleanness was even communicated to persons
who touched those who were diseased, or to anything with which
they had come in contact (chap. xv. 3-12, 19-27). In the case
of the menses, the uncleanness lasted seven days (chap. xv. 19,
24) ; in that of child-birth, either seven or fourteen days, and then
still further thirty-three or sixty-six, according to circumstances
(chap. xii. 2, 4, 5) ; and in that of a diseased flux, as long as the
disease itself lasted, and seven days afterwards (chap. xv. 13, 28) ;
but the uncleanness communicated to others only lasted till the
evening. In all these cases the purification consisted in the
bathing of the body and washing of the clothes and other objects.
But if the uncleanness lasted more than seven days, on the day
after the purification with water a sin-offering and a burnt-
offering were to be offered, that the priest might pronounce the
person clean, or receive him once more into the fellowship of the
holy God (chap. xii. 6, 8, xv. 14, 15, 29, 30). Leprosy made
those who were affected with it so unclean, that they were ex-
make with our ways of thinking, but which a purified humanity, when look-
ing back from the new earth, will fully understand, and will no longer only
' see through a glass darkly.'" — Leyrer, Herzog's Cycl.
Digitized by
Google
374 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
eluded from all intercourse with the clean (chap. xiii. 45, 46) ;
and on their recovery they were to be cleansed by a solemn lus-
tration, and received again with sacrifices into the congregation
of the Lord (chap. xiv. 1-32). There are no express instruc-
tions as to the communicability of leprosy; but this is implied
in the separation of the leper from the clean (chap. xiii. 45, 46),
as well as from the fact that a house affected by the leprosy
rendered all who entered it, or slept in it, unclean (chap. xiv.
46, 47). The defilement caused by a death was .apparently
greater still. Not only the corpse of a person who had died a
natural death, as well as of one who had been killed by violence,
but a dead body or grave defiled, for a period of seven days, both
those who touched them, and (in the case of the corpse) the
house in which the man had died, all the persons who were in it
or might enter it, and all the open vessels that were there (Num.
xix. 11, 14—16). Uncleanness of this kind could only be removed
by sprinkling water prepared from running water and the ashes
of a sin-offering (Num. xix. 12, 17 sqq.), and would even spread
from the persons defiled to persons and things with which they
came in contact, so as to render them unclean till the evening
(Num. xix. 22) ; whereas the defilement caused by contact with
a dead animal lasted only a day, and then, like every other kind
of uncleanness that only lasted till the evening, could be removed
by bathing the persons or washing the things (chap. xi. 25 sqq.).
But whilst, according to this, generation and birth as well
as death were affected with uncleanness ; generation and death,
the coming into being and the going out of being, were not
defiling in themselves, or regarded a3 the two poles which
bound, determine, and enclose the finite existence, so as to
warrant us in tracing the principle which lay at the foundation
of the laws of purification, as Bdhr supposes, " to the antithesis
between the infinite and the finite being, which falls into the
sphere of the sinful when regarded ethically as the opposite to
the absolutely holy." Finite existence was created by God,
quite as much as the corporeality of man ; and both came forth
from His hand pure and good. Moreover it i» not beget-
ting, giving birth, and dying, that are said to defile ; but the
secretions connected with. generation and child-bearing, and the
corpses of those who had died. In the decomposition which
follows death, the effect of sin, of which death is the wages, is
Digitized by
Google
chap. xii. 375
made manifest in the body. Decomposition, as the embodiment
of the unholy nature of sin, is uncleanness tear' i^o)(fiv ; and this
the Israelite, who was called to sanctification in fellowship with
God, was to avoid and abhor. Hence the human corpse pro-
duced the greatest amount of defilement ; so great, in fact, that
to remove it a sprinkling water was necessary, which had been
strengthened by the ashes of a sin-offering into a kind of sacred
alkali. Next to the corpse, there came on the one hand leprosy,
that bodily image of death which produced all the symptoms of
decomposition even in the living body, and on the other hand
the offensive secretions from the organs of generation, which
resemble the putrid secretions that are the signs in the corpse
of the internal dissolution of the bodily organs and the com-
mencement of decomposition. From the fact that the impurities,
for which special rites of purification were enjoined, are re-
stricted to these three forms of manifestation in the human
body, it is very evident that the laws of purification laid down
in the O. T. were not regulations for the promotion of cleanli-
ness or of good morals and decency, that is to say, were not
police regulations for the protection of the life of the body from
contagious diseases and other things injurious to health; but
that their simple object was " to impress upon the mind a deep
horror of everything that is and is called death in the creature,
and thereby to foster an utter abhorrence of everything that is
or is called sin, and also, to the constant humiliation of fallen
man, to remind him in all the leading processes of the natural
life — generation, birth, eating, disease, death — how everything,
even his own bodily nature, lies under the curse of sin (Gen.
iii. 14-19), that so the law might become a 'schoolmaster
to bring unto Christ,' and awaken and sustain the longing for
a Redeemer from the curse which had fallen upon his body
also (see Gal. iii. 24 , Bom. vii. 24, viii. 19 sqq. ; Phil. iii. 21)."
Leyrer.
Chap. xii. Uncleanness and Purification after Child-
birth. — Vers. 2-4. " If a woman bring forth, (V^W) seed and bear
a boy, she shall be unclean seven days as in the days of the unclean-
ness of her (monthly) sickness" "TO, from "TO to flow, lit. that
which is to flow, is applied more especially to the uncleanness of
a woman's secretions (chap. xv. 1 9). Win, inf. of <vn, to be sickly
Digitized by
Google
376 THE THIRD BOOK OF HOSES.
or ill, is applied here and in chap. xv. 33, xx. 18, to the suffering
connected with an issue of blood. — Vers. 3, 4. After the expiration
of this period, on the eighth day, the boy was to be circumcised
(see at Gen. xvii.). She was then to sit, i.e. remain at home,
thirty-three days in the blood of purification, without touching
anything holy or coming to the. sanctuary (she was not to take
any part, therefore, in the sacrificial meals, the Passover, etc.),
until the days of her purification were full, i.e. had expired.—
Ver. 5. But if she had given birth to a girl, she was to be un-
clean two weeks (14 days), as in her .menstruation, and then
after that to remain at home 66 days. The distinction between
the seven (or fourteen) days of the "separation for her infirmity,"
and the thirty-three (or sixty-six) days of the "blood of her
purifying," had a natural ground in the bodily secretions con-
nected with child-birth, which are stronger and have more blood
in them in the first week (lochia rubra) than the more watery
discharge of the lochia alba, which may last as much as five
weeks, so that the normal state may not be restored till about
six weeks after the birth of the child. The prolongation of the
period, in connection with the birth of a girl, was also founded
upon the notion, which was very common in antiquity, that the
bleeding and watery discharge continued longer after the birth
of a girl than after that of a boy (Hippocr. Opp. ed. Kuhn. i.
p. 393 ; Aristot. h. an. 6, 22 ; 7, 3, cf . Burdach, Physiologie iii.
p. 34). But the extension of the period to 40 and 80 days can
only be accounted for from the significance of the numbers,
which we meet with repeatedly, more especially the number
forty (see at Ex. xxiv. 18). — Vers. 6, 7. After the expiration of
the days of her purification " with regard to a son or a daughter,"
i.e. according as she had given birth to a son or a daughter (not
for the son or daughter, for the woman needed purification for
herself, and not for the child to which she had given birth, and
it was the woman, not the child, that was unclean), she was to
bring to the priest a yearling lamb for a / burnt-offering, and a
young pigeon or turtle-dove for a sin-offering, that he might
make, atonement for her before Jehovah and she might become
clean from the source of her issue, frotJ> |3, lit. son of his year,
which is a year old (cf. chap, xxiii. 12 ; Num. vi. 12, 14, vii.
15, 21, etc.), is used interchangeably with JW J3 (Ex. xii. 5),
and with njB» rja in the plural (chap, xxiii. 18, 19 ; Ex. xxix. 38;
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIII, XIV. 377
Num. vii. 17, 23, 29). DW "tfpD, fountain of bleeding (see at
Gen. iv. 10), equivalent to hemorrhage (cf. chap. xx. 18). The
purification by bathing and washing is not specially mentioned,
as being a matter of course; nor is anything stated with re-
ference to the communication of her uncleanness to persons
who touched either her or her couch, since the instructions with
regard to the period of menstruation no doubt applied to the
first seven and fourteen days respectively. For her restoration
to the Lord and His sanctuary, she was to come and be cleansed
with a sin-offering and a burnt-offering, on account of the un-
cleanness in which the sin of nature had manifested itself;
because she had been obliged to absent herself in consequence
for a whole week from the sanctuary and fellowship of the
Lord. But as this purification had reference, not to any special
moral guilt, but only to sin which had been indirectly mani-
fested in her bodily condition, a pigeon was sufficient for the
sin-offering, that is to say, the smallest of the bleeding sacrifices;
whereas a yearling lamb was required for a burnt-offering, to
express the importance and strength of her surrender of herself
to the Lord after so long a separation from Him. But in cases
of great poverty a pigeon might be substituted for the lamb
(ver. 8, cf. chap. v. 7, 11).
Chap. xiii. and xiv. Lepbost. — The law for leprosy, the
observance of which is urged upon -the people again in Deut.
xxiv. 8, 9, treats, in the first place, of leprosy in men : (a) in its
dangerous forms when appearing either on the skin (vers. 2-28),
or on the head and beard (vers. 29-37) ; (b) in harmless forms
(vers. 38 and 39); and (c) when appearing on a bald head
(vers. 40-44). To this there are added instructions for the
removal of the leper from the society of other men (vers. 45
and 46). It treats, secondly, of leprosy in linen, woollen, and
leather articles, and the way to treat them (vers. 47-59); thirdly,
of the purification of persons recovered from leprosy (chap. xiv.
1-32) ; and fourthly, of leprosy in houses and the way to remove
it (vers. 33-53). — The laws for leprosy in man relate exclusively
to the so-called white leprosy, Xevict), "k&Trpa, lepra, which pro-
bably existed at that time in hither Asia alone, not only among
the Israelites and Jews (Num. xii. 10 sqq. ; 2 Sam. iii. 29 ; 2
Kings v. 27, viu 3, xv. 5 ; Matt. viii. 2, 3, x. 8, xi. 5, xxvi. 6,
Digitized by
Google
378 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
etc.), but also among the Syrians (2 Kings v. 1 sqq.), and which
is still found in that part of the world, most frequently in the
countries of the Lebanon and Jordan and in the neighbourhood
of Damascus, in which city there are three hospitals for lepers,
(Seetzen, pp. 277, 278), and occasionally in Arabia (Niebuhr,
Arab. pp. 135 sqq.) and Egypt ; though at the present time the
pimply leprosy, lepra tuberosa s. articulorum (the leprosy of the
joints), is more prevalent in the East, and frequently occurs in
Egypt in the lower extremities in the form of 'elephantiasis. Of
the white leprosy (called Lepra Mosaica), which is still met with
in Arabia sometimes, where it is called Baras, Trusen gives
the following description: "Very frequently, even for years
before the actual outbreak of the disease itself, white, yellowish
spots are seen lying deep in the skin, particularly on the genitals,
in the face, on the forehead, or in the joints. They are without
feeling, and sometimes cause the hair to assume the same colour
as the spots. These spots afterwards pierce through the cellular
tissue, and reach the muscles and bones. The hair becomes
white and woolly, and at length falls off ; hard gelatinous swell-
ings are formed in the cellular tissue; the skin gets hard, rough,
and seamy, lymph exudes from it, and forms large scabs, which
fall off from time to time, and under these there are often offen-
sive running sores. The nails then swell, curl up, and fall off;
entropium is formed, with bleeding gums, the nose stopped up,
and a considerable flow of saliva. . . . The senses become dull,
the patient gets thin and weak, colliquative diarrhea sets in,
and incessant thirst and burning fever terminate his sufferings"
(Krankheiten d. alien Hebr. p. 165).
Chap. xiii. 2-28. The symptoms of leprosy, whether proceeding
directly from eruptions in the skin, or caused by a boil or burn. —
Vers. 2-8.. The first case: "When a man shall have in the skin
of his flesh (body) a raised spot or scab, or a bright spot." Wfo,
a lifting up (Gen. iv. 7, etc.), signifies here an elevation of the
skin in some part of the body, a raised spot like a pimple. nriBD,
an eruption, scurf, or scab, from nap to pour out, " a pouring out
as it were from the flesh or skin" (Knobel). rnn?, from ">n3, in
the Arabic and Chaldee to shine, is a bright swollen spot in the
skin. If either of these signs became " a spot of leprosy," the
person affected was to be brought to the priest, that he might
examine the complaint. The term zaraath, from an Arabic
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIII. 2-28. 379
word signifying to strike down or scourge, is applied to leprosy
as a scourge of God, and in the case of men it always denotes
the white leprosy, which the Arabs call baras. V\\, a stroke (lit.
" stroke of leprosy"), is applied not only to the spot attacked by
the leprosy, the leprous mole (vers. 3, 29-32, 42, etc.), but to
the persons and even to things affected with leprosy (vers. 4, 12,
13, 31, 50, 55). — Ver. 3. A person so diseased was to be pro-
nounced unclean, (a) if the hair of his head had turned white on
the mole, i.e. if the dark hair which distinguished the Israelites
had become white ; and (b) if the appearance of the mole was
deeper than the skin of the flesh, i.e. if the spot, where the mole
was, appeared depressed in comparison with the rest of the skin.
In that case it was leprosy. These signs are recognised by
modern observers (e.g. Hensler) ; and among the Arabs leprosy
is regarded as curable if the hair remains black upon the white
spots, but incurable if it becomes whitish in colour. — Vers. 4-6.
But if the bright spot was white upon the skin, and its appear-
ance was not deeper than the skin, and the place therefore was
not sunken, nor the hair turned white, the priest was to shut up
the leper, i.e. preclude him from intercourse with other men, for
seven days, and on the seventh day examine him again. If he
then found that the mole still stood, i.e. remained unaltered, " in
his eyes," or in his view, that it had not spread any further, he
was to shut him up for seven days more. And if, on further
examination upon the seventh day, he found that the mole had
become paler, had lost its brilliant whiteness, and had not spread,
he was to declare him clean, for' it was a scurf, i.e. a mere skin
eruption, and not true leprosy. The person who had been pro-
nounced clean, however, was to wash his clothes, to change him-
self from even the appearance of leprosy, and then to be clean.
— Vers. 7, 8. But if the scurf had spread upon the skin " after
his (first) appearance before the priest with reference to his
cleansing," i.e. to be examined concerning his purification ; and
if the priest noticed this on his second appearance, he was to
declare him unclean, for in that case it was leprosy.
The second ease (vers. 9-17) : if the leprosy broke out with-
out previous eruptions. — Vers. 9 sqq. " If a mole of leprosy is
in a man, and the priest to whom he is brought sees that there is
a white rising in the skin, and this has turned the hair white,
and there is raw (proud) flesh upon the elevation, it is an old
Digitized by
Google
380 m THE THIRD BOOK OP MOSES.
V
leprosy." The apodosis to vers. 9 and 10 commences with ver.
11. VI "ife>3 living, i.e. raw, proud flesh. Wio the preservation
of life (Gen xlv. 5), sustenance (Judg. vi. 4) ; here, in vers. 10
and 24, it signifies life in the sense of that which shows life, not
a blow or spot (VM, from fTO to strike), as it is only in a geo-
graphical sense that the verb has this signification, viz. to strike
against, or reach as far as (Num. xxxiv. 11). If the priest
•found that the evil was an old, long-standing leprosy, he was to
pronounce the man unclean, and not first of all to shut him up,
as there was no longer any doubt about the matter. — Vers. 12,
13. If, on the other hand, the leprosy broke out blooming on the
skin, and covered the whole of the skin from head to foot " with
regard to the whole sight of the eyes of the priest," i.e. as far as
his eyes could see, the priest was to pronounce the person clean.
" He has turned quite white," i.e. his dark body has all become
white. The breaking out of the leprous matter in this complete
and rapid way upon the surface of the whole body was the crisis
of the disease ; the diseased matter turned into a scurf, which
died away and then fell off. — Ver. 14. " But in the day when
proud flesh appears upon him, he is unclean, . . . the proud flesh is
unclean ; it is leprosy." That is to say, if proud flesh appeared
after the body had been covered with a white scurf, with which
the diseased matter had apparently exhausted itself, the disease
was not removed, and the person affected with it was to be pro-
nounced unclean.
The third case: if the leprosy proceeded from ah abscess
which had been cured. In ver. 18 "•B'3 is first of all used abso-
lutely, and then resumed with to, and the latter again is more
closely defined in VifoB : " if there arises in the flesh, in him, in
his skin, an abscess, and (it) is healed, and there arises in the
place of the abscess a white elevation, or a spot of a reddish
white, he (the person so affected) shall appear at the priest's." —
Ver. 20. If the priest found the appearance of the diseased spot
lower than the surrounding skin, and the hair upon it turned
white, he was to pronounce the person unclean. " It is a mole
of leprosy : it has broken out upon the abscess." — Vers. 21 sqq.
But if the hair had not turned white upon the spot, and there
was no depression on the skin, and it (the spot) was pale, the
priest was to shut him up for seven days. If the mole spread
upon the skin during this period, it was leprosy ; but if the spot
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIII. 29-87. 381
stood in its place, and had not spread, it was frit?^ WW, " the
closing of the abscess :" literally "the burning ;" here, that part
of the skin or flesh which has been burnt up or killed by
the inflammation or abscess, and gradually falls off as £curf
(Knobel).
The fourth case (vers. 24-28) : if there was a burnt place
upon the skin of the flesh ($K 0130, a spot where he had burnt
himself with fire, the scar of a burn), and the " life of the scar"
— i.e. the skin growing or forming upon the scar (see ver. 10) —
"becomes a whitish red, or white spot," i.e. if it formed itself
into a bright swollen spot. This was to be treated exactly like
the previous case, f 1 ^^] fW& (ver. 28), rising of the scar of the
burn, i.e. a rising of the flesh and skin growing out of the scar
of the burn.
Vers. 29-37. Leprosy upon the head or chin. — If the priest saw
a mole upon the head or chin of a man or woman, the appear-
ance of which was deeper than the skin, and on which the hair
was yellow (3hy golden, reddish, fox-colour) and thin, he was
to regard it as pna. Leprosy on the head or chin is called pro,
probably from pflj to pluck or tear, from its plucking out the
hair, or causing it to fall off ; like iarf<frr), the itch, from mo,
to itch or scratch, and scabies, from scabere. But if he did
not observe these two symptoms, if there was no depression of
the skin, and the hair was black and not yellow, he was to shut
up the person affected for seven days. In ia T? "^f (ver. 31)
there is certainly an error of the text : either "int5> must be re-
tained and r s dropped, or int? must be altered into 3hX, accord-
ing to ver. 37. The latter is probably the better of the two. —
Vers. 32 sqq. If the mole had not spread by that time, and the
two signs mentioned were not discernible, the person affected
was to shave himself, but not to shave the nethek, the eruption
or scurfy place, and the priest was to shut him up for seven days
more, and then to look whether any alteration had taken place ;
and if not, to pronounce him clean, whereupon he was to wash
his clothes (see ver. 6). — Vers. 35, 36. But if the eruption
spread even after his purification, the priest, on seeing this, was
not to look for yellow hair. " He is unclean :" that is to say,
he was to pronounce him unclean without searching for yellow
hairs ; the spread of the eruption was a sufficient proof of the
leprosv. — Ver. 37. But if, on the contrary, the eruption stood
Digitized by
Google
382 THE THIED BOOK OF HOSES.
(see ver. 5), and black hair grew out of it, be was healed, and
the person affected was to be declared clean.
Vers. 38 arid 39. Harmless leprosy. — This broke out upon
the skin of the body in rftna plaits, " white rings." If these
were dull or a pale white, it was the harmless bohak, ahtfm
(LXX.), which did not defile, and which even the Arabs, who
still call it bahah, consider harmless. It is an eruption upon the
skin, appearing in somewhat elevated spots or rings of unequal
sizes and a pale white colour, which do not change the hair; it
causes-no inconvenience, and lasts from two months to two years.
Vers. 40-44. The leprosy of bald heads. — TO is a head bald
behind ; naa, m front, u bald from the side, or edge of his face,
i.e. from the forehead and temples." Bald heads of both kinds
were naturally clean. — Vers. 42 sqq. But if a white reddish mole
was formed upon the bald place before or behind, it was leprosy
t breaking out upon it, and was to be recognised by the fact that
the rising of the mole had the appearance of leprosy on the skin
of the body. In that case the person was unclean, and to be
pronounced so by the priest. "On his head is his plague of
leprosy," i.e. he has it in his head.
Vers. 45 and 46. With regard to the treatment of lepers, the
lawgiver prescribed that they should wear mourning costume,
rend their clothes, leave the hair of their head in disorder (see
at chap. x. 6), keep the beard covered (Ezek. xxiv. 17, 22), and
cry " Unclean, unclean," that every one might avoid them for
fear of being defiled (Lam. iv. 15) ; and as long as the disease
lasted they were to dwell apart outside the camp (Num. v. 2
sqq., xii. 10 sqq., cf. 2 Kings xv. 5, vii. 3), 1 a rule which im-
plies that the leper rendered others unclean by contact. From
this the Rabbins taught, that by merely entering a house, a leper
polluted everything within it (Mishnah, Kelim i. 4; Negaim
xiii. 11).
Vers. 47—59. Leprosy in linen, woollen, and leather fabrics and
clothes. — The only wearing apparel mentioned in ver. 47 is either
woollen or linen, as in Deut. xxii. 11, Hos. ii. 7, Prov. xxxi. 13;
and among the ancient Egyptians and ancient Greeks these were
the materials usually worn. In vers. 48 sqq. VK5> and 3T?, "the
1 At the present day there are pest-houses specially set apart for lepers
outside the towns. In Jerusalem they are situated against the Zion-gate
1 (see Robinson, Pal. i. p. 364).
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIII. 47-59. 383
flax and the wool," i.e. for linen and woollen fabrics, are dis-
tinguished from clothes of wool or flax. The rendering given
to these words by the early translators is orrifiav and Kpotcq,
stamen et subtegmen (LXX., Vulg.), i.e. warp and weft. The
objection offered to this rendering, that warp and weft could
not be kept so separate from one another, that the one could be
touched and rendered leprous without the other, has been met
by Gussetius by the simple but correct remark, that the refer-
ence is to the yarn prepared for the warp and weft, and not to
the woven fabrics themselves. So long as the yarn was not
woven into a fabric, the warp-yarn and weft-yarn might very
easily be separated and lie in different places, so that the one
could be injured without the other. In this case the yarn in-
tended for weaving is distinguished from the woven material,
just as the leather is afterwards distinguished from leather-work
(ver. 49). The signs of leprosy were, if the mole in the fabric
was greenish or reddish. In that case the priest was to shut up
the thing affected with leprosy for seven days, and then examine
it. If the mole had spread in the meantime, it was a "grievous
leprosy." Jl'iKDD, from "iKO irritavit, recruduit (vulnus), is to be
explained, as it is by Bochart, as signifying lepra exasperata.
yian rnKDD making the mole bad or angry ; not, as Geserdus
maintains, from "ikd = VID acerbum faeiens, i.e. dolor em acerbum
excitans, which would not apply to leprosy in fabrics and houses
(chap. xiv. 44), and is not required by Ezek. xxviii. 24. All
such fabrics were to be burned as unclean. — Vera. 53 sqq. If
the mole had not spread during the seven days, the priest was to
cause the fabric in which the mole appeared to be washed, and
then shut it up for seven days more. If the mole did not alter
its appearance after being washed, even though it had not spread,
the fabric was unclean, and was therefore to be burned. " It is
a corroding in the back and front" (of the fabric or leather).
nnna, from nns, in Syriac fodit, from which comes Tins a pit, lit.
a digging : here a corroding depression. nm£ a bald place in
the front or right side, nna| a bald place in the back or left side
of the fabric or leather. — Ver. 56. But if the mole had turned
pale by the seventh day after the washing, it (the place of the
mole) was to be separated (torn off) from the clothes, leather or
yarn, and then (as is added afterwards in ver. 58) the garment
or fabric from which the mole had disappeared was to be washed
Digitized by
Google
s
384 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
a second time, and would then be clean. — Ver. 57. But if the
mole appeared again in any such garment or cloth, i.e. if it ap-
peared again after this, it was a leprosy bursting forth afresh,
and the thing affected with it was to be burned. Leprosy in
linen and woollen fabrics or clothes, and in leather, consisted in
all probability in nothing but so-called mildew, which commonly
arises from damp and want of air, and consists, in the case- of
linen, of round, partially coloured spots, which spread, and
gradually eat up the fabric, until it falls to pieces like mould.
In leather the mildew consists most strictly of " holes eaten in,"
and is of a " greenish, reddish, or whitish colour, according to
the species of the delicate cryptogami by which it has been
formed."
Chap, xiv., vers. 1-32. Purification of the leper, after his
recovery from his disease. As leprosy, regarded as a decompo-
sition of the vital juices, and as putrefaction in a living body,
was an image of death, and like this introduced the same disso-
lution and destruction of life into the corporeal sphere which
sin introduced into the spiritual ; and as the leper for this very
reason was not only excluded from the fellowship of the sanc-
tuary, but cut off from intercourse with the covenant nation
which was called to sanctification : the man, when recovered from
leprosy, was first of all to be received into the fellowship of the
covenant nation by a significant rite of purification, and then
again to be still further inducted into living fellowship with
Jehovah in His sanctuary. Hence the purification prescribed
was divided into two acts, separated from one another by an
interval of seven days.
The first act (vers. 2-8) set forth the restoration of the man,
who had been regarded as dead, into the fellowship of the living
members of the covenant nation, and was therefore performed
by the priest outside the camp. — Vers. 2 sqq. On the day of his
purification the priest was to examine the leper outside the
camp ; and if he found the leprosy cured and gone (JO NB"i3,
const, prwgnans, healed away from, i.e. healed and gone away
from), he was to send for (lit. order them to fetch or bring) two
living (J^'H, with all the fulness of their vital power) birds (with-
out any precise direction as to the kind, not merely sparrows),
and (a piece of) cedar-wood and coccus (probably scarlet wool,
or a little piece of scarlet cloth), and hyssop (see at Ex. xii. 22).
Digitized by
Google
chap. xiv. i-«. 385
— Vers. 5 sqq. The priest was to have one of the birds killed
into an earthen vessel upon fresh water (water drawn from a
fountain or brook, chap. xv. 13, Gen. xxvi. 19), that is to say,
slain in such a manner that its blood should flow into the fresh
water which was in a vessel, and should mix with it He was
then to take the (other) live bird, together with the cedar-wood,
scarlet, and hyssop, and dip them (these accompaniments) along
with the bird into the blood of the one which had been killed
over the water. With this the person cured of leprosy was to
be sprinkled seven times (see chap. iv. 6) and purified ; after
which the living bird was to be " let loose upon the face of the
field," t.e. to be allowed to fly away into the open country. The
two birds were symbols of the person to be cleansed. The one
let loose into the open country is regarded by all the commen-
tators as a symbolical representation of the fact, that the former
leper was now imbued with new vital energy, and released from
the fetters of his disease, and could now return in liberty again
into the fellowship of his countrymen. But if this is estab-
lished, the other must also be a symbol of the leper ; and just as
in the second the essential pointin the symbol was its escape to
the open country, in the first the main point must have been its
death. Not, however, in this sense, that it was a figurative
representation of the previous condition of the leper ; but that,
although it was no true sacrifice, since there was no sprinkling
of blood in connection with it, its bloody death was intended to
show that the leper would necessarily have suffered death on
account of his uncleanness, which reached to the very founda-
tion of his life, if the mercy of God had not delivered him
from this punishment of sin, and restored to him the full power
and vigour of life again. The restitution of this full and
vigorous life was secured to him symbolically, by his being
sprinkled with the blood of the bird which was killed in his
stead. But because his liability to death had assumed a bodily
form in the uncleanness of leprosy, he was sprinkled not only
with blood, but with the flowing water of purification into which
the blood had flowed, and was thus purified from his mortal un-
cleanness. Whereas one of the birds, however, had to lay
down its life, and shed its blood for the person to be cleansed,
the other was made into a symbol of the person to be cleansed
by being bathed in the mixture of blood and water; and its
PENT. — VOL. II. 2 B
Digitized by
Google
386 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
release, to return to its fellows and into its nest, represented his
deliverance from the ban of death which rested upon leprosy,
and his return to the fellowship of his own nation. This signi-
fication of the rite serves to explain not only the appointment of
birds for the purpose, since free unfettered movement in all
directions could not be more fittingly represented by anything
than by birds, which are distinguished from all other animals
by their freedom and rapidity of motion, but also the necessity
for their being alive and clean, viz. to set forth the renewal of
life and purification ; also the addition of cedar-wood, scarlet
wool, and hyssop, by which the life-giving power of the blood
mixed with living (spring) water was to be still further strength-
ened. The cedar-wood, on account of its antiseptic qualities
(e%« • aarjTTTov f) iceSpos, Theodor. on Ezek. xvii. 22), was a
symbol of the continuance of life ; the coccus colour, a sym-
bol of freshness of life, or fulness of vital energy ; and the
hyssop (fiordvr) pvrmicq, herba humilis, medidnalis, purgandit
pulmonibus apta : August, on Ps. li.), a symbol of purification
from the corruption of death. The sprinkling was performed
seven times, because it referred to a readmission into the cove-
nant, the stamp of which was seven ; and it was made with a
mixture of blood and fresh water, the blood signifying life, the
water purification. — Ver. 8. After this symbolical purification
from the mortal ban of leprosy, the person cleansed had to
purify himself bodily, by washing his clothes, shaving off all
his hair — i.e. not merely the hair of his head and beard, but that
of his whole body (cf. ver. 9), — and bathing in water ; and he
could then enter into the camp. But he had still to remain
outside his tent for seven days, not only because he did not yet
feel himself at home in the congregation, or because he was still
to retain the consciousness that something else was wanting
before he could be fully restored, but, as the Chaldee has ex-
plained it by adding the clause, et non accedat ad latus uxorii
suce, that he might not defile himself again by conjugal rights,
and so interrupt his preparation for readmission into fellowship
with Jehovah.
The second act (vers. 9-20) effected his restoration to fellow-
ship with Jehovah, and his admission to the sanctuary. It
commenced on the seventh day after the first with a fresh
purification ; viz. shaving off all the hair from the head, the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIV. 1-8J. 387
beard, the eyebrows — in fact, the whole body, — washing the
clothes, and bathing the body. On the eighth day there fol-
lowed a sacrificial expiation; and for this the person to be
expiated was to bring two sheep without blemish, a ewe-lamb
of a year old, three-tenths of an ephah of fine flour mixed with
oil as a meat-offering, and a log (or one-twelfth of a hin, i.e. as
much as six hens' eggs, or 15*62 Khenish cubic inches) of oil ;
and the priest was to present him, together with these gifts,
before Jehovah, i.e. before the altar of burnt-offering. The
one lamb was then offered by the priest as a trespass-offering,
together with the log of oil ; and both of these were waved by
him. By the waving, which did not take place on other occa-
sions in connection with sin-offerings and trespass-offerings, the
lamb and oil were transferred symbolically to the Lord ; and by
the fact that these sacrificial gifts represented the offerer, the
person to be consecrated to the Lord by means of them was
dedicated to His service again, just as the Levites were dedi-
cated to the Lord by the ceremony of waving (Num. viii. 11,
15). But a trespass-offering was required as the consecration-
offering, because the consecration itself served as a restoration
to all the rights of the priestly covenant nation, which had been
lost by the mortal ban of leprosy. 1 — Vers. 13, 14. After the slay-
ing of the lamb in the holy place, as the trespass-offering, like
the sin-offering, was most holy and belonged to the priest (see at
chap. vii. 6), the priest put some of its blood upon the tip of the
right ear, the right thumb, and the great toe of the right foot
of the person to be consecrated, in order that the organ of
hearing, with which he hearkened to the word of the Lord, and
those used in acting and walking according to His command-
1 Others, e.g. Biehm and Oehler, regard this trespass-offering also as a
kind of mulcta, or satisfaction rendered for the fact, that during the whole
period of his sickness, and so long as he was excluded from the congrega-
tion, the leper had failed to perform his theocratical duties, and Jehovah
had been injured in consequence. But if this was the idea upon which the
trespass-offering was founded, the law would necessarily have required that
trespass-offerings should be presented on the recovery of persons who had
been affected with diseased secretions ; for during the continuance of their
disease, which often lasted a long time, even as much as 12 years (Luke
viii. 43), they were precluded from visiting the sanctuary or serving the
Lord with sacrifices, because they were unclean, and therefore could not
perform their theocratical duties.
Digitized by
Google
388 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
ments, might thereby be sanctified through the power of the
atoning blood of the sacrifice ; just as in- the dedication of the
priests (chap. viii. 24). — Vers. 15-18. The priest then poured
some oil out of the log into the hollow of his left hand, and
dipping the finger of his right hand in the oil, sprinkled it seven
times before Jehovah, i.e. before the altar of burnt-offering, to
consecrate the oil to God, and sanctify it for further use. With
the rest of the oil he smeared the same organs of the person
to be consecrated which he had already smeared with blood,
placing it, in fact, u upon the blood of the trespa»s^>ffering" ie.
upon the spots already touched with blood ; he then poured the
remainder upon the head of the person to be consecrated, and
so made atonement for him before Jehovah. The priests
were also anointed at their consecration, not only by the pour-
ing of oil upon their head, but by the sprinkling of oil upon
their garments (chap. viii. 12, 30). But in their case the
Anointing of their head preceded the consecration-offering, and
holy anointing oil was used for the purpose. Here, on the con-
trary, it was ordinary oil, which the person to be consecrated had
offered as a sacrificial gift ; and this was first of all sanctified,
therefore, by being sprinkled before Jehovah, after which the
oil was sprinkled and poured upon the organs with which he was
to serve the Lord, and then upon the head, which represented
his personality. Just as the anointing oil, prepared according
to divine directions, shadowed forth the power and gifts of the
Spirit, with which God endowed the priests for their peculiar
office in His kingdom ; so the oil, which the leper about to be
consecrated presented as a sacrifice out of his own resources,
represented the spirit of life which he had received from God,
and now possessed as his own. This property of his spirit was
presented to the Lord by the priestly waving and sprinkling
of the oil before Jehovah, to be pervaded and revived by His
spirit of grace, and when so strengthened, to be not only applied
to those organs of the person to be consecrated, with which he
fulfilled the duties of his vocation as a member of the priestly
nation of God, but also poured upon his head, to be fully appro-
priated to his person. And just as in the sacrifice the blood was
the symbol of the soul, so in the anointing the oil was the
symbol of the spirit. If, therefore, the soul was established in
gracious fellowship with the Lord by being sprinkled with the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIV. 88-63. 389
atoning blood of sacrifice, the anointing with oil had reference
to the spirit, which gives life to soul and body, and which was
thereby, endowed with the power of the Spirit of God. In this
way the man cleansed from leprosy was reconciled to Jehovah, '
and reinstated in the covenant privileges and covenant grace. —
Vers. 19, 20. It was not till all this had been done, that the priest
could proceed to make expiation for him with the sin-offering, for
which the ewe-lamb was brought, "on account of his uncleanness,"
t.e. on account of the sin which still adhered to him as well as to
all the other members of the covenant nation, and which had
come outwardly to light in the uncleanness of his leprosy ; after
which he presented his burnt-offering and meat-offering, which
embodied the sanctification of all his members to the service of
the Lord, and the performance of works well-pleasing to Him.
The sin-offering, burnt-offering, and meat-offering were there-
fore presented according to the general instructions, with this
exception, that, as a representation of diligence in good works, a
larger quantity of meal and oil was brought than the later law
in Num. xv. 4 prescribed for the burnt-offering.— Vers. 21-32.
In cases of poverty on the part of the person to be consecrated,
the burnt-offering and sin-offering were reduced to a pair of
turtle-doves or young pigeons, and the meat-offering to a tenth
of an ephah of meal and oil ; but no diminution was allowed in
the trespass-offering as the consecration-offering, since this was
the conditio sine qua non of reinstatement in full covenant
lights. On account of the importance of all the details of this
law, every point is repeated a second time in vers. 21—32.
Vers. 33-53. The law concerning the leprosy of houses was
made known to Moses and Aaron, as intended for the time when
Israel should have taken possession of Canaan and 'dwell in
houses. As it was Jehovah who gave His people the land for
a possession, so " putting the plague of leprosy in a house of the
land of their possession " is also ascribed to Him (ver. 34), inas-
much as He held it over them, to remind the inhabitants of the
house that they owed not only their bodies but also their dwell-
ing-places to the Lord, and that they were to sanctify these to
Him. By this expression, " I put" the view which Knobel still
regards as probable, viz. that the house-leprosy was only the
transmission of human leprosy to the walls of the houses, is
completely overthrown ; not to mention the fact, that throughout
Digitized by
Google
390 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
the whole description there is not the slightest hint of any such
transmission, but the inhabitants, on the contrary, are spoken of
as clean, t.c. free from leprosy, and only those who went into
the house, or slept in the house after it had been shut up as
suspicious, are pronounced unclean (vers. 46, 47), though even
they are not said to have been affected with leprosy. The only
thing that can be gathered from the signs mentioned in ver. 37
is, that the house-leprosy was an evil which calls to mind u the
vegetable formations and braid-like structures that are found on
mouldering walls and decaying walls, and which eat into them
so as to produce a slight depression in the surface." 1 — Vers. 35,
36. When the evil showed itself in a house, the owner was to
send this message to the priest, " A leprous evil lias appeared in
my house" and the priest, before entering to examine it, was to
have the house cleared, lest everything in it should become un-
clean. Consequently, as what was in the house became unclean
only when the priest had declared the house affected with leprosy,
the reason for the defilement is not to be sought for in physical
infection, but must have been of an ideal or symbolical kind. —
Vers. 37 sqq. If the leprous spot appeared in u greenish or reddish
depressions, which looked deeper than the wall" the priest was to
shut up the house for seven days. If after that time he found
that the mole had spread on the walls, he was to break out the
stones upon which it appeared, and remove them to an unclean
place outside the town, and to scrape the house all round inside,
and throw the dust that was scraped off into an unclean place
outside the town. He was then to put other stones in their
place, and plaster the house with fresh mortar. — Vers. 43 sqq.
If the mole broke out again after this had taken place, it was a
malicious leprosy, and the house was to be pulled down as un-
clean, whilst the stones, the wood, and the mortar were to be
taken to an unclean place outside the town. — Vers. 46, 47.
Whoever went into the house during the time that it was closed,
became unclean till the evening and had to wash himself; but
1 Cf. Sommer (p. 220), who Bays, " The crust of many of these lichens
is so marvellously thin, that they simply appear as coloured spots, for the
most part circular, which gradually spread in a concentric form, and can
be rubbed off like dust. Some species have a striking resemblance to
eruptions upon the skin. There is one genus called spiloma (spots) ; and
another very numerous genus bears the name of lepraria."
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XV. 8-15. 391
whoever slept or ate therein during this time, was to wash his
clothes, and of course was unclean till the evening. iDJt fi^n
(ver. 46) may be a perfect tense, and a relative clause dependent
upon *D?, or it may be an infinitive for "V3DS1 as in ver. 43. — Ver.
48. If the priest should find, however, that after the fresh
plastering the mole had not appeared again, or spread (to other
places), he was to pronounce the house clean, because the evil
was cured, and (vers. 49-53) to perform the same rite of puri-
fication as was prescribed for the restoration of a man, who had
been cured of leprosy, to the national community (vers. 4-7).
The purpose was also the same, namely, to cleanse (K?n cleanse
from sin) and make atonement for the house, i.e. to purify it
from the uncleanness of sin which had. appeared in the leprosy.
For, although it is primarily in the human body that sin mani-
fests itself, it spreads from man to the things which he touches,
uses, inhabits, though without our being able to represent this
spread as a physical contagion. — Vers. 54-57 contain the con-
cluding formula to chap. xiii. and xiv. The law of leprosy was
given " to teach in the day of the unclean and the clean," i.e. to
give directions for the time when they would have to do with
the clean and unclean.
Chap. xv. The Uncleanness op Seobetions. — These in-
clude (1) a running issue from a man (vers. 2-15) ; (2) involun-
tary emission of seed (vers. 16, 17), and the emission of seed in
sexual intercourse (ver. 18) ; (3) the monthly period of a woman
(vers. 19-24) ; (4) a diseased issue of blood from a woman (vers.
25-30). They consist, therefore, of two diseased and two natural
secretions from the organs of generation.
Vers. 2-15. The running^ issue from a man is not described
with sufficient clearness for us to be able to determine with
certainty what disease is referred to : " if a man becomes flowing
out of his flesh, he is unclean in his flux." That even here the
term flesh is not a euphemism for the organ of generation, as is
frequently assumed, is evident from ver. 13, " he shall wash his
clothes and bathe his flesh in water," when compared with chap.
xvi. 23, 24, 28, etc., where flesh cannot possibly have any such
meaning. The "flesh" is the body as in ver. 7, " whoever touches
the flesh of him that hath the issue," as compared with ver. 19,
" whosoever toucheth her." At the same time, the agreement
Digitized by
Google
392 - THE THIBD BOOK OF MOSES.
between the law relating to the man with an issue and that
concerning the woman with an issue (ver. 19, " her issue in her
flesh") points unmistakeably to a secretion from the sexual
organs. Only the seat of the disease is not more closely defined.
The issue of the man is not a hemorrhoidal disease, for nothing
is said about a flow of blood; still less is it a syphilitic suppura-
tion {gonorrhoea virulenta), for the occurrence of this at all in
antiquity is very questionable ; but it is either a diseased flow of
semen (gonorrhoea), »'.«. an involuntary flow drop by drop arising
from weakness of the organ, as Jerome and the Babbins assume,
or more probably, simply blenorrhcea urethra, a discharge of mucus
arising from a catarrhal affection of the mucous membrane of the
urethra (urethritis). The participle 3t nw is expressive of con-
tinued duration. In ver. 3 the uncleanness is still more closely
defined: "whether his flesh run with his issue, or his flesh
closes before his issue," i.e. whether the member lets the matter
flow out or by closing retains it, " it is his uncleanness," i.e. in
the latter case as well as the former it is uncleanness to him, he
is unclean. For the "closing" is only a temporary obstruction,
brought about by some particular circumstance. — Ver. 4. Every
bed upon which he lay, and everything upon which he sat, was
defiled in consequence ; also every one who touched his bed (ver.
5), or sat upon it (ver. 6), or touched his flesh, ue. his body
(ver. 7), was unclean, and had to bathe himself and wash his
clothes in consequence. — Vers. 9, 10. The conveyance in which
such a man rode was also unclean, as well as everything under
him ; and whoever touched them was defiled till the evening,
and the person who carried them was to wash his clothes and
bathe himself. — Ver. 11. This also applied to every one whom
the man with an issue might touch, without first rinsing his
hands in water. — Vers. 12, 13. Vessels that he had touched
were to be broken to pieces if they were of earthenware, and
rinsed with water if they were of wood, for the reasons explained
in chap. xi. 33 and vi. 21. — Vers. 13-15. When he was cleansed,
i.e. recovered from his issue, he was to wait seven days with regard
to his purification, and then wash his clothes and bathe his body
in fresh water, and be clean. On the eighth day he was to bring
two turtle-doves or young pigeons, in order that the priest might
prepare one as a sin-offering and the other as a burnt-offering,
and make an atonement for him before the Lord for his issue.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XV. 16-21 393
Vers. 16-18. Involuntary emission of- seed. — This defiled for
the whole of the day, not only the man himself, but any garment
or skin upon which any of it had come, and required for purifi-
cation that the whole body should be bathed, and the polluted
things washed. — Ver. 18. Sexual connection. " If a man lie with
a woman with the emission of seed, both shall be unclean till the
evening, and bathe themselves in water." Consequently it was
not the concubitus as such which defiled, as many erroneously
suppose, but the emission of seed in the coitus. This explains
the law and custom, of abstaining from conjugal intercourse
during the preparation for acts of divine worship, or the perform-
ance of the same (Ex. xix. 5 ; 1 Sam. xxi. 5, 6 ; 2 Sam. xi. 4), in
which many other nations resembled the Israelites. (For proofs
see Leyrer's article in Herzog's Cyclopaedia, and Knobel in loco,
though the latter is wrong in supposing that conjugal intercourse
itself defiled.)
Vers. 19—24. The menses of a woman. — " If a woman have
an issue, (if) blood is her issue in her flesh, she shall be seven
days in her uncleanness." As the discharge does not last as a
rule more than four or five days, the period of seven days was
fixed on account of the significance of the number seven. In
this condition she rendered every one who touched her unclean
(ver. 19), everything upon which she lay or sat (ver. 20), every
one who touched her bed or whatever she sat upon (vers. 21,
22), also any one who touched the blood upon her bed or seat
(ver. 23, where KVi and ta are to be referred to ttj) ; and they
remained unclean till the evening, when they had to wash their
clothes and bathe themselves. — Ver. 24. If a man lay with her
and her uncleanness came upon him, he became unclean for
seven days, and the bed upon which he lay became unclean as
well. The meaning cannot be merely if he lie upon the same
bed with her, but if he have conjugal intercourse, as is evident
from chap. xx. 18 and Num. v. 13 (cf. Gen. xxvi. 10, xxxiv. 2,
xxxv. 22 ; 1 Sam. ii. 22). It cannot be adduced as an objection
to this explanation, which is the only admissible one, that accord-
ing to chap, xviii. J9 and xx. 18 intercourse with a woman
during her menses was an accursed crime, to be punished by
extermination. For the law in chap. xx. 18 refers partly to
conjugal intercourse during the hemorrhage of a woman after
child-birth, as the similarity of the words in chap. xx. 18 and xii.
Digitized by
Google
394 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
7 (TOl "ripp) clearly proves, and to the case of a man attempting
cohabitation with a woman during her menstruation. The verse
before us, on the contrary, refers simply to the possibility of
menstruation commencing during the act of conjugal inter-
course, when the man would be involuntarily defiled through the
unexpected uncleanness of the woman.
Vers. 25—31. Diseased issue from a woman. — If an issue of
blood in a woman flowed many days away from (not in) the
time of her monthly uncleanness, or if it flowed beyond her
monthly uncleanness, she was to be unclean as long as her un-
clean issue continued, just as in the days of her monthly unclean-
ness, and she defiled her couch as well as everything upon which
she sat, as in the other case, also every one who touched either
her or these things. — Vers. 28-30. After the issue had ceased,
she was to purify herself like the man with'an issue, as described
in vers. 13-15. — Obedience to these commands is urged in ver.
31 : " Cause that the children of Israel free themselves from
their uncleanness, that they die not through their uncleanness,
by defiling My dwelling in the midst of them." "Wi, Hiphil, to
cause that a person keeps aloof from anything, or loosens himself
from it, from ">H, Niphal to separate one's self, signifies here de-
liverance from the state of uncleanness, purification from it.
Continuance in it was followed by death, not merely in the par-
ticular instance in which an unclean man ventured to enter the
sanctuary, but as a general fact, because uncleanness was irrecon-
cilable with the calling of Israel to be a holy nation, in the midst
of which Jehovah the Holy One had His dwelling-place (chap,
xi. 44), and continuance in uncleanness without the prescribed
purification was a disregard of the holiness of Jehovah, and in-
volved rebellion against Him and His ordinances of grace. —
Vers. 32, 33. Concluding formula. The words, " him that lieth
with her that is unclean," are more general than the expression,
"lie with her," in ver. 24, and involve not only intercourse with an
unclean woman, but lying by her side upon one and the same bed.
THE DAT OP ATONEMENT. — CHAP. XVI.
The sacrifices and purifications enjoined thus far did not
suffice to complete the reconciliation between the congregation of
Israel, which was called to be a holy nation, but in its very nature
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVI. 1, 2. 395
was still altogether involved in sin and uncleanness, and Jehovah
the Holy One, — that is to say, to restore the perfect reconcilia-
tion and true vital fellowship of the nation with its God, in
accordance with the idea and object of the old covenant, — be-
cause, even with the most scrupulous observance of these direc-
tions, many sins and defilements would still remain unacknow-
ledged, and therefore without expiation, and would necessarily
produce in the congregation a feeling of separation from its God,
so that it would be unable to attain to the true joyousness of
access to the throne of grace, and to the place of reconciliation
with God. This want was met by the appointment of a yearly
general and perfect expiation of all the sins and uncleanness
which had remained unatoned for and uncleansed in the course
of the year. In this respect the laws of sacrifice and purifica-
tion received their completion and finish in the institution of the
festival of atonement, which provided for the congregation of
Israel the highest and most comprehensive expiation that was
possible under the Old Testament. Hence the law concerning
the day of atonement formed a fitting close to the ordinances
designed to place the Israelites in fellowship with their God, and
raise the promise of Jehovah, " I will be your God," into a living
truth. This law is described in the present chapter, and contains
(1) the instructions as to the performance of the general expia-
tion for the year (vers. 2-28), and (2) directions for the cele-
bration of this festival every year (vers. 29-34). From the ex-
piation effected upon this day it received the name of " day of
expiations" i.e. of the highest expiation (chap, xxiii. 27). The
Rabbins call it briefly RCtf*, the day #aT' et-oyfiv.
Vers. 1, 2. The chronological link connecting the following
law with the death of the sons of Aaron (chap. x. 1-5) was
intended, not only to point out the historical event which led to
the appointment of the day of atonement, but also to show the
importance and holiness attached to an entrance into the inmost
sanctuary of God. The death of Aaron's sons, as a punishment
for wilfully " drawing near before Jehovah," was to be a solemn
warning to Aaron himself, " not to come at all times into the
holy place within the vail, before the mercy-seat upon the ark,"
i.e. into the most holy place (see Ex. xxv. 10 sqq.), but only at
the time to be appointed by Jehovah, and for the purposes insti-
tuted by Him, i.e. } according to vers. 29 sqq., only once a year, on
Digitized by
Google
396 THE THIRD BOOK OF HOSES.
the day of atonement, and only in the manner prescribed in vers.
3 sqq., that he might not die. — " For I will appear in the cloud
above the capporeth." The cloud in which Jehovah appeared
above the capporeth, between the cherubim (Ex. xxv. 22), was
not the cloud of the incense, with which Aaron was to cover the
capporeth on entering (ver. 13), as Vitringa, B&hr, and others
follow the Sadducees in supposing, but the cloud of the divine
glory, in which Jehovah manifested His essential presence in
the most holy place above the ark of the covenant. Because
Jehovah appeared in this cloud, not only could no unclean and
sinful man go before the capporeth, i.e. approach the holiness of
the all-holy God ; but even the anointed and sanctified high priest,
if he went before it at his own pleasure, or without the expiatory
blood of sacrifice, would expose himself to Certain death. The
reason for this prohibition is to be found in the fact, that the
holiness communicated to the priest did not cancel the sin of his
nature, but only covered it over for the performance of his offi-
cial duties, and so long as the law, which produced only the
knowledge of sin and not its forgiveness and removal, was not
abolished by the complete atonement, the holy God was and
remained to mortal and sinful man a consuming fire, before
which no one could stand.
Vers. 3-5. Only riifta, " with this," i.e. with the sacrifices,
dress, purifications, and means of expiation mentioned after-
wards, could he go into " the holy place," i.e., according to the
more precise, description in ver. 2, into the inmost division of the
tabernacle, which is called Kodesh hakkadashim, " the holy of
holies," in Ex. xxvi. 33. He was to bring an ox (bullock) for
a sin-offering and a ram for a burnt-offering, as a sacrifice for
himself and his house (i.e. the priesthood, ver. 6), and two he-
goats for a sin-offering and a ram for a burnt-offering, as a
sacrifice for the congregation. For this purpose he was to put
on, not the state-costume of the high priest, but a body-coat,
drawers, girdle, and head-dress of white cloth (bad: see Ex.
xxviii. 42), having first bathed his body, and not merely his
hands and feet, as he did for the ordinary service, to appear
before Jehovah as entirely cleansed from the defilement of sin
(see at chap. viii. 6) and arrayed in clothes of holiness. The
dress of white cloth was not the plain official dress of the ordi-
nary priests, for the girdle of that dress was coloured (see at
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVL 6-10. 397
Ex. xxviii. 39, 40) ; and in that case the high priest would not
have appeared in the perfect purity of his divinely appointed
office as chief of the priesthood, but simply as the priest ap-
pointed for this day (v. Hofmann). Nor did he officiate (as
many of the Rabbins, and also C. a Lapide, Grotius, Eosenmuller,
and Knobel suppose) as a penitent praying humbly for the for-
giveness of sin. For where in all the world have clear white
clothes been worn either in mourning or as a penitential gar-
ment! The emphatic expression, " these are holy garments,"
is a sufficient proof that the pure white colour of all the clothes,
even of the girdle, was intended as a representation of holiness.
Although in Ex. xxviii. 2, 4, etc., the official dress not only of
Aaron, but of his sons also, that is to say, the priestly costume
generally, is described as " holy garments," yet in the present
chapter the word kodesh, " holy," is frequently used in an
emphatic sense (for example, in vers. 2, 3, 16, of the most holy
place of the dwelling), and by this predicate the dress is charac-
terized as most holy. Moreover, it was in baddim (" linen")
that the angel of Jehovah was clothed (Ezek. ix. 2, 3, 11, x. 2,
6, 7, and Dan. x. 5, xii. 6, 7), whose whole appearance, as de-
scribed in Dan. x. 6, resembled the appearance of the glory of
Jehovah, which Ezekiel saw in the vision of the four cherubim
(chap, i.), and was almost exactly like the glory of Jesus Christ,
which John saw in the Revelation (chap. i. 13-15). The white
material, therefore, of the dress which Aaron wore, when per-
forming the highest act of expiation under the Old Testament,
was a symbolical shadowing forth of the holiness and glory of
the one perfect Mediator between God and man, who, being the
radiation of the glory of God and the image of His nature,
effected by Himself the perfect cleansing away of our sin, and
who, as the true High Priest, being holy, innocent, unspotted,
and separate from sinners, entered once by His own blood into
the holy place not made with hands, namely, into heaven it-
self, to appear before the face of God for us, and obtain ever-
lasting redemption (Heb. i. 3, vii. 26, ix. 12, 24).
Vers. 6-10. With the bullock Aaron was to make atone-
ment for himself and his house. The two he-goats he was to
place before Jehovah (see chap. i. 5), and " give lots over them,"
i.e. have lots cast upon them, one lot for Jehovah, the other for
Azazel. The one upon which the lot for Jehovah fell (l?y, from
Digitized by
Google
398 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
the coming up of the lot out of the urn, Josh, xviii. 11, xix. 10),
he was to prepare as a sin-offering for Jehovah, and to present
the one upon which the lot for Azazel fell alive before Jehovah,
V?y IBS?, « to expiate it" i.«. to make it the object of expiation
(see at ver. 21), to send it (them) into the desert to Azazel.
<!*$[> which only occurs in this chapter, signifies neither " a
remote solitude," nor any locality in the desert whatever (as
Jonathan, Rashi, etc., suppose) ; nor the " he-goat" (from B?
goat, and W to turn off, " the goat departing or sent away," as
Symm., TheodoL, the Vulgate, Luther, and others render it) ;
nor " complete removal" (Bahr, Winer, Thaluck, etc.). The
words, one lot for Jehovah and one for Azazel, require uncon-
ditionally that Azazel should be regarded as a personal being, in
opposition to Jehovah. The word is a more intense form of -W
removit, dimovit, and comes from 7PJJ? by absorbing the liquid,
like Babel from balbel (Gen. xi. 9), and Golgotha from gulgalta
(Ewald, § 158c). The Septuagint rendering is correct, 6 airo-
tro(viraio<: ; although in ver. 10 the rendering airvrro^irri is also
adopted, i.e. " averruncus, a fiend, or demon whom one drives
away" (Ewald). We have not to think, however, of any demon
whatever, who seduces men to wickedness in the form of an
evil spirit, as the fallen angel Azazel is represented as doing in
the Jewish writings (Book of Enoch viii. 1, x. 12, xiii. 1 sqq.),
like the terrible fiend Shibe, whom the Arabs of the peninsula
of Sinai so much dread (Seetzen, i. pp. 273-4), but of the devil
himself, the head of the fallen angels, who was afterwards
called Satan ; for no subordinate evil spirit could have been
placed in antithesis to Jehovah as Azazel is here, but only the
ruler or head of the kingdom of demons. The desert and deso-
late places are mentioned elsewhere as the abode of evil spirits
(Isa. xiii. 21, xxxiv. 14 ; Matt. xii. 43 ; Luke xi. 24 ; Rev. xviii.
2). The desert, regarded as an image of death and desolation,
corresponds to the nature of evil spirits, who fell away from the
primary source of life, and in their hostility to God devastated
the world, which was created good, and brought death and de-
struction in their train.
Vers. 11-20. He was then to slay the bullock of the sin-
offering, and make atonement for himself and his house (or
family, i.e. for the priests, ver. 33). But before bringing the
blood pf the sin-offering into the most holy place, he was to take
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVI. 11-20 399
" the filling of the censer (machtah, a coal-pan, Ex. xxv. 38) with
fire-coals" i.e. as many burning coals as the censer would hold,
from the altar of burnt-offering, and <e the filling of his hands,"
i.e. two hands full of u fragrant incense" (Ex. xxx. 34), and go
with this within the vail, i.e. into the most holy place, and there
place the incense upon the fire before Jehovah, " that~the cloud
of (burning) incense might cover the capporeth above the testimony,
and he might not die." The design of these instructions was not
that the holiest place, the place of Jehovah's presence, might be
hidden by the cloud of incense from the gaze of the unholy eye
of man, and so he might separate himself reverentially from it,
that the person approaching might not be seized with destruc-
tion. But as burning incense was a symbol of prayer, this
covering of the capporeth with the cloud of incense was a
symbolical covering of the glory of the Most Holy One with
prayer to God, in order that He might not see the sin, nor suffer
His holy wrath to break forth upon the sinner, but might
graciously accept, in the blood of the sin-offering, the souls for
which it was presented. Being thus protected by the incense
from the wrath of the holy God, he was to sprinkk (once) some
of the blood of the ox with his finger, first upon the capporeth
in front, i.e. not upon the top of the capporeth, but merely upon
or against the front of it, and then seven times before the cappo-
reth, i.e. upon the ground in front of it. It is here assumed as
a matter of course, that when the offering of incense was finished,
he would necessarily come out of the most holy place again, and
go to the altar of burnt-offering to fetch some of the blood of
the ox which had been slaughtered there.— Ver. 15. After this
he was to slay the he-goat as a sin-offering for the nation, for
which purpose, of course, he must necessarily come back to the
court again, and then take the blood of the goat into the most
holy place, and do just the same with it as he had already done
with that of the ox. A double sprinkling took place in both
cases, first upon or against the capporeth, and then seven times.
in front of the capporeth. The first sprinkling, which was per-
formed once only, was for the expiation of the sins, first of the
high priest and his house, and then of the congregation of Israel
(chap. iv. 7 and 18); the second, which was repeated seven
times, was for the expiation of the sanctuary from the sins of
the people. This is implied in the words of ver. 16a, " and so
Digitized by
Google
400 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
shall he make expiation for the most holy place, on account of
the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and on account of their
transgressions with regard to all their sins," which refer to both
the sacrifices ; since Aaron first of all expiated the sins of the
priesthood, and the uncleanness with which the priesthood had
stained the sanctuary through their sin, by the blood of the
bullock of the sin-offering ; and then the sins of the nation, and
the uncleannesses with which it had defiled the sanctuary, by the
he-goat, which was also slain as a sin-offering. 1 — Vers. 166 and
17. " And so shall he do to the tabernacle of the congregation that
dwelleth among them " (i.e. has its place among them, Josh. xxii.
19) " in the midst of tlieir uncleanness." The holy things were
rendered unclean, not only by the sins of those who touched
them, but by the uncleanness, i.e. the bodily manifestations of
the sin of the nation ; so that they also required a yearly expia-
tion and cleansmg through the expiatory blood of sacrifice. By
ohel moed, " the tabernacle of the congregation," in vers. 16 and
17, as well as vers. 20 and 33, we are to understand the holy
place of the tabernacle, to which the name of the whole is
applied on account of its occupying the principal space in the
dwelling, and in distinction from kodesh (the holy), which is
used in this chapter to designate the most holy place, or the
space at the back of the dwelling. It follows still further from
this, that by the altar in ver. 18, and also in vers. 20 and 33,
which is mentioned here as the third portion of the entire sanc-
tuary, we are to understand the altar of burnt-offering in the
court, and not the altar of incense, as the Rabbins and most of
the commentators assume. This rabbinical view cannot be
sustained, either from Ex. xxx. 10 or from the context. Ex. xxx.
10 simply prescribes a yearly expiation of the altar of incense
on the day of atonement ; and this is implied in the words " so
shall he do," in ver. 166. For these words can only mean, that
in the same way in which he had expiated the most holy place
he was also to expiate the holy place of the tabernacle, in which
the altar of incense took the place of the ark of the covenant of
1 V. Hofmann's objection to this rests upon the erroneous supposition
that a double act of expiation was required for the congregation, and only
a single one for the priesthood, whereas, according to the distinct words of
the text, a double sprinkling was performed with the blood of both the sin-
offerings, and therefore a double expiation effected.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVI. 11-20. 401
the most holy place; so that the expiation was performed by
his patting blood, in the first place, upon the horns of the altar,
and then sprinkling it seven times upon the ground in front of
it. The expression " go out " in ver. 18 refers, hot to his going
out of the most holy into the holy place, but to his going out of
the ohel moed (or holy place) into the court. — Ver. 17. There
was to be no one in the ohel moed when Aaron went into it to
make expiation in the most holy place, until he came out (of the
tabernacle) again ; not because no one but the chief servant of
Jehovah was worthy to be near or present either as spectator or
assistant at this sacred act before Jehovah (Knobel), but because
no unholy person was to defile by his presence the sanctuary,
which had just been cleansed; just as no layman at all was
allowed to enter the holy place, or could go with impunity into
the presence of the holy God. — Vers. 18, 19. After he had
made atonement for the dwelling, Aaron was to expiate/ the
altar in the court, by first of all putting some of the blood of
the bullock and he-goat upon the horns of the altar, and then
sprinkling it seven times with his finger, and thus cleansing and
sanctifying it from the uncleannesses of the children of Israel.
The application of blood to the horns of the altar was intended
to expiate the sins of the priests as well as those of the nation ;
just as in the case of ordinary sin-offerings it expiated the sins
of individual members of the nation (chap. iv. 25, 30, 34), to
which the priests also belonged; and the sevenfold sprinkling
effected the purification of the place of sacrifice from the un-
cleannesses of the congregation.
The meaning of the sprinkling of blood upon the capporeth
and the horns of the two altars was the same as in the case of
every sin-offering (see pp. 280 and 304). The peculiar features
in the expiatory ritual of the day of atonement were the follow-
ing. In the first place, the blood of both sacrifices was taken
not merely into the holy place, but into the most holy, and
sprinkled directly upon the throne of God. This was done to
show that the true atonement could only take place before the
throne of God Himself, and that the sinner was only then truly
reconciled to God, and placed in the full and living fellowship
of peace with God, when he could come directly to the throne of
God, and not merely to the place where, although the Lord did
indeed manifest His grace to him, He was still separated from
PENT. — VOL. II. 2 O
Digitized by
Google
y
402 THE THIBD BOOK OF MOSES.
him by a curtain. In this respect, therefore, the bringing of
the blood of atonement into the most holy place had a prophetic
signification, and was a predictive sign that the curtain, which
then separated Israel from its God, would one day be removed,
and that with the entrance of the full and eternal atonement
free access would be opened to the throne of the Lord. The
second peculiarity in this act of atonement was the sprinkling of
the blood seven times upon the holy places, the floor of the holy
of holies and holy place, and the altar of the court ; also the
application of blood to the media of atonement in the three
divisions of the tabernacle, for the cleansing of the holy places
from the uncleanness of the children of Israel. As this un-
cleanness cannot be regarded as consisting of physical defilement,
but simply as the ideal effluence of their jsins, which had been
transferred to the objects in question ; so, on the other hand, the
cleansing of the holy places can only be understood as consisting
in an ideal transference of the influence of the atoning blood to
the inanimate objects which had been defiled by sin. If the
way in which the sacrificial blood, regarded as the expiation of
souls, produced its cleansing effects was, that by virtue thereof
the sin was covered over, whilst the sinner was reconciled to
God and received forgiveness of sin and the means of sanctifi-
cation, we must regard the sin-destroying virtue of the blood as
working in the same way also upon the objects defiled by sin,
namely, that powers were transferred to them which removed
the effects proceeding from sin, and in this way wiped out the
uncleanness of the children of Israel that was in them. This
communication of purifying powers to the holy things was
represented by the sprinkling of the atoning blood upon and
against them, and indeed by their being sprinkled seven times,
to set forth the communication as raised to an efficiency corre-
sponding to its purpose, and to impress upon it the stamp of a
divine act through the number seven, which was sanctified by
the work of God in creation.
Vers. 20-22. After the completion of the expiation and cleans-
ing of the holy things, Aaron was to bring up the live goat, t.e.
to have it brought before the altar of burnt-offering, and placing
both his hands upon its head, to confess all the sins and trans-
gressions of the children of Israel upon it, and so put them upon
its head. He was then to send the goat away into the desert by
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVI. 20-22. 403
a man who was standing ready, that it might carry all its sins
upon it into a land cut off ; and there the man was to set the
goat at liberty. W, airaj; \ey. from nj? an appointed time, sig-
nifies opportune, present at the right time, or ready, fTTO, which
is also met with in this passage alone, from itl to cut^ or cut off,
that which is severed, a country cut off from others, not con-
nected, by roads with any inhabited land. " The goat was not
to find its way back" (Knobet). To understand clearly the
meaning of this symbolical rite, we must start from the fact,
that according to the distinct words of ver. 5, the two goats were
to serve as a sin-offering (nttiarj?). They were both of them de-
voted, therefore, to one and the same purpose, as was pointed
out by the Talmudists, who laid down the law on that very
account, that they were to be exactly alike, colore, statura, et
valore. The living goat, therefore, is not to be regarded merely
as the bearer of the sin to be taken away, but as quite as truly a
sin-offering as the one that was slaughtered. It was appointed
VPJJ "IBS? (ver. 10), i.e. not that an expiatory rite might be per-
formed over it, for 7V with IBS always applies to the object of
the expiation, but properly to expiate it, i.e. to make it the object
of expiation, or make expiation with it. To this end the sins of
the nation were confessed upon it with the laying on of hands,
and thus symbolically laid upon its head, that it might bear them,
and when sent into the desert carry them away thither. The
sins, which were thus laid upon its head by confession, were the
sins of Israel, which had already been expiated by the sacrifice
of the other goat. To understand, however, how the sins already
expiated could still be confessed and laid upon the living goat, it is
not sufficient to say, with Bahr, that the expiation with blood repre-
sented merely a covering or covering up of the sin, and that in order
to impress upon the expiation the stamp of the greatest possible
completeness and perfection, a supplement was appended, which
represented the carrying away and removal of the sin. For in
the case of every sin-offering for the congregation, in addition to
the covering or forgiveness of sin represented by the sprinkling
of blood, the removal or abolition of it was also represented by
the burning of the flesh of the sacrifice ; and this took place in
the present instance also. As both goats were intended for a
sin-offering, the sins of the nation were confessed upon both, and
placed upon the heads of both by the laying on of hands ; though
Digitized by
Google
404 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
it is of the living goat only that this is expressly recorded, being
omitted in the case of the other, because the rule laid down in chap,
iv. 4 sqq. was followed. 1 By both Israel was delivered from all
sins and transgressions ; but by the one, upon which the lot " for
Jehovah" fell, it was so with regard to Jehovah ; by the other,
upon which the lot " for Azazel" fell, with regard to Azazel.
With regard to Jehovah, or in relation to Jehovah, the sins were
wiped away by the sacrifice of the goat ; the sprinkling of the
blood setting forth their forgiveness, and the burning of the
animal the blotting of them out ; and with this the separation of
the congregation from Jehovah because of its sin was removed,
and living fellowship with God restored. But Israel had also
been brought by its sin into a distinct relation to Azazel, the
head of the evil spirits ; and it was necessary that this should be
brought to an end, if reconciliation with God was to be per-
fectly secured. This complete deliverance from sin and its
author was symbolized in the leading away of the goat, which
had been laden with the sins, into the desert. This goat was to
take back the sins, which God had forgiven to His congregation,
into the desert to Azazel, the father of all sin, on the one hand
as a proof that his evil influences upon men would be of no avail
in the case of those who had received expiation from God, and
on the other hand as a proof to the congregation also that those
who were laden with sin could not remain in the kingdom of
God, but would be banished to the abode of evil spirits, unless
they were redeemed therefrom. This last point, it is true, is not
expressly mentioned in the text ; but it is evident from the fate
which necessarily awaited the goat, when driven into the wilder-
ness in the " land cut off." It would be sure to perish out there
in the desert, that is to say, to suffer just what a sinner would
have to endure if his sins remained upon him ; though probably
it is only a later addition, not founded in the law, which we find
in the Mishnah, Joma vi. 6, viz. that the goat was driven head-
long from a rock in the desert, and dashed to pieces at the foot.
1 The distinction, that in the case of all the other sacrifices ike (one)
hand is ordered to be laid upon the victim, whilst here both hands are ordered
to be laid upon the goat, does not constitute an essential difference, as Hof-
mann supposes; but the' laying on of both hands rendered the act more
solemn and expressive, in harmony with the solemnity of the whole proceed-
ing.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVI. 23-84. 405
There Is not the slightest idea of presenting a sacrifice to Azazel.
This goat was a sin-offering, only so far as it was laden with the
sins of the people to carry them away into the desert ; and in
this respect alone is there a resemblance between the two goats
and the two birds used in the purification of the leper (chap. xiv.
4 sqq.), of which the one to be set free was bathed in the blood
of the one that was hilled. In both cases the reason for making
use of two animals is to be found purely in the physical impos-
sibility of combining all the features, that had to be set forth in
the sin-offering, in one single animal.
Vers. 23-28. After the living goat had been sent away,
Aaron was to go into the tabernacle, i.e. the holy place of the
dwelling, and there take off his white clothes and lay them
down, i.e. put them away, because they were only to be worn in
the performance of the expiatory ritual of this day, and then
bathe his body in the holy place, i.e. in the court, in the laver
between the altar and the door of the dwelling, probably because
the act of laying the sins upon the goat rendered him unclean.
He was then to put on his clothes, i.e. the coloured state-dress of
the high priest, and to offer in this the burnt-offerings, for an
atonement for himself and the nation (see chap. i. 4), and to burn
the fat portions of the sin-offerings upon the altar. — Vers. 26
sqq. The man who took the goat into the desert, and those who
burned the two sin-offerings outside the camp (see at chap. iv.
11, 21), had also to wash their clothes and bathe their bodies
before they returned to the camp, because they had been defiled
by the animals laden with sin.
Vers. 29-34. General directions for ike yearly celebration of
the day of atonement. — It was to be kept on the tenth day of the
seventh month, as an " everlasting statute" (see at Ex. xii. 14).
On that day the Israelites were to ft afflict their souls," i.e. to
fast, according to chap, xxiii. 32, from the evening of the 9th
till the evening of the 10th day. Every kind of work was to
be suspended as on the Sabbath (Ex. xx. 10), by both natives
and foreigners (see Ex. xii. 49), because this day was a high
Sabbath (Ex. xxxi. 15). Both fasting and sabbatical rest are
enjoined again in chap, xxiii. 27 sqq. and Num. xxix. 7, on pain
of death. The fasting commanded for this day, the only fasting
prescribed in the law, is most intimately connected with the sig-
nification of the feast of atonement. If the general atonement
Digitized by
Google
406 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
made on this day was not to pass into a dead formal service, the
people must necessarily enter in spirit into the signification of
the act of expiation, prepare their souls for it with penitential
feelings, and manifest this penitential state by abstinence from the
ordinary enjoyments of life. To " afflict (bow, humble) the soul"
by restraining the earthly appetites, which have their seat in the
soul, is the early Mosaic expression for fasting (Dl¥). The latter
word came first of all into use in the time of the Judges (Judg.
xx. 26; ISam. vii. 6; cf. Ps. xxxv. 13: "I afflicted my soul
with fasting"). " By bowing his soul the Israelite was to place
himself in an inward relation to the sacrifice, whose soul was
given for his soul ; and by this state of mind, answering to the
outward proceedings of the day, he was to appropriate the fruit
of it to himself, namely, the reconciliation of his soul, which
passed through the animal's death" (Baumgarten). — Vers. 32 sqq.
In the future, the priest who was anointed and set apart for the
duty of the priesthood in his father's stead, i.e. the existing high
priest, was to perform the act of expiation in the manner pre-
scribed, and that " once a year." The yearly repetition of the
general atonement showed that the sacrifices of the law were not
sufficient to make the servant of God perfect according to his
own conscience. And this imperfection of the expiation, made
with the blood of bullocks and goats, could not fail to awaken
a longing for the perfect sacrifice of the eternal High Priest,
who has obtained eternal redemption by entering once, through
His own blood, into the holiest of all (Heb. ix. 7-12). And
just as this was effected negatively, so by the fact that the high
priest entered on this day into the holiest of all, as the represen-
tative of the whole congregation, and there, before the throne of
God, completed its reconciliation with Him, was the necessity
exhibited in a positive manner for the true reconciliation of
man, and his introduction into a perfect and abiding fellowship
with Him, and the eventual realization of this by the blood of
the Son of God, our eternal High Priest and Mediator, pro-
phetically foreshadowed. The closing words in ver. 34, " and he
(i.e. Aaron, to whom Moses was to communicate the instructions
of God concerning the feast of atonement, ver. 2) v did as the
Lord commanded Moses," are anticipatory in their character,
like Ex. xii. 50. For the law in question could not be carried
out till the seventh month of the current year, that is to say, as
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVII. 1, 2. 407
we find from a comparison of Num. x. 11 with Ex. xl. 17, not till
after the departure of Israel from Sinai.
II.— LAWS FOB THE SANCTIFICATION OF ISRAEL IN THE
COVENANT-FELLOWSHIP OF ITS GOD.
Chap. xvi*i.-xxv.
holiness op conduct on the part op the israelites. —
chap. xvii.-xx.
The contents of these four chapters have been very fittingly
summed up by Baumgarten in the following heading : " Israel
is not to walk in the way of the heathen and of the Oanaanites,
but in the ordinances of Jehovah," as all the commandments
contained in them relate to holiness of life.
Chap. xvii. Holiness op Food. — The Israelites were not
to slaughter domestic animals as food either within or outside
the camp, but before the door of the tabernacle, and as slain-
offerings, that the blood and fat might be offered to Jehovah.
They were not to sacrifice any more to field-devils (vers. 3-7),
and were to offer all their burnt-offerings or slain-offerings be-
fore the door of the tabernacle (vers. 8 and 9) ; and they were
not to eat either blood or carrion (vers. 10-16). These laws are
not intended simply as supplements to the food laws in chap. xi. ;
but they place the eating of food on the part of the Israelites in
the closest relation with their calling as the holy nation of
Jehovah, on the one hand to oppose an effectual barrier to the
inclination of the people to idolatrous sacrificial meals, on the
other hand to give a consecrated character to the food of the
people in harmony with their calling, that it might be received
with thanksgiving and sanctified with prayer (1 Tim. iv. 4, 5).
— Vers. 1, 2. The directions are given to " Aaron and his sons,
and all the children of Israel," because they were not only bind-
ing upon the nation generally, but upon the priesthood also ;
whereas the instructions in chap. xviii.-xx. are addressed to
" the children of Israel," or " the whole congregation" (chap.
Digitized by
Google
408 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
xviii. 2, xix. 2, xx. 2), just as special laws are laid down for the
priests in chap. xx. and xxi. with reference to the circum-
stances mentioned there.
Vers. 3-7. Whoever of the house of Israel slaughtered an
ox, sheep, or goat, either within or outside the camp, without
bringing the animal to the tabernacle, to offer a sacrifice there-
from to the Lord, " blood was to be reckoned to him ;" that is to
say, as the following expression, " he hath shed blood," shows,
such slaughtering was to be reckoned as the shedding of blood,
or blood-guiltiness, and punished with extermination (see Gen.
xvii. 14). The severity of this prohibition required some ex-
planation, and this is given in the reason assigned in vers. 5-7,
viz. " that the Israelites may bring their slain-offerings, which
they slay in the open field, before the door of the tabernacle, as
peace-offerings to Jehovah," and " no more offer their sacrifices
to the 0*?$?, after whom they go a whoring" (ver. 7). This
reason presupposes that the custom of dedicating the slain ani-
mals as sacrifices to some deity, to which a portion of them was
offered, was then widely spread among the Israelites. It had
probably been adopted from the Egyptians ; though this is not
expressly stated by ancient writers : Herodotus (i. 132) and
Strabo (xv. 732) simply mentioning it as a Persian custom,
whilst the law book of Manu ascribes it to the Indians. To
root out this idolatrous custom from among the Israelites, they
were commanded to slay every animal before the tabernacle, as
a sacrificial gift to Jehovah, and to bring the slain-offerings,
which they would have slain in the open field, to the priest at
the tabernacle, as shelamim (praise-offerings and thank-offer-
ings), that he might sprinkle the blood upon the altar, and burn
the fat as a sweet-smelling savour for Jehovah (see chap. iii.
2-5). " The face of the field" (ver. 5, as in chap. xiv. 7, 53) :
the open field, in distinction from the enclosed space of the court
of Jehovah's dwelling. " The altar of Jehovah" is spoken of in
ver. 6 instead of " the altar" only (chap. i. 5, xi. 15, etc.), on
account of the contrast drawn between it and the altars upon
which they offered sacrifice to Seirim. 8*?$?, literally goats, is
here used to signify damones (Vulg.), " field-devils" (Luther),
demons, like the one* in Deut. xxxii. 17, who were supposed to
inhabit the desert (Isa. xiii. 21, xxxiv. 14), and whose perni-
cious influence they sought to avert by sacrifices. The Israelites
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVII. 8-16. 409
had brought this superstition, and the idolatry to which it gave
rise, from Egypt. The Seirimwere the gods whom the Israelites
worshipped and went a whoring after in Egypt (Josh. xxiv. 14 ;
Ezek. xx. 7, xxiii. 3, 8, 19, 21, 27). Both the thing and the
name were derived from the Egyptians, who worshipped goats
as gods (Josephua c. Ap. 2, 7), particularly Pan, who was
represented in the form of a goat, a personification of the male
and fertilizing principle in nature, whom they called Mendes
and reckoned among the eight leading gods, and to whom they
had built a splendid and celebrated temple in Thmuis, the
capital of the Mendesian Nomos in Lower Egypt, and erected
statues in the temples in all directions (cf. Herod. 2, 42, 46 ;
Strabo, xvii. 802 ; Diod. Sic. i. 18). The expression " a statute
for ever" refers to the principle of the law, that sacrifices were
to be offered to Jehovah alone, and not to the law that every
animal was to be slain before the tabernacle, which was after-
wards repealed by Moses, when they were about to enter Ca-
naan, where it coidd no longer be carried out (Deut. xii. 15).
Vers. 8-16. To this there are appended three laws, which
are kindred in their nature, and which were binding not only
upon the Israelites, but also upon the foreigners who dwelt in
the midst of them. — Vers. 8, 9 contain the command, that who-
ever offered a burnt-offering or slain-offering, and did not bring
it to the tabernacle to prepare it for Jehovah there, was to be
exterminated ; a command which involved the prohibition of
sacrifice in any other place whatever, and was given, as the
further extension of this law in Deut. xii. clearly proves, for the
purpose of suppressing the disposition to offer sacrifice to other
gods, as well as in other places. In vers. 10-14 the prohibition
of the eating of blood is repeated, and ordered to be observed
on pain of extermination ; it is also extended to the strangers in
Israel ; and after a more precise explanation of the reason for
the law, is supplemented by instructions for the disposal of the
blood of edible game. God threatens that He will inflict the
punishment -Himself, because the eating of blood was a trans-
gression of the law which might easily escape the notice of the
authorities. " To set one's face against :" i.e. to judge. The
reason for the command in ver. 11, " For the soul of the flesh
(the soul which gives life to the flesh) is in the blood, and I «
have given it to you upon the altar, to make an atonement for
Digitized by
Google
410 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
your souls," is not a double one, viz. (1) because the blood con-
tained the soul of the animal, and (2) because God had set
apart the blood, as the medium of expiation for the human soul,
for the altar, i.e. to be sprinkled upon the altar. The first reason
simply forms the foundation for the second : God appointed the
blood for the altar, as containing the soul of the animal, to be
the medium of expiation for the souls of men, and therefore
prohibited its being used as food. u For the blood it expiates
by virtue of the soul," not " the soul" itself. 3 with 1B3 has
only a local or instrumental signification (chap. vi. 23, xvi. 17,
27 ; also vii. 7 ; Ex. xxix. 33 ; Num. v. 8). Accordingly, it was
not the blood as such, but the blood as the vehicle of the soul,
which possessed expiatory virtue ; because the animal soul was
offered to God upon the altar as a substitute for the human
soul. Hence every bleeding sacrifice had an expiatory force,
though without being an expiatory sacrifice in the strict sense of
the word. — Ver. 13. The blood also of such hunted game as was
edible, whether bird or beast, was not to be eaten either by the
Israelite or stranger, but to be poured out and covered with
earth. In Deut. xii. 16 and 24, where the command to slay all
the domestic animals at the tabernacle as slain-offerings is re-
pealed, this is extended to such domestic animals as were slaugh-
tered for food ; their blood also was not to be eaten, but to be
poured upon the earth u like water," i.e. not quasi rem profanam
et nullo ritu sacro (Rosenmuller, etc.), but like water which is
poured upon the earth, sucked in by it, and thus given back to
the womb of the earth, from which God had caused the animals
to come forth at their creation (Gen. i. 24). Hence pouring it
out upon the earth like water was substantially the same as
pouring it out and covering it with earth (cf. Ezek. xxiv. 7, 8) ;
and the purpose of the command was to prevent the desecra-
tion of the vehicle of the soulish life, which was sanctified as the
medium of expiation. — Ver. 14. "For as for the soul of all flesh
. . . its blood makes out its soul:" i.e. u this is the case with the
soul of all flesh, that it is its blood which makes out its soul."
iK»S33 is to be taken as a predicate in its meaning, introduced
with beth essentiale. It is only as so understood, that the clause
supplies a reason at all in harmony with the context. Because
the distinguishing characteristic of the blood was, that it was
the soul of the being when living in the flesh ; therefore it was
Digitized by
Google
CHAfr. xvirr. 411
not to be eaten in the case of any animal : and even in the case
of animals that were not proper for sacrifice, it was to be allowed
to run out upon the ground, and then covered with earth, or,
so to speak, buried. 1 — Lastly (vers. 15, 16), the prohibition
against eating " that which died" (xi. 39, 40), or " that which
was torn" (Ex. xxii. 30), is renewed and supplemented by the
law, that whoever, either of the natives or of foreigners, should
eat the flesh of that which had fallen (died a natural death), or
had been torn in pieces by wild beasts (sc. thoughtlessly or in
ignorance ; cf . chap. v. 2), and neglected the legal purification
afterwards, was to bear his iniquity (chap. v. 1). Of course the
flesh intended is that of animals which were clean, and there-
fore allowable as food, when properly slaughtered, and which
became unclean simply from the fact, that when they had died
a natural death, or had been torn to pieces by wild beasts, the
blood remained in the flesh, or did not flow out in a proper
manner. According to Ex. xxii. 30, the rou (that which
had fallen) was to be thrown to the dogs ; but in Deut. xiv. 21
permission is given either to sell it or give it to a stranger or
alien, to prevent the plea that it was a pity that such a thing
should be entirely wasted, and so the more effectually to secure
the observance of the command, that it was not to be eaten by
an Israelite.
Chap, xviii. Holiness of the Marriage Relation. — The
prohibition of incest and similar sensual abominations is intro-
duced with a general warning as to the licentious customs of the
Egyptians and Canaanites, and an exhortation to walk in the
1 On the truth which lay at the foundation of this idea of the unity of
the soul and blood, which others of the ancients shared with the Hebrews,
particularly the early Greek philosophers, see Delitzsch's bibl. Psychol, pp.
242 sqq. " It seems at first sight to be founded upon no other reason,
than that a sudden diminution of the quantity of the blood is sure to cause
death. But this phenomenon rests upon the still deeper ground, that all
the activity of the body, especially that of the nervous and muscular sys-
tems, is dependent upon the circulation of the blood ; for if the flow of
blood is stopped from any part of the body, all its activity ceases imme-
diately ; a sensitive part loses all sensation in a very few minutes, and mus-
cular action is entirely suspended. . . . The blood is really the basis of the
physical life ; and so far the soul, as the vital principle of the body, is pre-
eminently in the blood" (p. 245).
Digitized by
Google
412 THE THIBD BOOK OF MOSES.
judgments and ordinances of Jehovah (vers. 2-5), and is brought
to a close with a threatening allusion to the consequences of all
such defilements (vers. 24-30). — Vers. 1-5. By the words, "I
am Jehovah your God," which are placed at the head and re-
peated at the close (ver. 30), the observance of the command is
enforced upon the people as a covenant obligation, and urged
upon them most strongly by the promise, that through the ob-
servance of the ordinances and judgments of Jehovah they
should live (ver. 5). — Ver. 5. " The man who does them (the
ordinances of Jehovah) shall live (gain true life) through them "
(see at Ex. i. 16 and Gen. iii. 22).
Vers. 6-18. The laws against incest are introduced in ver. 6
with the general prohibition, descriptive of the nature of this
sin, " None of you shall approach Vifc>3 ikbtps^k to any flesh of
his flesh, to uncover nakedness." The difference between "W
flesh, and "^3 flesh, is involved in obscurity, as both words are
used in connection with edible flesh (see the Lexicons). " Flesh
of his flesh " is a flesh that is of his own flesh, belongs to the
same flesh as himself (Gen. ii. 24), and is applied to a blood-
relation, blood-relationship being called 'TWE' (or flesh-kindred)
in Hebrew (ver. 17). Sexual intercourse is called uncovering
the nakedness of another (Ezek. xvi. 36, xxiii. 18). The prohi-
bition relates to both married and unmarried intercourse, though
the reference is chiefly to the former (see ver. 18, chap. xx. 14,
17, 21). Intercourse is forbidden (1) with a mother, (2) with
a step-mother, (3) with a sister or half-sister, (4) with a grand-
daughter, the daughter of either son or daughter, (5) with the
daughter of a step-mother, (6) with an aunt, the sister of either
father or mother, (7) with the wife of an uncle on the father's
side, (8) with a daughter-in-law, (9) with a sister-in-law, or
brother's wife, (10) with a woman and her daughter, or a woman
and her granddaughter, and (11) with two sisters at the same
time. No special reference is made to sexual intercourse with
(a) a daughter, (b) a full sister, (c) a mother-in-law; the last,
however, which is mentioned in Deut. xxvii. 23 as an accursed
crime, is included here in No. 10, arid the second in No. 3, whilst
the first, like parricide in Ex. xxi. 15, is not expressly noticed,
simply because the crime was regarded as one that never could
occur. Those mentioned under Nos. 1, 2, 3, 8, and 10 were to
be followed by the death or extermination of the criminals (chap.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVIII. 6-18. 413
xx. 11, 12, 14, 17), on account of their being accursed crimes
(Deut. xxiii. 1, xxvii. 20, 22, 23). On the other hand, the only-
threat held out in the case of the connection mentioned under
Nos. 6, 7, and 9, was that those who committed such crimes
should bear their iniquity, or die childless (chap. xx. 19-21).
The cases noticed under Nos. 4 and 5 are passed over in chap.
xx., though they no doubt belonged to the crimes which were to
be punished with death, and No. 11, for which no punishment
was fixed, because the wrong had been already pointed out in
ver. 18. 1
The enumeration of the different cases commences in ver. 7
very appropriately with the prohibition of incest with a mother.
Sexual connection with a mother is called "uncovering the
nakedness of father and mother." As husband and wife are
one flesh (Gen. ii. 24), the nakedness of the husband is un-
covered in that of his wife, or, as it is described in Deut. xxii.
30, xxvii. 20, the wing, i.e. the edge, of the bedclothes of the
father's bed, as the husband spreads his bedclothes over his
wife as well as himself (Ruth iii. 9). Ilor, strictly speaking,
nriy rf?i is only used with reference to the wife; but in the
dishonouring of his wife the honour of the husband is violated
1 The marriage laws and customs were much more lax among the Gen-
tiles. With the Egyptians it was lawful to marry sisters and half-sisters
(Diod. Sic. i. 27), and the licentiousness of the women was very great
among them (see at Gen. xxxix. 6 sqq.). With the Persians marriage was
allowed with mother, daughter, and sister (Clem. Al. strom. iii. p. 431;
Eusebii prtep. ev. vi. 10) ; and this is also said to have been the case with
the Medians, Indians, and Ethiopians, as well as with the Assyrians (Jerome
adv. Jovin. ii. 7 ; Lucian, Sacriff. 5) ; whereas the Greeks and Romans ab-
horred such marriages, and the Athenians and Spartans only permitted mar-
riages with half-sisters (cf. Selden de jure not. et gent. v. 11, pp. 619 sqq.).
The ancient Arabs, before the time of Mohammed, were very strict in this
respect, and would not allow of marriage with a mother, daughter, or aunt
on either the father's or mother's side, or with two sisters at the same time.
The only cases on record of marriage between brothers and sisters are among
the Arabs of Marbat (Seetzen, ZacWs Mon. Corresp. Oct. 1809). This custom
Mohammed raised into a law, and extended it to nieces, nurses, foster-
sisters, etc. (Koran, Sure ir. 20 sqq.).
Elaborate commentaries upon this chapter are to be found in Michaelis
Abhandl. iiber die Ehegesetze Mosis, and his Mos. Recht ; also in Saalschiitz
Mos. Recht. See also my Archdologie ii. p. 108. For the rabbinical laws
and those of the Talmud, see Selden uzorebr. lib. 1, c. 1 sqq., and Saalschiitz
ut sup.
Digitized by
Google
414 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
also, and his bed defiled, Gen. xlix. 4. It is wrong, therefore,
to interpret the verse, as Jonathan and Clericu* do, as relating
to carnal intercourse between a daughter and father. Not only
is this at variance with the circumstance that all these laws are
intended for the man alone, and addressed expressly to him, but
also with ver. 8, where the nakedness of the father's wife is
distinctly called the father's shame. — Ver. 8. Intercourse with a
father's wife, i.e. with a step-mother, is forbidden as uncovering
the father's nakedness; since a father's wife stood in blood-
relationship only to the son whose mother she was. But for the
father's sake her nakedness was to be inaccessible to the son, and
uncovering it was to be punished with death as incest (chap.
xx. 11 ; Deut. xxvii. 20). By the "father's wife" we are pro-
bably to understand not merely his full lawful wife, but his
concubine also, since the father's bed was defiled in the latter
case no less than in the former (Gen. xlix. 4), and an accursed
crime was committed, the punishment of which was death. At
all events, it cannot be inferred from chap. xix. 20-22 and Ex.
xxi. 9, as Knobel supposes, that a milder punishment was inflicted
in this case. — Ver. 9. By the sister, the daughter of father or
mother, we are to understand only the step- or half-sister, who
had either the same father or the same mother as the brother
had. The'dause, "whether born at home or born abroad" does
not refer to legitimate or illegitimate birth, but is to be taken as
a more precise definition of the words, daughter of thy father or
of thy mother, and understood, as Dud. de D t ieu supposes, as
referring to the half-sister " of the first marriage, whether the
father's daughter left by a deceased wife, or the mother's
daughter left by a deceased husband," so that the person marry-
ing her would be a son by a second marriage. Sexual inter-
course with a half-sister is described as 1DH in chap. xx. 17, and
threatened with extermination. This word generally signifies
sparing love, favour, grace ; but here, as in Prov. xiv. 34, it
means dishonour, shame, from the Piel 1?n, to dishonour. — Ver.
10. The prohibition of marriage with a granddaughter, whether
the daughter of a son or daughter, is explained in the words,
" for they are thy nakedness," the meaning of which is, that as
they were directly descended from the grandf ather, carnal inter-
course with them would be equivalent to dishonouring his own
flesh and blood. — Ver. 11. u The daughter of thy father's wife
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVIII. 6-18. 415
(t.e. thy step-mother), born to thy father" is the half-sister by a
second marriage ; and the prohibition refers to the son by a first
marriage, whereas ver. 9 treats of the son by a second marriage.
The notion that the man's own mother is also included, and that
the prohibition includes marriage with a full sister, is at variance
with the usage of the expression " thy father's wife." — Vers. ] 2
and 13. Marriage or conjugal intercourse with the sister of either
father or mother (i.e. with either the paternal or maternal aunt)
was prohibited, because she was the blood-relation of the father
or mother. iKE'="ifc'3 ">KB> (ver. 6, as in chap. xx. 19, xxi. 2, Num.
xxvii. 11), hence •TJN?', blood-relationship (ver. 17). — Ver. 14.
So, again, with the wife of the father's brother, because the
nakedness of the uncle was thereby uncovered. The threat held
out in chap. xx. 19 and 20 against the alliances prohibited in
vers. 12-14, is that the persons concerned should bear their
iniquity or sin, i.e. should suffer punishment in consequence (see
at chap. v. 1) ; and in the last case it is stated that they should
die childless. From this it is obvious that sexual connection
with the sister of either father or mother was not to be punished
with death by the magistrate, but would be punished with
disease by God Himself. — Ver. 15. Sexual connection with a
daughter-in-law, a son's wife, is called ?3Fi in chap. xx. 12, and
threatened with death to both the parties concerned. ?3R, from
/v3 to mix, to confuse, signifies a sinful mixing up or confusing
of the divine ordinances by unnatural unchastity, like the lying
of a woman with a beast, which is the only other connection in
which the word occurs (ver. 23). — Ver. 16. Marriage with a
• brother's wife was a sin against the brother's nakedness, a sexual
defilement, which God would punish with barrenness. This
prohibition, however, only refers to cases in which the deceased
brother had left children; for if he had died childless, the
brother not only might, but was required to marry his sister-in-
law (Deut. xxv. 5). — Ver. 17. Marriage with a woman and her
daughter, whether both together or in succession, is described
in Deut. xxvii. 20 as an accursed lying with the mother-in-law;
whereas here it is the relation to the step-daughter which is
primarily referred to, as we may see from the parallel prohibi-
tion, which is added, against taking the daughter of her son or
daughter, i.e. the granddaughter-in-law. Both of these were
crimes against bloodrrelationship which were to be punished with
Digitized by
Google
416 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
death in the case of both parties (chap. xx. 14), because they
w.ere u wickedness," net, lit. invention, design, here applied to
the crime of licentiousness and whoredom (chap. xix. 29 ; Judg.
xx. 6 ; Job xxxi. 11.) — Ver. 18. Lastly, it was forbidden to
take a wife to her sister (HvV upon her, as in Gen. xxviii. 9,
xxxi. 50) in her life-time, that is to say, to marry two sisters at
the same time, "rw " to pack together, to uncover their naked-
ness," i.e. to pack both together into one marriage bond, and so
place the sisters in carnal union through their common husband,
and disturb the sisterly relation, as the marriage with two sisters
that was forced upon Jacob had evidently done. No punish-
ment is fixed for the marriage with two sisters ; and, of course,
after the death of the first wife a man was at liberty to many
her sister.
Vers. 19-23. Prohibition of other kinds of unchastity and of
unnatural crimes. — Ver. 19 prohibits intercourse with a woman
during her uncleanness. <i$Dia rn: signifies the uncleanness of
a woman's hemorrhage, whether menstruation or after child-
birth, which is called in chap. xii. 7, xx. 18, the fountain of
bleeding. The guilty persons were both of them to be cut off
from their nation according to chap. xx. 18, i.e. to be punished
with death. — Ver. 20. " To a neighbour's wife thou shalt not
give , I'! , ?3?' thy pouring as seed " (i.e. make her pregnant), " to
defile thyself with her," viz. by the etnissio seminis (chap. xv.
16, 17), a defilement which was to be punished as adultery by
the stoning to death of both parties (chap. xx. 10 ; Deut. xxii.
22, cf. John ix. 5). — Ver. 21. To bodily unchastity there is
appended a prohibition of spiritual whoredom. " Thou shalt not
give of thy seed to cause to pass through (sc. the fire ; Deut. xviii.
10) for Moloch." *I?ten is constantly written with the article:
it is rendered by the LXX. apxpv both here and in chap. xx.
2 sqq., but 6 Mo~K6% fiaaiXev? in other places (2 Kings xxiii.
10 ; Jer. xxxii. 35). Moloch was an old Canaanitish idol, called
by the Phoenicians and Carthaginians Melkarth, Baal^meleek,
Malcom, and other such names, and related to Baal, a sun-god
worshipped, like Kronos and Saturn, by the sacrifice of children.
It was represented by a brazen statue, which was hollow and
capable of being heated, and formed with a bull's head, and
arms stretched out to receive the children to be sacrificed. From
the time of Ahaz children were slain at Jerusalem in the valley
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVIII. 19-28. 417
of Ben-Hinnom, and then sacrificed by being laid in the heated
arms and burned (Ezek. xvi. 20, 21, xx. 31; Jer. xxxii. 35; 2
Kings xxiii. 10,. xvi. 3, xvii. 17, xxi. 6, cf. Ps. cvi. 37, 38).
Now although this offering of children in the valley of Ben-
Hinnom is called a " slaughtering " by Ezekiel (chap. xvi. 21),
and a " burning through (in the) fire " by Jeremiah (chap. vii.
31), and although, in the times of the later kings, children were
actually given up to Moloch and burned as slain-offerings, even >
among the Israelites; it by no means follows from this, that
" passing through to Moloch," or "passing through the fire," or
" passing through the fire to Moloch " (2 Kings xxiii. 10),
signified slaughtering and burning with fire, though this has
been almost unanimously assumed since the time of Clericus.
But according to the unanimous explanation of the Rabbins,
fathers, and earlier theologians, " causing to pass through the
fire " denoted primarily going through the fire without burning,
a februation, or purification through fire, by which the children
were consecrated to Moloch ; a kind of fire-baptism, which pre-
ceded the sacrificing, and was performed, particularly in olden
time, without actual sacrificing, or slaying and burning. For
februation was practised among the most different nations with-
out being connected with human sacrifices; and, like most of the
idolatrous rites of the heathen, no doubt the worship of Moloch
assumed different forms at different times and among different
nations. If the Israelites had really sacrificed their children to
Moloch, i.e. had slain and burned them, before the time of Ahaz,
the burning would certainly have been mentioned before ; for
Solomon had built a high place upon the mountain to the east
of Jerusalem for Moloch, the abomination of the children of
Ammon, to please his foreign wives (1 Kings xi. 7 : see the Art.
Moloch in Herzotfs Cycl.). This idolatrous worship was to be
punished with death by stoning, as a desecration of the name of
Jehovah, and a defiling of His sanctuary (chap. xx. 3), i.e. as a
practical contempt of the manifestations of the grace of the
living God (chap. xx. 2, 3). — Vers. 22, 23. Lastly, it was for-
bidden to " lie with mankind as with womankind," i.e. to com-
mit the crime of pcederastia, that sin of Sodom (Gen. xix. 5),
to which the whole of the heathen were more or less addicted
(Bom. i. 27), and from which even the Israelites did not keep
themselves free (Judg. xix. 22 sqq.); or to "lie with any beast."
PENT. — VOL. ir. 2 D
Digitized by
Google
418 THE THIRD BOOR OF MOSES.
" Into no beast shalt thou give thine emission of seed, . . . and
a woman shall not place herself before a beast to lie down
thereto." 2?"} = r?"J " to lie," is the term used particularly to
denote a crime of this description (chap. xx. 13 and 15, 16, cf.
Ex. xxii. 18). Lying with animals was connected in Egypt
with the worship of the goat ; at Mendes especially, where the
women lay down before he-goats (Herodotus, 2, 46 ; Strabo, 17,
p. 802). Aelian (not. an. vii. 19) relates an account of the
crime being also committed with a dog in Borne ; and according
to Sonnini, R. 11, p. 330, in modern Egypt men are said to lie
even with female crocodiles.
Vers. 24-30. In the concluding exhortation God pointed
expressly to the fact, that the nations which He was driving out
before the Israelites (the participle OpB'p is used of that which
is certainly and speedily coming to pass) had defiled the land
by such abominations as those, that He had visited their iniquity
and the land had spat out its inhabitants, and warned the
Israelites to beware of these abominations, that the land might
not spit them out as it had the Canaanites before them. The
pret. Ni?pn (ver. 25) and HKjj (ver. 28) are prophetic (cf. chap. xx.
22, 23), and the expression is poetical. The land is personified
as a living creature, which violently rejects food that it dislikes.
"Hoc enim tropo vult significare Scriptnra erwrmitatem criminum,
quod scilicet ipsce creaturw irrationales suo creatori semper
obedientes et pro illo pugnantes detestentur peccatores tales eosque
terra quasi evomat, cum illi expelhmtur ab ea" (C. a Lap.).
Chap. xix. Holiness of Behaviour towards God and
Man. — However manifold the commandments, which are grouped
together rather according to a loose association of ideas than
according to any logical arrangement, they are all linked to-
gether by the common purpose expressed in ver. 2 in the words,
" Ye shall be holy, for I am holy, Jehovah your God" The
absence of any strictly logical arrangement is to be explained
chiefly from the nature of the object, and the great variety of
circumstances occurring in life which no casuistry can fully
exhaust, so that any attempt to throw light upon these relations
must consist more or less of the description of a series of concrete
events. — Vers. 2-8. The commandment in ver. 2, u to be holy
as God. is holy," expresses on the one hand the principle upon
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIX 9-18. 419
which all the different commandments that follow were based,
and on the other hand the goal which the Israelites were to
keep before them as the nation of Jehovah. — Ver. 3. The first
thing required is reverence towards parents and the observance
of the Lord's Sabbaths,— the two leading pillars of the moral
government, and of social well-being. To fear father and
mother answers to the honour commanded in the decalogue to
be paid to parents ; and in the observance of the Sabbaths the
labour connected with a social calling is sanctified to the Lord
God. — Ver. 4 embraces the first two commandments of the
decalogue: viz. not to turn to idols to worship them (Deut.
xxxi. 18, 20), nor to make molten gods (see at Ex. xxxiv. 17).
The gods beside Jehovah are called elilim, i.e. nothings, from
their true nature. — Vers. 5-8. True fidelity to Jehovah was to
be shown, so far as sacrifice, the leading form of divine worship,
was concerned', in the fact, that the holiness of the sacrificial
flesh was strictly preserved in the sacrificial meals, and none of
the flesh of the peace-offerings eaten on the third day. To this
end the command in chap. vii. 15-18 is emphatically repeated,
and transgressors are threatened with extermination. On the
singular Kfe* in ver. 8, see at Gen. xxvii. 29, and for the expres-
sion "shall be cut off," Gen. xvii. 14.
Vers. 9-18. Laws concerning the conduct towards one's
neighbour, which should flow from unselfish love, especially
with regard to the poor and distressed. — Vers. 9, 10. In reap-
ing the field, " thou shalt not finish to reap the edge of thy
field," i.e. not reap the field to the extreme edge ; " neither
shalt thou hold a gathering up (gleaning) of thy harvest," i.e. not
gather together the ears left upon the field in the reaping. In
the vineyard and olive-plantation, also, they were not to have
any gleaning, or gather up what was strewn about (peret sig-
nifies the grapes and olives that had fallen off), but to leave
them for the distressed and the foreigner, that he might also
share in the harvest and gathering. DT3, lit. a noble plantation,
generally signifies a vineyard ; but it is also applied to an olive-
plantation (Judg. xv. 5), and here it is to be understood of both.
For when this command is repeated in Deut. xxiv. 20, 21, both
vineyards and olive-plantations are mentioned. When the olives
had been gathered by being knocked off with sticks, the custom
of shaking the boughs ("*■) to get at those olives which could
Digitized by
Google
420 THE THIKD BOOK OF MOSES.
not be reached with the sticks was expressly forbidden, in the
interest of the strangers, orphans, and widows, 'as well as glean-
ing after the vintage. The command with regard to the corn-
harvest is repeated again in the law for the feast of Weeks or
Harvest Feast (cbap. xxiii. 20) ; and in Dent. xxiv. 19 it is ex-
tended, quite in the spirit of our law, so far as to forbid fetching
a sheaf that bad been overlooked in the field, and to order it to
be left for the needy. (Compare with this Deut. xxiii. 25, 26.)
— Vers. 11 sqq. The Israelites were not to steal (Ex. xx. 15);
nor to deny, viz. anything entrusted to them or found (chap. v.
21 sqq.) ; nor to lie to a neighbour, i.e. with regard to property
or goods, for the purpose of overreaching and cheating him ; nor
to swear by the name of Jehovah to lie and defraud, and so
profane the name of God (see Ex. xx. 7, 16) ; nor to oppress
and rob a neighbour (cf. chap. v. 21), by the unjust abstraction
or detention of what belonged to him or was due to him, — for
example, they were not to keep the wages of a day-labourer
over night, but to pay him every day before sunset (Deut. xxiv.
14, 15). — Ver. 14. They were not to do an injury to an infirm
person : neither to ridicule or curse the deaf, who could not
hear the ridicule or curse, and therefore could not defend him-
self (Ps. xxxviii. 15) ; nor " to put a stumblingblock before
the blind," i.e. to put anything in his way over which he might
stumble and fall (compare Deut. xxvii. 18, where a curse is pro-
nounced upon the man who should lead the blind astray). Bnt
they were to " fear before God," who hears, and sees, and will
punish every act of wrong (cf. ver. 32, xxv. 17, 36, 43).—
Ver. 15. In judgment, i.e. in the administration of justice, they
were to do no unrighteousness : neither to respect the person of
the poor (wpoaairop Xafifidveiv, to do anything out of regard to
a person, used in a good sense in Gen. xix. 21, in a bad sense
here, namely, to act partially from unmanly pity) ; nor to adorn
the person of the great (i.e. powerful, distinguished, exalted),
i.e. to favour him in a judicial decision (see at Ex. xxiii. 3).—
Ver. 16. They were not to go about as calumniators among their
countrymen, to bring their neighbour to destruction (Ezek. xxii.
9) ; nor to set themselves against the blood of a neighbour, i.e. to
seek his life. ^n does not mean calumny, but, according to its
formation, a calumniator (Ewald, § 149e). — Ver. 17. They were
not to cherish hatred in their hearts towards their brother, but
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIX 19-82. 421
to admonish a neighbour, i.e. to tell him openly what they had
against him, and reprove him for his conduct, just as Christ
teaches His disciples in Matt, xviii. 15-17, and " not to load a
sin upon themselves." Ktpn v?y Kfeo does not mean to have to
bear, or atone for a sin on his account (Onkeloa, Knobel, etc.),
but, as in. chap. xxii. 9, Num. xviii. 32, to bring sin upon one's
self, which one then has to bear, or atone for ; so also in Num.
xviii. 22, twin nKk>, from which the meaning " to bear," i.e. atone
for sin, or suffer its consequences, was first derived. — Ver. 18.
Lastly, they were not to avenge themselves, or bear malice
against the sons of their nation (their countrymen), but to love
their neighbour as themselves. "itti to watch for (Song of Sol.
i. 6, viii. 11, 12), hence (= Ttfpetv) to cherish a design upon a
person, or bear him malice (Ps. ciii. 9 ; Jer. Hi. 5, 12 ; Nahum
i. 2).
Vers. 19-32. The words, " Ye shall keep My statutes," open
the second series of commandments, which make it a duty on
the part of the people of God to keep the physical and moral
order of the world sacred.' This series begins in ver. 19 with
the commandment not to mix the things which are separated in
the creation of God. " Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with
a diverse kind : thou shalt not sow thy field with two kinds of
seed, or put on a garment of mixed stuff." Q^?3, from K?3
separation, signifies dim res diversi generis, heterogenece, and is a
substantive in the accusative, giving a more precise definition.
»DJK5> is in apposition to DW? "^ an< i according to Deut. xxii.
11 refers to cloth or a garment woven of wool and flax, to a
mixed fabric therefore. The etymology is obscure, and the
rendering given by the LXX., iclj38ijhov } i.e. forged, not genu-
ine, is probably merely a conjecture based upon the context.
The word is probably derived from the Egyptian ; although the
attempt to explain it from the Coptic has not been so far satis-
factory. In Deut. xxii. 9-11, instead of the field, the vineyard
is mentioned, as that which they were not to sow with things of
two kinds, i.e. so that a mixed produce should arise ; and the
threat is added, " that thy fulness (full fruit, Ex. xxii. 28), the
seed, and the produce of the vineyard (t.«. the corn and wine
grown upon the vineyard) may not become holy" (cf. chap,
xxvii. 10, 21), i.e. fall to the sanctuary for its servants. It is
also forbidden to plough with an ox and ass together, i.e. to yoke
Digitized by
Google
422 THE THIBD BOOK OF HOSES.
them to the same plough. By these laws the observance of the
natural order and separation of things is made a duty binding
upon the Israelites, the people of Jehovah, as a divine ordi-
nance founded in the creation itself (Gen. i. 11, 12, 21, 24, 25).
All the symbolical, mystical, moral, and utilitarian reasons that
have been supposed to lie at the foundation of these commands,
are foreign to the spirit of the law. And with regard to the
observance of them, the statement of Josephus and the Rabbins,
that the dress of the priests, as well as the tapestries and cur-
tains of the tabernacle, consisted of wdbl and linen, is founded
upon the assumption, which cannot be established, that #B>,
/3v<rao<}, is' a term applied to linen. The mules frequently men-
tioned, e.g. in 2 Sam. xiii. 29, xviii. 9, 1 Kings i. 33, may have
been imported from abroad, as we may conclude from 1 Kings
x. 25. — Vers. 20-22. Even the personal rights of slaves were
to be upheld ; and a maid, though a slave, was not to be de-
graded to the condition of personal property. If any one lay
with a woman who was a slave and betrothed to a man, but
neither redeemed nor emancipated, the punishment of death was
not to be inflicted, as in the case of adultery (chap. xx. 10), or
the seduction of a free virgin who was betrothed (Deut. xxii.
23 sqq.), because she was not set free ; but scourging was to be
inflicted, and the guilty person was also to bring a trespass-
offering for the expiation of his sin against God (see at chap,
v. 15 sqq.). rffl'iru, .from Tin carpere, lit. plucked, i.e. set apart,
betrothed to a man, not abandoned or despised, rnan redeemed,
HK'sn emancipation without purchase, — the two ways in which a
slave could obtain her freedom, rn'pa, air. Xey., from "ig? to
examine (chap. xiii. 36), lit. investigation, then punishment,
chastisement. This referred to both parties, as is evident from
the expression, " they shall not be put to death ;" though it is
not more precisely defined. According to the Mishnah, KeriiJi.
ii. 4, the punishment of the woman consisted of forty stripes. —
Vers. 23-25. The garden-fruit was also to be sanctified to the
Lord. When the Israelites had planted all kinds of fruit-trees
in the land of Canaan, they were to treat the fruit of every tree
as uncircumcised for the first three years, i.e. not to eat it, as
being uncircumcised. The singular suffix in ^^r refers to ?3,
and the verb Tip is a denom. from iyip, to make into a foreskin,
to treat as uncircumcised, i.e. to throw away as unclean or un-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIX. 26-31 423
eatable. The reason for this command is not to be sought for
in the fact, that in the first three years fruit-trees bear only a
little fruit, and that somewhat insipid, and that if the blossom
or fruit is broken off the first year, the trees will bear all the
more plentifully afterwards (Aben Esra, Clericw, J. D. Mich.),
though this end would no doubt be thereby attained ; but it rests
rather upon ethical grounds. Israel was to treat the fruits of
horticulture with the most careful regard as a gift of God, and
sanctify the enjoyment of them by a thank-offering. In the
fourth year the whole of the fruit was to be a holiness of praise
for Jehovah, i.e. to be offered to the Lord as a holy sacrificial
gift, in praise and thanksgiving for the blessing which He had
bestowed upon the fruit-trees. This offering falls into the
category of first-fruits, and was no doubt given up entirely to
the Lord for the servants of the altar ; although the expression
DWSi nfc>y (Judg. ix. 27) seems to point to sacrificial meals of
the first-fruits, that had already been reaped : and this is the
way in which Josephus has explained the command (Ant. iv. 8,
19). For (ver. 25) they were not to eat the fruits till the fifth
year, " to add (increase) its produce to you," viz. by the blessing
of God, not by breaking off the fruits that might set in the first
years.
Vers. 26-32. The Israelites were to abstain from all un-
natural, idolatrous, and heathenish conduct. — Ver. 26. "Ye
shall not eat upon blood " (-V as in Ex. xii. 8, referring to the
basis of the eating), i.e. no flesh of which blood still lay at the
foundation, which was not entirely cleansed from blood (cf . 1
Sam. xiv. 32). These words were not a mere repetition of the
law against eating blood (chap. xvii. 10), but a strengthening of
the law. Not only were they to eat no blood, but no flesh to
which any blood adhered. They were also " to practise no kind
of incantations." BTU : from tfro to whisper (see Gen. xliv. 5), or,
according to some, a denom. verb from E>ro a serpent ; literally,
to prophesy from observing snakes, then to prophesy from
auguries generally, augurari. $1> a denom. verb, not from JJP
a cloud, with the signification to prophesy from the motion of the
clouds, of which there is not the slightest historical trace in
Hebrew ; but, as the Rabbins maintain, from TM an eye, literally,
to ogle, then to bewitch with an evil eye. — Ver. 27. " Ye shall
not round the border of your head:" i.e. not cut the hair in a
Digitized by
Google
424 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
circle from one temple to the other, as some of the Arab tribes
did, according to Herodotus (3, 8), in honour of their god
'Oporak, whom he identifies with the Dionysos of the Greeks.
In Jer. ix. 25, xxv. 23, xlix. 32, the persons who did this are
called ilKD 'VWjS, round-cropped, from their peculiar tonsure.
" Neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard" sc. by cutting
it off (cf. chap. xxi. 5), which PUny reports some of the Arabs
to have done, barba abraditur, prceterquam in superiore labro,
aliis et hcec intonsa, whereas the modern Arabs either wear a
short moustache, or shave off the beard altogether (Niebuhr,
Arab. p. 68). — Ver. 28. " Ye shall not make cuttings on your
flesh (body) on account of a soul, i.e. a dead person (Bfe? =
np E>W, chap. xxi. 11, Num. vi. 6, or np, Deut. xiv. 1 ; so again
in chap. xxii. 4, Num. v. 2, ix. 6, 7, 10), nor make engraven (or
branded) writing upon yourselves" Two prohibitions of an un-
natural disfigurement of the body. The first refers to passionate
outbursts of mourning, common among the excitable nations of
the East, particularly in the southern parts, and to the custom of
scratching the arms, hands, and face (Deut. xiv. 1), which is said
to have prevailed among the Babylonians and Armenians (Cyrop.
iii. 1, 13, iii. 3, 67), the Scythians (Herod. 4, 71), and even the
ancient Romans (cf. M. Geier de Ebrceor. luctu, c. 10), and to
be still practised by the Arabs (Arvieux Beduinen, p. 153), the
Persians (Morier Zweite Seise, p. 189), and the Abyssinians of
the present day, and which apparently held its ground among the
Israelites notwithstanding the prohibition (cf . Jer. xvi. 6, xli. 5,
xlvii. 5), — as well as to the custom, which is also forbidden in
chap. xxi. 5 and Deut. xiv. 1, of cutting off the hair of the head
and beard (cf. Isa. iii. 24, xxii. 12 ; Micah i. 16 ; Amos viii. 10;
Ezek. vii. 18). It cannot be inferred from the Words of Plu-
tarch, quoted by Spencer, oo«owTe? j(ap(%eo-9ai rots TereXewnj-
icbatv, that the heathen associated with this custom the idea of
making an expiation to the dead. The prohibition of W&?_ t W a ,
scriptio stigmatis, writing corroded or branded (see Ges. thes.
pp. 1207-8), i.e. of tattooing, — a custom not only very common
among the savage tribes, but still met with in Arabia (Arvieux
Beduinen, p. 155 ; Burckhardt Beduinen, pp. 40, 41) and in Egypt
among both men and women of the lower orders (Lane, Manners
and Customs i. pp. 25, 35, iii. p. 169), — had no reference to
idolatrous usages, but was intended to inculcate upon the Israel-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIX. 26-32. 425
ites a proper reverence for God's creation. — Ver. 29. " Do not
prostitute thy daughter, to cause her to be a whore, lest the land
/all to whoredom, and the land become full of vice " (zimmah :
see chap, xviii. 17). The reference is not to spiritual whoredom
or idolatry (Ex. xxxiv. 16), but to fleshly whoredom, the word
zimmah being only used in this connection. If a father caused
his daughter to become a prostitute, immorality would soon be-
come predominant, and the land (the population of the land)
fall away to whoredom. — Ver. 30. The exhortation now returns
to the chief point, the observance of the Lord's Sabbaths and
reverence for His sanctuary, which embrace the true method
of divine worship as laid down in the ritual commandments.
When the Lord's day is kept holy, and a holy reverence for the
Lord's sanctuary lives in the heart, not only are many sins
avoided, but social and domestic life is pervaded by the fear of
God and characterized by chasteness and propriety. — Ver. 31.
True fear of God, however, awakens confidence in the Lord and
His guidance, and excludes all superstitious and idolatrous ways
and methods of discovering the future. This thought prepares
the way for the warning against turning to familiar spirits, or
seeking after wizards. nix denotes a departed spirit, who was
called up to make disclosures with regard to the future, hence
a familiar spirit, spiritum malum qui certis artibus eliciebatur ut
evocaret mortuorum manes, qui prwdicarent qua ab eis petebantur
(Cler.). This is the meaning in Isa. xxix. 4, as well as here
and in chap. xx. 6, as is evident from chap. xx. 27, " a man or
woman in whom is an ob," and from 1 Sam. xxviii. 7, 8, baalath
ob, " a woman with such a spirit." The name was then applied
to the necromantist himself, by whom the departed were called
up (1 Sam. xxviii. 3 ; 2 Kings xxiii. 24). The word is con-
nected with ob, a skin. V^j the knowing, so to speak, " clever
man " (Symm. yvdxmis, Aq. fxopurrrfi), is only found in con-
nection with ob, and denotes unquestionably a person acquainted
with necromancy, or a conjurer who devoted himself to the in-
vocation of spirits. (For further remarks, see at 1 Sam. xxviii.
7 sqq.). — Ver. 32. This series concludes with the moral precept,
" Before a hoary head thou shalt rise up (sc. with reverence, Job
xxix. 8), and the countenance (the person) of the old man thou
shalt honour and fear before thy God." God is honoured in the
old man, and for this reason reverence for age is required. This
Digitized by
Google
426 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
virtue was cultivated even by the heathen; e.g. the Egyptians
{Herod. 2, 80), the Spartans (Plutarch), and the ancient Romans
(Gellius, ii. 15). It is still found in the East (Lane, Sitten und
Gebr. ii. p. 121).
Vers. 33-37. A few commandments are added of a judicial
character. — Vers. 33, 34. The Israelite was not only not to op-
press the foreigner in his land (as had already been commanded
in Ex. xxii. 20 and xxiii. 9), but to treat him as a native, and love
him as himself. — Vers. 35, 36. As a universal rule, they were to
do no wrong in judgment (the administration of justice, ver.
15), or in social intercourse and trade with weights and measures
of length and capacity ; but to keep just scales, weights, and
measures. On ephah and hin, see at Ex. xvi. 36 and xxix. 40.
In the renewal of this command in Deut. xxv. 13-16, it is for-
bidden to carry u stone and stone " in the bag, i.e. two kinds of
stones (namely, for weights), large and small ; or to keep two
kinds of measures, a large one for buying and a small one for
selling ; and full (unadulterated) and just weight and measure
are laid down as an obligation. This was a command, the
breach of which was frequently condemned (Prov. xvi. 11, xx.
10, 23 ; Amos viii. 5 ; Micah vi. 10, cf. Ezek. xlv. 10).— Ver.
37. Concluding exhortation, summing up all the rest.
Chap. xx. Punishments for the Vices and Crimes pro-
hibited in chap. Xvin. and xix.— The list commences with
idolatry and soothsaying, which were to be followed by extermi-
nation, as a practical apostasy from Jehovah, and a manifest
breach of the covenant. — Ver. 2. Whoever, whether an Israelite
or a foreigner in Israel, dedicated of his seed (children) to
Moloch (see chap, xviii. 21), was to be put to death. The
people of the land were to stone him. £83 01~\, lapide obruere,
is synonymous with ?pp, lit. lapidem jacere : this was the usual
punishment appointed in the law for cases in which death
was inflicted, either as the result of a judicial sentence, or by
the national community. — Ver. 3. By this punishment the
nation only carried out the will of Jehovah ; for He would cut
off such a man (see at chap. xvii. 10 and xviii. 21) for having
defiled the sanctuary of Jehovah and desecrated the name of
Jehovah, not because he had brought the sacrifice to Moloch
into the sanctuary of Jehovah, as Movers supposes, but in the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XX. 9-21. 4$7
same sense in which all the sins of Israel defiled the sanctuary
in their midst (chap. xv. 31, xvi. 16). — Vers. 4, 5. If the people,
however (the people of the land), should hide their eyes from
him (on the dagesh in thyn and *&?¥. see the note on p. 307),
from an unscrupulous indifference or a secret approval of his
sin, the Lord would direct His face against him and his family,
and cut him off with all that went a whoring after him. — Ver.
6. He would also do the same to every soul that turned to
familiar spirits and necromantists (chap. xix. 31, cf. Ex. xxii.
17), "to go a whoring after them," i.e. to make himself guilty
of idolatry by so doing, such practices being always closely
connected with idolatry. — Vers. 7, 8. For the Israelites were to
sanctify themselves, i.e. to keep themselves pure from all idola-
trous abominations, to be holy because Jehovah was holy (chap.
xi. 44, xix. 2), and to keep the statutes of their God who sanc-
tified them (Ex. xxxi. 13).
Vers. 9-18. Whoever cursed father or mother was to be
punished with death (chap. xix. 3) ; " his blood would be upon
him." The cursing of parents was a capital crime (see at chap,
xvii. 4, and for the plural VOT Ex. xxii. 1 and Gen. iv. 10), which
was to return upon the doer of it, according to Gen. ix. 6. The
same punishment was to be inflicted upon adultery (ver. 10, cf.
chap, xviii. 20), carnal intercourse with a father's wife (ver. 11,
cf. chap, xviii. 7, 8) or with a daughter-in-law (ver. 12, cf.
chap, xviii. 17), sodomy (ver. 13, cf. chap, xviii. 22), sexual in-
tercourse with a mother and her daughter, in which case the
punishment was to be heightened by the burning of the criminals
when put to death (ver. 14, cf. chap, xviii. 17), lying with a
beast (vers. 15, 16, cf. chap, xviii. 23), sexual intercourse with a
half-sister (ver. 17, cf. chap, xviii. 9 and 11), and lying with a
menstruous woman (ver. 18, cf. chap, xviii. 19). The punish-
ment of death, which was to be inflicted in all these cases upon
both the criminals, and also upon the beast that had been abused
(vers. 15, 16), was to be by stoning, according to vers. 2, 27, and
Deut. xxii. 21 sqq. ; and by the burning (ver. 14) we are not to
understand death by fire, or burning alive, but, as we may clearly
see from Josh. vii. 15 and 25, burning the corpse' after death.
This was also the case in chap. xxi. 9 and Gen. xxxviii. 24.
Vers. 19-21. No civil punishment, on the other hand, to be
inflicted by the magistrate or by the community generally, was
Digitized by
Google
428 THE THIED BOOK OF MOSES.
ordered to follow marriage with an aunt, the sister of father or
mother (ver. 19, cf. chap, xviii. 12, 13), with an uncle's wife
(ver. 20, cf. chap, xviii. 4), or with a sister-in-law, a brother's
wife (ver. 21, cf. chap, xviii. 16). In all these cases the threat
is simply held out, " they shall bear their iniquity," and (accord-
ing to vers. 20, 21) " die childless ;" that is to say, God would
reserve the punishment to Himself (see at chap, xviii. 14). In
the list of punishments no reference is made to intercourse with
a mother (chap, xviii. 7) or a granddaughter (chap, xviii. 10),
as it was taken for granted that the punishment of death would
be inflicted in such cases as these ; just as marriage with a
daughter or a full sister is passed over in the prohibitions in
chap, xviii.
Vers. 22-27. The list of punishments concludes, like the
prohibitions in chap, xviii. 24 sqq., with exhortations to observe
the commandments and judgments of the Lord, and to avoid
such abominations (on ver. 22 cf . chap, xviii. 3-5, 26, 28, 30 ;
and on ver. 23 cf. chap, xviii. 3 and 24). The reason assigned
for the exhortations is, that Jehovah was about to give them for
a possession the fruitful land, whose inhabitants He had driven
out because of their abominations, and that Jehovah was their
God, who had separated Israel from the nations. For this rea-
son (ver. 25) they were also to sever (make distinctions) between
clean and unclean cattle and birds, and not make their souls (jLe.
their persons) abominable through unclean animals, with which
the earth swarmed, and which God had " separated to make un-
clean," i.e. had prohibited them from eating or touching when
dead, because they defiled (see chap. xi.). For (ver. 26) they
were to be holy, because Jehovah their God was holy, who had
severed them from the nations, to belong to Him, i.e. to be the
nation of His possession (see Ex. xix. 4-6). — Ver. 27. But be-
cause Israel was called to be the holy nation of Jehovah, every
one, either man or woman, in whom there was a heathenish
spirit of soothsaying, was to be put to death, viz. stoned (cf . chap,
xix. 31), to prevent defilement by idolatrous abominations.
HOLINESS OF THE PRIESTS, OF THE HOLY GIFTS, AND
OF SACRIFICES. — CHAP. XXI. AND XXII.
Chap. xxi. The Sanctification of the Priests. — As
the whole nation was to strive after sanctification in all the duties
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXI. 1-6. 429
of life, on account of its calling as a nation of God, the priests,
whom Jehovah had chosen out of the whole nation to be the
custodians of His sanctuary, and had sanctified to that end, were
above all to prove themselves the sanctified servants of the Lord
in their domestic life and the duties of their calling. (1) They
were not to defile themselves by touching the dead or by signs
of mourning (vers. 1-6 and 10-12) ; (2) they were to contract
and maintain a spotless marriage (vers. 7-9 and 13-15) ; and
(3) those members of the priesthood who had any bodily failings
were to keep away from the duties of the priests' office (vers.
16-24).
Vers. 1-6. The priest was not to defile himself on account of
a soul, i.e. a dead person (nephesh, as in chap. xix. 28), among
his countrymen, unless it were of his kindred, who stood near to
him (i.e. in the closest relation to him), formed part of the same
family with him (cf. ver. 3), such as his mother, father, son,
daughter, brother, or a sister who was still living with him as a
virgin and was not betrothed to a husband (cf. Ezek. xliv. 25).
As every corpse not only defiled the persons who touched it, but
also the tent or dwelling in which the person had died (Num.
xix. 11, 14) ; in the case of death among members of the family
or household, defilement was not to be avoided on the part of
the priest as the head of the family. It was therefore allowable
for him to defile himself on account of such persons as these,
and even to take part in their burial. The words of ver. 4 are
obscure : " He shall not defile himself W3J>3 ???, i.e. as lord
(pater-familias) among his countrymen, to desecrate himself;"
and the early translators have wandered in uncertainty among
different renderings. In all probability ??3 denotes the master
of the house or husband. But, for all that, the explanation
given by Knobel and others, "as a husband he shall not defile
himself on the death of his wife, his mother-in-law and daughter-
in-law, by taking part in their burial," is decidedly to be rejected.
For, apart from the unwarrantable introduction of the mother-
in-law and daughter-in-law, there is sufficient to prevent our
thinking of defilement on the death of a wife, in the fact that
the wife is included in the " kin that is near unto him" in ver.
2, though not in the way that many Rabbins suppose, who main-
tain that "ISK> signifies wife, but implicite, the wife not being ex-
pressly mentioned, because man and wife form one flesh (Gen.
Digitized by
Google
430 THE THIED BOOK OF MOSES.
ii. 24), and the wife stands, nearer to the husband than father
and mother, son and daughter, or brother and sister. Nothing
is proved by appealing to the statement made by Plutarch, that
the priests of the Romans were not allowed to defile themselves
by touching the corpses of their wives ; inasmuch as there is no
trace of this custom to be found among the Israelites, and the
Rabbins, for this very reason, suppose the death of an illegiti-
mate wife to be intended. The correct interpretation of the
words can only be arrived at by considering the relation of the
fourth verse to what precedes and follows. As vers. 16-3 stand
in a very close relation to vers. 5 and 6, — the defilement on
account of a dead person being more particularly explained in
the latter, or rather, strictly speaking, greater force being given
to the prohibition, — it is natural to regard ver. 4 as standing in
a similar relation to ver. 7, and to understand it as a general
prohibition, which is still more clearly expounded in vers. 7 and
9. The priest was not to defile himself as a husband and the
head of a household, either by marrying a wife of immoral or
ambiguous reputation, or by training his children carelessly, so
as to desecrate himself, i.e. profane the holiness of his rank and
office by either one or the other (cf. vers. 9 and 15). — In ver.
5 desecration is forbidden in the event of a death occurring.
He was not to shave a bald place upon his head. According
to the Chethib nrni?| is to be pointed with n— attached, and the
Keri ^fTipj is a grammatical alteration to suit the plural suffix
in DB^a, which is obviously to be rejected on account of the
parallel vqv to DJjpt riKW. In both of the clauses there is a
construct™ ad sensum, the prohibition which is addressed to indi-
viduals being applicable to the whole : upon their head shall no
one shave a bald place, namely, in front above the forehead,
" between the eyes" (Deut. xiv. 1). We may infer from the
context that reference is made to a customary mode of mourn-
ing for the dead; and this is placed beyond all doubt by Deut.
xiv. 1, where it is forbidden to all the Israelites " for the dead."
According to Herodotus, 2, 36, the priests in Egypt were shaven,
whereas in other places they wore their hair long. In other
nations it was customary for those who were more immediately
concerned to shave their heads as a sign of mourning ; but the
Egyptians let their hair grow both upon their head and chin when
any of their relations were dead, whereas they shaved at other
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXI. 7-16. 431
times. The two other outward signs of mourning mentioned,
namely, cutting off the edge of the beard and making incisions
in the body, have already been forbidden in chap. xix. 27, 28,
and the latter is repeated in Deut. xiv. 1. The reason for the
prohibition is given in ver. 6, — " they shall be holy unto their
God" and therefore not disfigure their head and body by signs
of passionate grief, and so profane the name of their God when
they offer the firings of Jehovah ; that is to say, when they
serve and approach the God who has manifested Himself to His
people as the Holy One. On the epithet applied to the sacri-
fices, " the food of God," see at chap. iii. 11 and 16.
Vers. 7-9. Their marriage and their domestic life were also
to be in keeping with their holy calling. They were not to
marry a whore (i.e. a public prostitute), or a fallen woman, or a
woman put away (divorced) from her husband, that is to say,
any person of notoriously immoral life, for this would be irre-
concilable with the holiness of the priesthood, but (as may be
seen from this in comparison with ver. 14) only a virgin or
widow of irreproachable character. She need not be an Israelite,
but might be the daughter of a stranger living among the Israel-
ites ; only she must not be an idolater or a Canaanite, for the
Israelites were all forbidden to marry such a woman (Ex. xxxiv.
16; Deut. vii. 3). — Ver. 8. " Thou shalt sanctify him therefore"
that is to say, not merely " respect his holy dignity " (Knobel),
but take care that he did not desecrate his office by a marriage
so polluted. The Israelites as a nation are addressed in the
persons of their chiefs. The second clause of the verse, u he
shall be holy unto thee" contains the same thought. The repeti-
tion strengthens the exhortation. The reason assigned for the
first clause is the same as in ver. 6 ; and that for the second, the
same as in chap. xx. 8, 26, Ex. xxxi. 13, etc. — Ver. 9. The
priest's family was also to lead a blameless life. If a priest's
daughter began to play the whore, she profaned her father, and
was to be burned, i.e. to be stoned and then burned (see chap.
xx. 14). jnb B*K, a man who is a priest, a priest-man.
Vers. 10-15. The high priest was to maintain a spotless
purity in a higher degree still. He, whose head had been
anointed with oil, and who had been sanctified to put on the
holy clothes (see chap. viii. 7—12 and vii. 37), was not to go
with his hair flying loose when a death had taken place, nor to
Digitized by
Google
432 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
rend his clothes (see chap. x. 6), nor to go in to any dead body
(no n'B>B3 souls of a departed one, i.e. dead persons) ; he was not
to defile himself (cf . ver. 2) on account of his father and mother
(i.e. when they were dead), nor to go out of the sanctuary funeris
nempe causa (Ros.), to give way to his grief or attend the funeral.
We are not to understand by this, however, that the sanctuary
was to be his constant abode, as BO.hr and Baumgarten main-
tain (cf. chap, x, 7). " Neither shall he profane the sanctuary of
his God" sc. by any defilement of his person which he could
and ought to avoid ; u for the consecration of the anointing oil of
his God is upon him" (cf. chap. x. 7), and defilement was in-
compatible with this. "WJ does not mean the diadem of the
high priest here, as in Ex. xxix. 6, xxxix. 30, but consecration
(see at Num. vi. 7). — Vers. 13, 14. He was only to marry a
woman in her virginity, not a widow, a woman put away, or a
fallen woman, a whore (fUft without a copulative is in apposition
to njpn a fallen girl, who was to be the same to him as a whore),
but " a virgin of his own people," that is to say, only an Israel-
itish woman. — Ver. 15. " Neither shall he profane his seed (pos-
terity) among his people," sc. by contracting a marriage that was
not in keeping with the holiness of his rank.
Vers. 16-24. Directions for the sons (descendants) of Aaron
who were afflicted with bodily imperfections. As the spiritual
nature of a man is reflected in his bodily form, only a faultless
condition of body could correspond to the holiness of the priest ;
just as the Greeks and Bomans required, for the very same
reason, that the priests should be oXoKKtjpoi, integri corporis
(Plato de legg. 6, 759 ; Seneca excerpt, controv. 4, 2; Plutarch
qucest. rom. 73). Consequently none of the descendants of
Aaron, " according to their generations," i.e. in all future gene-
rations (see Ex. xii. 14), who had any blemish (mum, /uw/to?,
bodily fault) were to approach the vail, i.e. enter the holy place,
or draw near to the altar (in the court) to offer the food of
Jehovah, viz. the sacrifices. No blind man, or lame man, or
charum, icoXofiopiv (from /eoXoySo? and pip), naso mutilus (LXX.),
i.e. one who had sustained any mutilation, especially in the face,
on the nose, ears, lips, or eyes, not merely one who had a flat or
stunted nose ; or VTW, lit. stretched out, i.e. one who had any-
thing beyond what was normal, an ill-formed bodily member
therefore ; so that a man who had more than ten fingers and ten
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXII. 1-16. 433
toes might be so regarded (2 Sam. xxi. 20). — Ver. 19. Whoever
had a fracture in his foot or hand. — Ver. 20. t-?* a hump-backed
man. p*!, lit. crushed to powder, fine : as distinguished from the
former, it signified one who had an unnaturally thin or withered
body or member, not merely consumptive or wasted away. ??3n
frjfa mixed, i.e. spotted in his eye, one who had a white speck in
his eye (Onk., Vulg., Saad.), not blear-eyed (LXX.). 3"i3, which
occurs nowhere else except in chap. xxii. 22 and Deut. xxviii.
27. signifies, according to the ancient versions, the itch; and
n Pr.> which only occurs here and in chap. xxii. 22, the ring-
worm (LXX., Targ., etc.). . ^K rriitp, crushed in the stones,
one who had crushed or softened stones; for in Isa. xxxviii. 21,
the only other place where rriD occurs, it signifies, not to rub to
pieces, but to squeeze out, to lay in a squeezed or liquid form
upon the wound : the Sept. rendering is novop%i<i, having only
one stone. Others understand the word as signifying ruptured
( Vulg., Saad.), or with swollen testicles (Juda ben Karish). All
that is certain is, that we are not to think of castration of any
kind (cf. Deut. xxiii. 2), and that there is not sufficient ground
for altering the text into nriD extension. — Ver. 22. Persons
afflicted in the manner described might eat the bread of their
God, however, the sacrificial gifts, the most holy and the holy, i.e.
the wave-offerings, the first-fruits, the firstlings, tithes and things
laid under a ban (Num. xviii. 11-19 and 26-29), — that is to say,
they might eat them like the rest of the priests ; but they were
not allowed to perform any priestly duty, that they might not dese-
crate the sanctuary of the Lord (ver. 23, cf. ver. 12). — Ver. 24.
Moses communicated these instructions to Aaron and his sons.
Chap. xxii. Vers. 1^16. Reverence foe Things sancti-
fied. — The law on this matter was, (1) that no priest who had
become unclean was to touch or eat- them (vers. 2-9), and
(2) that no one was to eat them who was not a member of a
priestly family (vers. 10-16). — Ver. 2. Aaron and his sons were
to keep away from the holy gifts of the children of Israel, which
they consecrated to Jehovah, that they might not profane the
holy name of Jehovah by defiling them, "itsn with JO to keep
away, separate one's self from anything, i.e. not to regard or
treat them as on a par with unconsecrated things. The words,
"which they sanctify to Me," are a supplementary apposition,
PENT. — VOL. II. 2 E
Digitized by
Google
434 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
added as a more precise definition of the " holy things of the
children of Israel ;" as the expression u holy things " was applied
to the holy ohjects universally, including the furniture of the
tabernacle. Here, however, the reference is solely to the holy
offerings or gifts, which were not placed upon the altar, but
presented to the Lord as heave-offerings and wave-offerings,
and assigned by Him to the priests as the servants of His house,
for their maintenance (Num. xviii. 11-19, 26-29). None of the
descendants of Aaron were to approach these gifts, which were
set apart for them, — i.e. to touch them either for the purpose of
eating, or making them ready for eating, — whilst any unclean-
ness was upon them, on pain of extermination. — Vers. 4, 5. No
leper was to touch them (see chap. xiii. 2), or person with
gonorrhoea (chap. xv. 2), until he was clean ; no one who had
touched a person defiled by a corpse (chap. xix. 28 ; Num. xix.
22), or whose seed had gone from him (chap. xv. 16, 18) ; and
no one who had touched an unclean creeping animal,' or an
unclean man. foiKQtp ?bp, as in chap. v. 3, a closer definition of
ft KDt?< "iBto, u who is unclean to him with regard to (on account
of) any uncleanness which he may have." — Vers. 6, 7. " A soul
which touches it" i.e. any son of Aaron, who had touched either
an unclean person or thing, was to be unclean till the evening,
and then bathe his body ; after sunset, i.e. when the day was over,
he became clean, and could eat of the sanctified things, for they
were his food. — Ver. 8. In this connection the command given
to all the Israelites, not to eat anything that had fallen down
dead or been torn in pieces (chap. xvii. 15, 16), is repeated with
special reference to the priests. (On ver. 9, see chap. viii. 35,
xviii. 30, and xix. 17.) tffcfW, " because they have defiled it (the
sanctified thing)." — Vers. 10-16. No stranger was to eat a sanc-
tified thing. ">T is in general the non-priest, then any person who
was not fully incorporated into a priestly family, e.g. a visitor
or day-labourer (cf. Ex. xii. 49), who were neither of them
members of his family. — Ver. 11. On the other hand, slaves
bought for money, or born in the house, became members of his
family and lived upon his bread ; they were therefore allowed
to eat of that which was sanctified along with him, since the
slaves were, in fact, formally incorporated into the nation by
circumcision (Gen. xvii. 12, 13). — Vers. 12, 13. So again the
daughter of a priest, if she became a widow, or was put away
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXII. 17-S8. 435
by her husband, and returned childless to her father's house,
and became a member of his family again, just as in the days
of her youth, might eat of the holy things. But if she had any
children, then after the death of her husband, or after her
divorce, she formed with them a family of her own, which could
not be incorporated into the priesthood, of course always sup-
posing that her husband was not a priest. — Ver. 14. But if any
one (i.e. any layman) should eat unawares of that which was
sanctified, he was to bring it, i.e. an equivalent for it, with the
addition of a fifth as a compensation for the priest ; like a man
who had sinned by unfaithfulness in relation to that which was
sanctified (chap. v. 16). — In the concluding exhortation in vers.
15 and 16, the subject to wnj (profane) and Wfcn (bear) is
indefinite, and the passage to be rendered thus : " They are
not to profane the sanctified gifts of the children of Israel, what
they heave for the Lord (namely, by letting laymen eat of them),
and are to cause them (the laymen) who do this unawares to
bear a trespass-sin (by imposing the compensation mentioned
in ver. 14), if they eat their (the priests') sanctified gifts."
Understood in this way, both verses furnish a Siting conclusion
to the section vers. 10-14. On the other hand, according to the
traditional interpretation of these verses, the priesthood is re-
garded as the subject of the first verb, and a negative supplied
before the second. Both of these are arbitrary and quite in-
defensible, because vers. 10-14 do not refer to the priests but to
laymen, and in the latter case we should expect OWK W^ tvt
(cf. ver. 9) instead of the unusual onto ttOlPn.
Vers. 17-33. Acceptable Sacrifices. — Vers. 18-20.
Every sacrifice offered to the Lord by an Israelite or foreigner,
in consequence of a vow or as a freewill-offering (cf. chap. vii.
16), was to be faultless and a male, " for good pleasure to the
offerer " (cf . i. 3), i.e. to secure for him the good pleasure of
God. An animal with a fault would not be acceptable. — Vers.
21, 22. Every peace-offering was also to be faultless, whether
brought u to fulfil a special (important) vow " (cf . Num. xv. 3,
8: vhs, from *6b to be great, distinguished, wonderful), or as a
freewill gift ; that is to say, it was to be free from such faults
as blindness, or a broken limb (from lameness therefore : Deut.
xv. 21), or cutting (i.e. mutilation, answering to Win chap. xxi.
Digitized by
Google
436 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
18), or an abscess Ovf !, from 7S> r to flow, probably a flowing
suppurating abscess). — Ver. 23. As a voluntary peace-offering
they might indeed offer an ox or sheep that was &&$ Wife',
" stretched out and drawn together," i.e. with the whole body
or certain limbs either too large or too small; 1 but such an
animal could not be acceptable as a votive offering. — Ver. 24.
Castrated animals were not to be sacrificed, nor in fact to be
kept in the land at all. *pVO compressus, 0\i/3la<;, an animal
with the stones crushed; WIS contusus, ffXaauv:, with them
beaten to pieces; pVU avulsus, airabwv, with them twisted off;
rfi"l3 excisus, rofilai or i/cro/iias, with them cut off. In all these
different ways was the operation performed among the ancients
(cf. Aristot. hist. an. ix. 37, 3 ; Colum. vi. 26, vii. 11 ; Pallad.
vi. 7). " And in your land ye shall not make," sc. W SflJtt, i.e.
castrated animals, that is to say, " not castrate animals." This
explanation, which is the one given by Josephus (Ant. iv. 8, 40)
and all the Rabbins, is required by the expression "in your
land," which does not at all suit the interpretation adopted by
Clericus and Knobet, who understand by nfc>y the preparation of
sacrifices, for sacrifices were never prepared outside the land.
The castration of animals is a mutilation of God's creation, and
the prohibition of it was based upon the same principle as that
of mixing heterogeneous things in chap. xix. 19. — Ver. 25.
Again, the Israelites were not to accept any one of all these, i.e.
the faulty animals described, as sacrifice from a foreigner. a For
their corruption is m them," i.e. something corrupt, a fault, ad-
heres to them ; so that such offerings could not procure good
pleasure towards them. — In vers. 26-30 three laws are given of
a similar character. — Ver. 27. A young ox, sheep, or goat was
to be seven days under its mother, and could only be sacrificed
from the eighth day onwards, according to the rule laid down
in Ex. xxii. 29 with regard to the first-born. The reason for
this was, that the young animal had not attained to a mature
and self-sustained life during the first week of its existence.*
1 In explanation of these words Knolel very properly remarks, that with
the Greeks the sacrificial animal was required to be Atpihiis (Pollux i. 1, 26),
Upon which Hesychius observes, firrzi ir'h.savi^av pin 'hiuv ri rot/ auftaTO;.
2 For this reason the following rule was also laid down by the Romans :
Suis foetus sacrificio die quinto purus est, pecoris die octavo, bovis tricesimo
(Plin. h. n. 8, 61).
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIII. 437
This maturity was not reached till after the lapse of a week,
that period of time sanctified by the creation. There is no rule
laid down in the law respecting the age up to which an animal
was admissible in sacrifice. Bullocks, i.e. steers or young oxen
of more than a year old, are frequently mentioned and pre-
scribed for the festal sacrifices (for the young ox of less than a
year old ie called -W; chap. ix. 3), viz. as burnt-offerings in chap,
xxiii. 18, Num. vii. 15, 21, 27, 33, 39 sqq., viii. 8, xv. 24,
xxviii. 11, 19, 27, xxix. 2, 8, and as sin-offerings in chap. iv. 3,
14, xvi. 3 ; — sheep (lambs) of one year old are also prescribed
as burnt-offerings in chap. ix. 3, xii. 6, xxiii. 12, Ex. xxix. 38,
Num. vi. 14, vii. 17, 21, 27, 33, 39 sqq., xxviii. 3, 9, 19, 27,
xxix. 2, 8, 13, 17 sqq., as peace-offerings in Num. vii. 17, 23,
xxix. 35 sqq., and as trespass-offerings in Num. vi. 12 ; also a
yearling ewe as a sin-offering in chap. xiv. 10 and Num. vi. 14,
and a yearling goat in Num. xv. 27. They generally brought
older oxen or bullocks for peace-offerings (Num. vii. 17, xxiii.
29 sqq.), and sometimes as burnt-offerings. In Judg. vi. 25
an ox of seven years old is said to have been brought as a burnt-
offering ; and there can be no doubt that the goats and rams
presented as sin-offerings and trespass-offerings were more than
a year old.— -Ver. 28. The command not to kill an ox or sheep
at the same time as its young is related to the law in Ex. xxiii.
19 and Deut. xxii. 6, 7, and was intended to lay it down as a
duty on the part of the Israelites to keep sacred the relation
which God had established between parent and offspring. — In
vers. 29, 30, the command to eat the flesh of the animal on the
day on which it was offered (chap. vii. 15, xix. 5, 6) is repeated
with special reference to the praise-offering. — Vers. 31-33.
Concluding exhortation, as in chap, xviii. 29, xix. 37. (On ver.
32, cf. chap, xviii. 21 and xi. 44, 45.)
8ANCTIFICATION OF THE SABBATH AND THE FEASTS OF
JEHOVAH. — CHAP. XXIII.
This chapter does not contain a " calendar of feasts," or a
summary and completion of the directions previously given in a
scattered form concerning the festal times of Israel, but simply
a list of those festal days and periods of the year at which holy
meetings were to be held. This is most clearly stated in the
heading (ver. 2) : " the festal times of Jehovah, which ye shall call
Digitized by
Google
438 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
out as holy meetings, these are they, My feasts? ix. those which
are to be regarded as My feasts, sanctified to Me. The festal
seasons and days were called "feasts of Jehovah," times ap-
pointed and fixed by Jehovah (see Gen. i. 14), not because the
feasts belonged to fixed times regulated by the course of the
moon (KnobeT), but because Jehovah had appointed them as
days, or times, which were to be sanctified to Him. Hence the
expression is not only used with reference to the Sabbath, the
new moon, and the other yearly feasts ; but in Num. xxviii. 2
and xxix. 39 it is extended so as to include the times of the daily
morning and evening sacrifice. (On the u holy convocation "
see Ex. xii. 16.)
Yer. 3. At the head of these moadim stood the Sabbath, as
the day which God had already sanctified as a day of rest for His
people, by His own rest on the seventh creation-day (Gen. ii. 3,
cf. Ex. xk. 8-11). On tfretP rots', see at Ex. xxxi. 15 and xvi.
33. As a weekly returning day of rest, the observance of which
had its foundation in the creative work of God, the Sabbath was
distinguished from the yearly feasts, in which Israel commemo-
rated the facts connected with its elevation into a people of God,
and which were generally called u feasts of Jehovah" in the
stricter sense, and as such were distinguished from the Sabbath
(vers. 37, 38 ; Isa. i. 13, 14 ; 1 Chron. xxiii. 31 ; 2 Ohron. xxxi.
3 ; Neh. x. 54). This distinction is pointed out in the heading,
" these are the feasts of Jehovah" (yer. 4). 1 In Num. xxviii. 11
the feast of new moon follows the Sabbath ; but this is passed
over here, because the new moon was not to be observed either
with sabbatical rest or a holy meeting.
Vers. 4-14. Ver. 4 contains the special heading for the
yearly feasts. D"$D3 a t their appointed time. — Vers. 5-8. The
leading directions for the Passover and feast of Mazzoth are
1 Partly on account of this repetition, and partly because of the supposed
discrepancy observable in the fact, that holy meetings are not prescribed for
the Sabbath in the list of festal sacrifices in Num. xxviii. and xxix., Hup-
feld and Knobel maintain that the words of vers. 2 and 3, from rrtrP to
DaTQSJ'iD, notwithstanding their Elohistic expression, were not written by
the Elohist, but are an interpolation of the later editor. The repetition of
- the heading, however, cannot prove anything at all with the constant repe-
titions that occur in the so-called Elohistic groundwork, especially as it
can be fully explained by the reason mentioned in the text. And the pre-
tended discrepancy rests upon the perfectly arbitrary assumption, that Num.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIIL 4-14. 439
repeated! from Ex. xii. 6, 11, 15—20. fnij? rotOt?, occupation of
a work, signifies labour at some definite occupation, e.g. the
building of the tabernacle, Ex. xxxv. 24, xxxvi. i. 3 ; hence
occupation in connection with trade or one's social calling, such
as agriculture, handicraft, and so forth ; whilst H387D is the per-
formance of any kind of work, e.g. kindling fire for cooking
food (Ex. xxxv. 2, 3). On the Sabbath and the day of atone-
ment every kind of civil work was prohibited, even to the
kindling of fire for the purpose of cooking (vers. 3, 30, 31, cf.
Ex. xx. 10, xxxi 14, xxxv. 2, 3 ; Deut. v. 14 and Lev. xvi.
29 ; Num. xxix. 7) ; on the other feast-days with a holy con-
vocation, only servile work (vers. 7, 8, 21, 25, 35, 36, cf. Ex.
xii. 16, and the explanation in vol. i., and* Num. xxviii. 18, 25,
26, xxix. 1, 12, 35). To this there is appended a fresh regula-
tion in vers. 9-14, with the repetition of the introductory clause,
" And the Lord spake" etc. When the Israelites had come
into the land to be given them by the Lord, and had reaped
the harvest, they were to bring a sheaf as first-fruits of their
harvest to the priest, that he might wave it before Jehovah on
the day after the Sabbath, i.e. after the first day of Mazzoth.
According to Josephus and Philo, it was a sheaf of barley ; but
this is not expressly commanded, because it would be taken for
granted in Canaan, where the harvest began with the barley.
In the warmer parts of Palestine the barley ripens about the
middle of April, and is reaped in April or the beginning of May,
whereas the wheat ripens two or three weeks later (Seetzen;
Robinson's Pal. ii. 263, 278). The priest was to wave the sheaf
before Jehovah, i.e. to present it symbolically to Jehovah by the
ceremony of waving, without burning any of it upon the altar.
The rabbinical rule, viz. to dry a portion of the ears by the fire,
xxviii. and xxix. contain a complete codex of all the laws relating to all the
feasts. How totally this assumption is at variance with the calendar of
feasts, is clear enough from the fact, that no rule is laid down there for the
observance of the Sabbath, with the exception of the sacrifices to be offered
upon it, and that even rest from labour is not commanded. Moreover
Knobel is wrong in identifying the " holy convocation" with a journey to
the sanctuary, whereas appearance at the tabernacle to hold the holy con-
vocations (for worship) was not regarded as necessary either in the law
itself or according to the later orthodox custom, but, on the contrary, holy
meetings for edification were held on the Sabbath in every place in the land,
and it was out of this that the synagogues arose.
Digitized by
Google
440 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
and then, after rubbing them out, to burn them on the altar, was
an ordinance of the later scribes, who knew not the law, and
was based upon chap. ii. 14. For the law in chap. ii. 14 refers
to the offerings of first-fruits made by private persons, which are
treated of in Num. xviii. 12, 13, and Deut. xxvi. 2 sqq. The
sheaf of first-fruits, on the other hand, which was to be offered
before Jehovah as a wave-offering in the name of the congrega-
tion, corresponded to the two wave-loaves which -were leavened
and then baked, and were to be presented to the Lord as first-
fruits (ver. 17). As no portion of these wave-loaves was burned
upon the altar, because nothing leavened was to be placed upon
it (chap. ii. 11), but they were assigned entirely to the priests,
we have only to assume that the same application was intended
by the law in the case of the sheaf of first-fruits, since the text
only prescribes the waving, and does not contain a word about
roasting, rubbing, or burning the grains upon the altar, nine
natpn (the morrow after the Sabbath) signifies the next day after
the first day of the feast of Mazzoth, i.e. the 16th Abib (Nisan),
not the day of the Sabbath which fell in the seven days' feast
of Mazzoth, as the Bsethoseans supposed, still less the 22d of
Nisan, or the day after the conclusion of the seven days' feast,
which always closed with a Sabbath, as Hitzig imagines. 1 The
1 The view advocated by the Bsethoseans, which has been lately sup-
ported by W. Schultz, is refuted not only by Josh. v. 11, but by the definite
article used, ri3E>n> which points back to one of the feast-days already men-
T " *
tioned, and still more decisively by the circumstance, that according to
ver. 15 the seven weeks, at the close of which the feast of Pentecost was to
be kept, were to be reckoned from this Sabbath ; and if the Sabbath was
not fixed, but might fall upon any day of the seven days' feast of Mazzoth,
and therefore as much as five or six days after the Passover, the feast of
Passover itself would be forced out of the fundamental position which it
occupied in the series of annual festivals (cf. Ranke, Pentateuch ii. 108).
Hitzig's hypothesis has been revived by Hupfeld and Knobel, without any
notice of the conclusive refutation given to it by BSkr and Wieseler ; only
Knobel makes " the Sabbath" not the concluding but the opening Sabbath
of the feast of Passover, on the ground that " otherwise the festal sheaf
would not have been offered till the 22d of the month, and therefore would
have come post festum."" But this hypothesis, which renders it necessary
that the commencement of the ecclesiastical year should always be assigned
to a Saturday (Sabbath), in order to gain weekly Sabbaths for the 14th and
2ist of the month, as the opening and close of the feast of Passover, gives
such a form to the Jewish year as would involve its invariably closing with
a broken week ; a hypothesis which is not only incapable of demonstration,
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIII. 4-14. 441
" Sabbath" does not mean the seventh day of the week, but the
day of rest, although the weekly Sabbath was always the seventh
or last day of the week ; hence not only the seventh day of the
week (Ex. xxxi. 15, etc.), but the day of atonement (the tenth
of the seventh month), is called " Sabbath" and " Shabbath
shabbathon" (ver. 32, chap. xvi. 31). As a day of rest, on
which no laborious work was to be performed (ver. 8), the first
day of the feast of Mazzoth is called " Sabbath," irrespectively
of the day of the week upon which it fell ; and " the morrow
after the Sabbath" is equivalent to " the morrow after the Pass-
over" mentioned in Josh. v. 11, where "Passover" signifies the
day at the beginning of which the paschal meal was held, i.e. the
first day of nnleavened bread, which commenced on the evening
of the 14th, in other words, the 15th Abib. By offering the
sheaf of first-fruits of the harvest, the Israelites were to conse-
crate their daily bread to the Lord their God, and practically to
acknowledge that they owed the blessing of the harvest to the
grace of God. They were not to eat any bread or roasted grains
of the new corn till they had presented the offering of their
God (ver. 14). This offering was fixed for the second day of
the feast of the Passover, that the connection between the har-
vest and the Passover might be kept in subordination to the
leading idea of the Passover itself (see at Ex. xii. 15 sqq.). But
but, from the holiness attached to the Jewish division of weeks, is a priori
improbable, and in fact inconceivable. The Mosaic law, which gave such
sanctity to the division of time into weeks, as founded upon the history of
creation, by the institution of the observance of the Sabbath, that it raised
the Sabbath into the groundwork of a magnificent festal cycle, could not
possibly have made such an arrangement with regard to the time for the
observance of the Passover, as would involve almost invariably the mutila-
tion of the last week of the year, and an interruption of the old and sacred
-weekly cycle with the Sabbath festival at its close. The arguments by
-which so forced a hypothesis is defended, must be very conclusive indeed, to
meet with any acceptance. But neither Hitzig nor his followers have been
able to adduce any such arguments as these. Besides the word " Sabbath"
and Josh. v. 11, which prove nothing at all, the only other argument ad-
duced by Knobel is, that " it is impossible to see why precisely the second
day of the azyma, when the people went about their ordinary duties, and
there was no meeting at the sanctuary, should have been distinguished by
the sacrificial gift which was the peculiar characteristic of the feast," — an
argument based upon the fallacious principle, that anything for which I
can see no reason, cannot possibly have occurred.
Digitized by
Google
442 THE THIRD BOOK OF HOSES.
as the sheaf was not burned upon the altar, but only presented
symbolically to the Lord by waving, and then handed over to
the priests, an altar-gift had to be connected with it, — namely, a
yearling sheep as a burnt-offering, a meat-offering of two-tenths
of an ephah of fine flour mixed with oil, and a drink-offering
of a quarter of a hiri of wine, — to give expression to the obliga-
tion and willingness of the congregation not only to enjoy their
earthly food, but to strengthen all the members of their body
for growth in holiness and diligence in good works. The burnt-
offering, for which a yearling lamb was prescribed, as in fact for
all the regular festal sacrifices, was of course in addition to the
burnt-offerings prescribed in Num. xxviii. 19, 20, for every feast-
day. The meat-offering, however, was not to consist of one-
tenth of an ephah of fine flour, as on other occasions (Ex. xxix.
40 ; Num. xxviii. 9, 13, etc.), but of two-tenths, that the offering
of corn at the harvest-feast might be a more plentiful one than
usual.
Vers. 15-22. The law for the special observance of the feast
of ffarvest (Ex. xxiii. 16) is added here without any fresh intro-
ductory formula, to show at the very outset the close connection
between the two feasts. Seven whole weeks, or fifty days, were to
be reckoned from the day of the offering of the sheaf, and then the
day of first-fruits (Num. xxviii. 26) or feast of Weeks (Ex. xxxiv.
22 ; Deut. xvi. 10) was to be celebrated. From this reckoning
the feast received the name of Pentecost (ji irevrrjKo<rr^, Acts ii.
1). That ninSB' (ver. 15) signifies weeks, like nijDB> in Deut.
xvi. 9, and ret o-dfiftaTa, in the Gospels (e.g. Matt, xxviii. 1), is
evident from the predicate Jlb'Dn, " complete," which would be
quite unsuitable if Sabbath-days were intended, as a long period
might be reckoned by half weeks instead of whole, but certainly
not by half Sabbath-days. Consequently u the morrow after the
seventh Sabbath" (ver. 16) is the day after the seventh week,
not after the seventh Sabbath. On this day, i.e. fifty days after
the first day of Mazzoth, Israel was to offer a new meat-offering
to the Lord, i.e. made of the fruit of the new harvest (chap,
xxvi. 10), " wave-loaves" from its dwellings, two of two-tenths
of an ephah of fine flour baked leavened, like the bread which
served for their daily food, "as first-fruits unto the Lord," and
of the wheat-harvest (Ex. xxxiv. 22), which fell in the second
half of May and the first weeks of June (Robinson, Palestine),
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIII. 15-22. 443
and therefore was finished as a whole by the feast of Weeks.
The loaves differed from all the other meat-offerings, being made
of leavened dough, because in them their daily bread was offered
to the Lord, who had blessed the harvest, as a thank-offering
for His blessing. They were therefore only given to the Lord
symbolically by waving, and were then to belong to the priests
(ver. 20). The injunction " out of your habitations" is not to
be understood, as Calvin and others suppose, as signifying that
every householder was to present two such loaves ; it simply
expresses the idea, that they were to be loaves made for the daily
food of a household, and not prepared expressly for holy pur-
poses. — Vers. 18, 19. In addition to the loaves, they were to offer
seven yearling lambs, one young bullock, and two rams, as burnt-
offerings, together with their (the appropriate) meat and drink-
offerings, one he-goat as a sin-offering, and two yearling lambs
as peace-offerings. — Ver. 20. " The priest shall wave them (the
two lambs of the peace-offerings), together with the loaves of the
first-fruits, as a wave-offering before Jehovah ; witfi the two lambs
(the two just mentioned), they (the loaves) shall be holy to Jeho-
vah for the priest." In the case of the peace-offerings of private
individuals, the flesh belonged for the most part to the offerer ;
but here, in the case of a thank-offering presented by the con-
gregation, it was set apart for the priest. The circumstance,
that not only was a much more bountiful burnt-offering pre-
scribed than in the offerings of the dedicatory sheaf at the com-
mencement of harvest (ver. 12), but a sin-offering and peace-
offering also, is to be attributed to the meaning of the festival
itself, as a feast of thanksgiving for the rich blessing of God
that had just been gathered in. The sin-offering was to excite
the feeling and consciousness of sin on the part of the congre-
gation of Israel, that whilst eating their daily leavened bread
they might not serve the leaven of their old nature, but seek
and implore from the Lord their God the forgiveness and cleans-
ing away of their sin. Through the increased burnt-offering
they were to give practical expression to their gratitude for the
blessing of harvest, by a strengthened consecration and sanctifi-
cation of all the members of the whole man to the service of the
Lord ; whilst through the peace-offering they entered into that
fellowship of peace with the Lord to which they were called,
•and which they wete eventually to enjoy through His blessing
Digitized by
Google
444 THE THIED BOOK OF MOSES.
in their promised inheritance. In this way the whole of the year's
harvest was placed under the gracious blessing of the Lord by
the sanctification of its commencement and its close ; and the
enjoyment of their daily food was also sanctified thereby. For
the sake of this inward connection, the laws concerning the wave-
sheaf and wave-loaves are bound together into one whole ; and
by this connection, which was established by reckoning the time
for the feast of Weeks from the day of the dedication of the
sheaf, the two feasts were linked together into an internal unity.
The Jews recognised this unity from the very earliest times, and
called the feast of Pentecost Azereih (Greek, 'Aaapdd), because
it was the close of the seven weeks (see at ver. 36 : Josephus,
Ant. iii. 10). 1 — Ver. 21. On this day a holy meeting was to be
held, and laborious work to be suspended, just as on the first and
seventh days of Mazzoth. This was to be maintained as a statute
for ever (see ver. 14). It was not sufficient, however, to thank
the Lord for the blessing of harvest by a feast of thanksgiving
to the Lord, but they were not to forget the poor and distressed
when gathering in their harvest. To indicate this, the law laid
down in chap. xix. 9, 10 is repeated in ver. 22.
Vers. 23-25. On the first day of the seventh month there
was to be shabbatkon, rest, i.e. a day of rest (see Ex. xvi. 23),
a memorial of blowing of trumpets, a holy convocation, the sus-
pension of laborious work, and the offering of a firing for Jeho-
vah, which are still more minutely described in the calendar of
festal sacrifices in Num. xxix. 2-6. W" 1 ^ 1 , a joyful noise, from
W"i to make a noise, is used in ver. 24 for iBto' njrnn, a blast of
trumpets. On this day the shophar was to be blown, a blast of
trumpets to be appointed for a memorial before Jehovah (Num.
- x. 10), i.e. to call the congregation into remembrance before
Jehovah, that He might turn towards it His favour and grace
(see at Ex. xxviii. 12, 29, xxx. 16) ; and from this the feast-day
is called the day of the trumpet-blast (Num. xxix. 1). Shophar,
a trumpet, was a large horn which produced a dull, far-reaching
tone. Buccina pastoralis est et cornu recurvo effieitur, wn.de et
proprie kebraice sophar, grace /ceparlvt) appellatur (Jerome on
1 A connection between the feast of Pentecost and the giving of the law,
which Maimonides (a.d. fl205) was the first to discover, is not only foreign
to the Mosaic law, but to the whole of the Jewish antiquity ; and even
Abarbanel expressly denies it.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIII. 26-82. 445
Hos. v. 8). 1 The seventh month of the year, like the seventh day
of the week, was consecrated as a Sabbath or sabbatical month,
by a holy convocation and the suspension of labour, which were
to distinguish the first day of the seventh month from the begin-
ning of the other months or the other new moon days throughout
the year. For the whole month was sanctified in the first day, as
the beginning or head of the month ; and by the sabbatical ob-
servance of the commencement, the whole course of the month
was raised to a Sabbath. This was enjoined, not merely because
it was the seventh month, but because the seventh month was to
secure to the congregation the complete atonement for all its sins,
and the wiping away of all the uncleannesses which separated it
from its God, viz. on the day of atonement, which fell within
this month, and to bring it a foretaste of the blessedness of life
in fellowship with the Lord, viz. in the feast of Tabernacles,
which commenced five days afterwards. This significant cha-
racter of the seventh month was indicated by the trumpet-blast,
by which the congregation presented the memorial of itself
loudly and strongly before Jehovah on the first day of the month,
that He might bestow upon them the promised blessings of His
grace, for the realization of His covenant. The trumpet-blast on
this day was a prelude of the trumpet-blast with which the com-
mencement of the year of jubilee was proclaimed to the whole
nation, on the day of atonement of every seventh sabbatical
year, that great year of grace under the old covenant (chap. xxv.
9) ; just as the seventh month in general formed the link be-
tween the weekly Sabbath and the sabbatical and jubilee years,
and corresponded as a Sabbath month to the year of jubilee
rather than the sabbatical year, which had its prelude in the
weekly Sabbath-day.
Vers. 26-32. On the tenth day of the seventh month the
day of atonement was to be observed by*a holy meeting, by fast-
* The word njmn is also used in Num. x. 5, 6 to denote the blowing with
T J
the slyer trumpets ; but there seems to be no ground for supposing these
trumpets to be intended here, not only because of the analogy between the
seventh day of the new moon as a jubilee day and the jubilee year (chap.
xxv. 9, 10), but also because the silver trumpets are assigned to a different
purpose in Num. x. 27IO, and their use is restricted to the blowing at the
offering of the burnt-offerings on the feast-days and new moons. To this
we have to add the Jewish tradition, which favours with perfect unanimity
the practice of blowing with horns (the horns of animals).
Digitized by
Google
446 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
ing from the evening of the ninth till the evening of- the tenth,
by resting from all work on pain of death, and with sacrifices,
of which the great expiatory sacrifice peculiar to this day had
already been appointed in chap, xvi., and the general festal
sacrifices are described in Num. xxix. 8-11. (For fuller parti-
culars, see at chap, xvi.) By the restrictive IN, the observance
of the day of atonement is represented a priori as a peculiar
one. The *]N refers less to " the tenth day," than to the leading
directions respecting this feast : " only on the tenth of this
seventh month . . . there shall be a holy meeting to you, and ye
shall afflict your souls," etc. — Ver. 32. " Ye shall rest your rest,"
i.e. observe the rest that is binding upon you from all laborious
work.
Vers. 33-43. On the fifteenth of the same month the feast
of Tabernacles was to be kept to the Lord for seven days : on the
first day with a holy meeting and rest from all laborious work,
and for seven days with sacrifices, as appointed for every day in
Num. xxix. 13-33. Moreover, on the eighth day, i.e. the 22d of
the month, the closing feast was to be observed in the same
manner as on the first day (vers. 34-36). The name, " feast of
Tabernacles" (booths), is to be explained from the fact, that the
Israelites were to dwell in booths made of boughs for the seven
days that this festival lasted (ver. 42). rnv??, which is used in
ver. 36 and Num. xxix. 35 for the eighth day, which terminated
the feast of Tabernacles, and in Deut. xvi. 8 for the seventh day
of the feast of Mazzotk, signifies the solemn close of a feast of
several days, clausula festi, from "isy to shut in, or close (Gen.
xvi. 2; Deut. xi. 17, etc.), not a coagendo, congregando populo ad
festum, nor a cohibitione laboris, ab interdicto opere, because the
word is only applied to the last day of the feasts of Mazzoth and
Tabernacles, and not to the first, although this was also kept with
a national assembly and suspension of work. But as these
clausula festi were holidays with a holy convocation and sus-
pension of work, it was very natural that the word should be
transferred at a later period to feasts generally, on which the
people suspended work and met for worship and edification
(Joel i. 14 ; Isa. i. 13 ; 2 Kings x. 20). The azereth, as the
eighth day, did not strictly belong to the feast of Tabernacles,
which was only to last seven days ; and it was distinguished,
moreover, from these seven days by a smaller number of offer-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIII. 83-43. 447
ings (Num. xxix. 35 sqq.). The eighth day was rather the
solemn close of the whole circle of yearly feasts, and therefore
was appended to the close of the last of these feasts as the
eighth day of the feast itself (see at Num. xxviii. seq.). — With
ver. 36 the enumeration of all the yearly feasts on which holy
meetings were to be convened is brought to an end. This is
stated in the concluding formula (vers. 37, 38), which answers
to the heading in ver. 4, in which the Sabbaths are excepted, as
they simply belonged to the moadim in the more general sense
of the word. In this concluding formula, therefore, there is no
indication that vers. 2 and 3 and vers. 39-43 are later additions
to the original list of feasts which were to be kept with a meet-
ing for worship. 'W mpij? (to offer, etc.) is not dependent upon
" holy convocations," but upon the main idea, " feasts of Jeho-
vah." Jehovah had appointed moadim, fixed periods in the year,
for His congregation to offer sacrifices ; not as if no sacrifices
could be or were to be offered except at these feasts, but to re-
mind His people, through these fixed days, of their duty to
approach the Lord with sacrifices. HBte is defined by the enu-
meration of four principal kinds of sacrifice, — burnt-offerings,
meat-offerings, slain (i.e. peace-) offerings, and drink-offerings,
'a DV IT} : " every day those appointed for it," as in Ex. v. 13. —
Ver. 38. " Beside the Sabbaths ;" i.e. the Sabbath sacrifices (see
Num. xxviii. 9, 10), and the gifts and offerings, which formed
no integral part of the keeping of the feasts and Sabbaths, but
might be ( offered on those days. rriJriD, gifts, include all the
dedicatory offerings, which were presented to the Lord without
being intended to be burned upon the altar ; such, for example,
as the dedicatory gifts of the tribe-princes (Num. vii.), the first-
lings and tithes, and other so-called heave-offerings (Num. xviii.
11, 29). By the " vows" and rtoiJ, "freewill-offerings," we are
to understand not only the votive and freewill slain or peace-
offerings, but burnt-offerings also, and meat-offerings, which
were offered in consequence of a vow, or from spontaneous
impulse (see Judg. xi. 31, where Jephthah vows a burnt-offer-
ing). — In vers. 39 sqq. there follows a fuller description of the
observance of the last feast of the year, for which the title,
" feast of Tabernacles" (ver. 34), had prepared the way, as the
feast had already been mentioned briefly in Ex. xxiii. 16 and
xxxiv. 22 as " feast of Ingathering," though hitherto no rule
Digitized by
Google
448 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
had been laid down concerning the peculiar manner in which it
was to be observed. In connection with this epithet in Exodus,
it is described again in ver. 39, as in vers. 35, 36, as a^seven days'
feast, with sabbatical rest on the first and eighth day ; and in
vers. 40 sqq. the following rule is given for its observance :
" Take to you fruit of ornamental trees, palm-branches, and
boughs of trees with thick foliage, and willows of the brook,
and rejoice before the Lord your God seven days, every native
in Israel." If we observe that there are only three kinds of
boughs that are connected together by the copula (yav) in
ver. 40, and that it is wanting before 'D1 HB3, there can hardly
be any doubt that Tin )ft> ,- lB is the generic term, and that the
three names which follow specify the particular kinds of boughs.
By " the fruit," therefore, we understand the shoots and branches
of the trees, as well as the blossom and fruit that grew out of
them. Tin \V, " trees of ornament ;" we are not to understand
by these only such trees as the orange and citron, which were
placed in gardens for ornament rather than use, as the ChaU.
and Syr. indicate, although these trees grow in the gardens of
Palestine (Rob., Pal. i. 327, iii. 420). The expression is a more
general one, and includes myrtles, which were great favourites
with the ancients, on account of their beauty and the fragrant
odour which they diffused, olive-trees, palms, and other trees,
which were used as booths in Ezra's time (Neh. viii. 15). In the
words, " Take fruit of ornamental trees," it is not expressly stated,
it is true, that this fruit was to be used, like the palm-branches,
for constructing booths ; but this is certainly implied in the con-
text : u Take . . . and rejoice . . . and keep a feast . ..in the booths
shall ye dwell." rfasa with the article is equivalent to " in the
booths which ye have constructed from the branches mentioned"
(cf. Ges. § 109, 3). It was in this sense that the law was under-
stood and carried out in the time of Ezra (Neh. viii. 15 sqq.). 1
1 Even in the time of the Maccabees, on the other hand (cf. 2 Mace. x.
6, 7), the feast of the Purification of the Temple was celebrated by the Jews
after the manner of the Tabernacles («*t«I ax.mvaft&Tav rpiroii) ; so that they
offered songs of praise, holding (Ixoures, carrying ?) leafy poles (Dvpoovg,
not branches of ivy, cf. Grimm, ad I.e.) and beautiful branches, also palms;
and in the time of Christ it was the custom to have sticks or poles (staves)
of palm-trees and citron-trees (jSipaovs in. tpomUay *«< xnpiav : Joseplus,
Ant. xiii. 13, 5), or to carry in the hand a branch of myrtle and willow
bound round with wool, with palms at the top and an apple of the rtpri*
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIII. 83-43. 449
The leading character of the feast of Tabernacles, which is indi-
cated at the outset by the emphatic "H& (ver. 39, see at ver. 27),
was to consist in " joy before the Lord." As a " feast," i.e.
a feast of joy (Jn, from Mn = ^n, denoting the circular motion
of the dance, 1 Sam. xxx. 16), it was to be kept for seven days ;
so that Israel " should be only rejoicing," and give itself up
entirely to joy (Deut. xvi. 15). Now, although the motive
assigned in Deut. is this : " for God will bless thee (Israel) in
all thine increase, and in all the work of thine hands;" and
although the feast, as a " feast of ingathering," was a feast of
thanksgiving for the gathering in of the produce of the land,
" the produce of the floor and wine-press ;" and the blessing
they had received in the harvested fruits, the oil and wine, which
contributed even more to the enjoyment of life than the bread
that was needed for daily food, furnished in a very high degree
the occasion and stimulus to the utterance of grateful joy : the
origin and true signification of the feast of Tabernacles are not
to be sought for in this natural allusion to the blessing of tne
harvest, but the dwelling in booths was the principal point in
the feast ; and this was instituted as a law for all future time
(ver. 41), that succeeding generations might know that Jehovah
had caused the children of Israel to dwell in booths when He led
them out of Egypt (ver. 43). n 3D, a booth or hut, is not to be
confounded with ?£& a tent, but comes from ?]3D texuit, and
signifies casa, umbraculum ex frondibus ramisque consertum
(Ges. thet. t. v.), serving as a defence both against the heat of
the sun, and also against wind and rain (Ps. xxxi. 21 ; Isa. iv. 6 ;
Jonah iv. 5). Their dwelling in booths was by no means in-
tended, as Bdhr supposes, to bring before the minds of the
people the unsettled wandering life of the desert, and remind
(peach or pomegranate ?) upon it (tlpwioimv pvpoinns *■»! M*( ai>» xpa&t)
<bol»ixo$ veitonnfihnu, tow ftvihov rov rq? Wipeias •xpoaooroi). This custom,
which was still further developed in the Talmud, where a bunch made of
palm, myrtle, and willow boughs is ordered to be carried in the right hand,
and a citron or orange in the left, has no foundation in the law : it sprang
rather out of an imitation of the Greek harvest-feast of the Pyanepsia and
Bacchus festivals, from which the words tipmi and tlptmusmi were borrowed
by Josephus, and had been tacked on by the scribes to the text of the Bible
(ver. 40) in the best way they could. See Btihr, Symbol, ii. p. 625, and the
innumerable trivial laws in Mishna Succa and Succa Codex talm. babyl. sive
de tabemacuhrum festo ed. Dachs. Utr. 1726, 4.
PENT. — VOL. II. 2 P
Digitized by
Google
450 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
them of the trouble endured there, for the recollection of pri-
vation and want can never be an occasion of joy ; but it was to
place vividly before the eyes of the future generations of Israel
a memorial of the grace, care, and protection which God
afforded to His people in the great and terrible wilderness
(Deut. viii. 15). Whether the Israelites, in their journey
through the wilderness, not only used the tents which they had
taken with them (cf. chap. xiv. 8 ; Ex. xvi. 16, xviii. 7, xxxiii.
8 sqq. ; Num. xvi. 26 sqq., xxiv. 5, etc.), but erected booths of
branches and bushes in those places of encampment where they
remained for a considerable time, as the Bedouins still do some-
times in the peninsula of Sinai (Burckhardt, Syrim, p. 858), or
not ; at all events, the shielding and protecting presence of the
Lord in the pillar of cloud and fire was, in the words of the
prophet, " a booth (tabernacle) for a shadow in the day-time
from the heat, and for a place of refuge, and for a covert from
storm and from rain" (Isa. iv. 6) in the barren wilderness, to
those who had just been redeemed out of Egypt. Moreover,
the booths used at this feast were not made of miserable shruhs
of the desert, but of branches of fruit-trees, palms and thickly
covered trees, the produce of the good and glorious land into
which God had brought them (Deut. viii. 7 sqq.) ; and in this
respect they presented a living picture of the plenteous fulness
of blessing with which the Lord had enriched His people.
This fulness of blessing was to be called to mind by their
dwelling in booths ; in order that, in the land " wherein they
ate bread without scarceness and lacked nothing, where they
built goodly houses and dwelt therein ; where their herds and
flocks, their silver and their gold, and all that they had, multi-
plied" (Deut. viii. 9, 12, 13), they might not say in their
hearts, " My power, and the might of mine hand, hath gotten
me this wealth," but might remember that Jehovah was their
God, who gave them power to get wealth (vers. 17, 18), that so
their heart might not " be lifted np and forget Jehovah their
God, who had led them out of the land of Egypt, the house of
bondage." If, therefore, the foliage of the booths pointed to
the glorious possessions of the inheritance, which the Lord had
prepared for His redeemed people in Canaan, yet the natural
allusion of the feast, which was superadded to the historical, and
subordinate to it, — viz. to the plentiful harvest of rich and beau-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIV. 1-9. 451
tiful fruits, which they had gathered in from this inheritance,
and could now enjoy in peace after the toil of cultivating the
land was over, — would necessarily raise their hearts to ■ still
higher joy through their gratitude to the Lord and Giver of
all, and make this feast a striking figure of the blessedness of
the people of God when resting from their labours. — Ver. 44.
Communication of these laws to the people.
PREPARATION OP THE HOLT LAMPS AND 8HEW-BBEAD.
PUNISHMENT OP A BLASPHEMER. — CHAP. XXIV.
Vers. 1-9. The directions concerning the oil for the holy
candlestick (vera. 1-4) and the preparation of the shew-bread
(vers. 5-9) lose the appearance of an interpolation, when we
consider and rightly understand on the one hand the manner in
which the two are introduced in ver. 2, and on the other their,
significance in relation to the worship of God. The introduc-
tory formula, " Command the children of Israel that they fetch
(bring)," shows that the command relates to an offering on the
part of the congregation, a sacrificial gift, with which Israel was
to serve the Lord continually. This service consisted in the fact,
that in the oil of the lamps of the seven-branched candlestick,
which burned before Jehovah, the nation of Israel manifested
itself as a congregation which caused its light to shine in the
darkness of this world ; and that in the shew-bread it offered
the fruits of its labour in the field of the kingdom of God, as a
spiritual sacrifice to Jehovah. The offering of oil, therefore, for
the preparation of the candlestick, and that of fine flour for
making the loaves to be placed before Jehovah, formed part of the
service in which Israel sanctified its life and labour to the Lord
its God, not only at the appointed festal periods, but every day;
and the law is very appropriately appended to the sanctification
of the Sabbaths and feast-days, prescribed in chap, xxiii. The
first instructions in vers. 2-4 are a verbal repetition of Ex. xxvii.
20, 21, and have been explained already. Their execution by
Aaron is recorded at Num. viii. 1-4 ; and the candlestick itself
was set in order by Moses at the consecration of the tabernacle
(Ex. xl. 25). — Vers. 5-9. The preparation of the shew-bread
and the use to be made of it are described here for the first
time ; though it had already been offered by the congregation
Digitized by
Google
452 THE THIBD BOOK OF MOSES.
at the consecration of the tabernacle, and placed by Moses
upon the table (Ex. xxxix. 36, xL 23). Twelve cakes (challoth,
ii. 4) were to be made of fine flour, of two-tenths of an ephah
each, and placed in two rows, six in each row, upon the golden
table before Jehovah (Ex. xxv. 23 sqq.). Pure incense was
then to be added to each row, which was to be (to serve) as a
memorial (azcarah, see chap. ii. 2), as a firing for Jehovah.
7J> JTU to give upon, to add to, does not force us to the conclusion
that the incense was to be spread upon the cakes ; but is easily
reconcilable with the Jewish tradition (Josephus, Ant. iii. 10, 7;
Mishnah, Menach. xi. 7, 8), that the incense was placed in golden
saucers with each row of bread. The number twelve corre-
sponded to the number of the twelve tribes of Israel. The
arrangement of the loaves in rows of six each was in accordance
with the shape of the table, just like the division of the names
of the twelve tribes upon the two precious stones on Aaron's
shoulder-dress (Ex. xxviii. 10). By the presentation or prepa-
ration of them from the fine flour presented by the congregation,
and still more by the addition of incense, which was burned
upon the altar every Sabbath on the removal of the loaves as
azcarah, i.e. as a practical meiriento of the congregation before
God, the laying out of these loaves assumed the form of a blood-
less sacrifice, in which the congregation brought the fruit of its
life and labour before the face of the Lord, and presented itself
to its God as a nation diligent in sanctification to good works.
If the shew-bread was a minchah, or meat-offering, and even a
most holy one, which only the priests were allowed to eat in the
holy place (ver. 9, cf. chap. ii. 3 and vi. 9, 10), it must naturally
have been unleavened, as the unanimous testimony of the
Jewish tradition affirms it to have been. And if as a rule no
meat-offering could be leavened, and of the loaves of first-fruits
prepared for the feast of Pentecost, which were actually leavened,
none was allowed to be placed upon the altar (chap. ii. 11, 12,
vi. 10) ; still less could leavened bread be brought into the
sanctuary before Jehovah. The only ground, therefore, on
which Knobel can maintain that those loaves were leavened, is
on the supposition that they were intended to represent the daily
bread, which could no more fail in the house of Jehovah than
in any other well-appointed house (see Bdhr, Sytnbolik i. p.
410). The process of laying these loaves before Jehovah con-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIV. 10-«8. 453
tinually was to be "an everlasting covenant" (ver. 8), i.e. a
pledge or sign of the everlasting covenant, just as circumcision,
as the covenant in the flesh, was to be an everlasting covenant
(Gen. xvii. 13).
Vers. 10-23. The account of the punishment of a Blas-
phemer is introduced in the midst of the laws, less because u it
brings out to view by a clear example the administration of the
divine law in Israel, and also introduces and furnishes the reason
for several important laws" (Baumgarten), than because the
historical occurrence itself took place at the time when the laws
relating to sanctification of life before the Lord were given,
whilst the punishment denounced against the blasphemer exhi-
bited in a practical form, as a warning to the whole nation, the
sanctification of the Lord in the despisers of His name. The
circumstances were the following: — The son of an Israelitish
woman named Shelomith, the daughter of Dibri, of the tribe
of Dan, and of an Egyptian whom the Israelitish woman had
married, went out into the midst of the children of Israel, i.e.
went out of his tent or place of encampment among the Israel-
ites. As the son of an Egyptian, he belonged to the foreigners
who had gone out with Israel (Ex. xii. 38), and who probably
had their tents somewhere apart from those of the Israelites,
who were encamped according to their tribes (Num. ii. 2).
Having got into a quarrel with an Israelite, this man scoffed at
the name (of Jehovah) and cursed. The cause of the quarrel
is not given, and cannot be determined. 3p3 : to bore, hollow
out, then to sting, metaphorically to separate, fix (Gen. xxx.
28), hence to designate (Num. i. 17, etc.), and to prick in malam
partem, to taunt, i.e. to blaspheme, curse, = 3?j? Num. xxiii. 11,
25, etc. That the word is used here in a bad sense, is evident
from the expression " and cursed," and from the whole context
of vers. 15 and 16. The Jews, on the other hand, have taken
the word 3|?3 in this passage from time immemorial in the sense
of eirovofiA^eiv (LXX.), and founded upon it the well-known
law, against even uttering the name Jehovah (see particularly
ver. 16). u The name " tear' 4%. is the name " Jehovah " (cf . ver.
16), in which God manifested His nature. It was this passage
that gave rise to the custom, so prevalent among the Eabbins, of
using the expression " name," or " the name," for Dominus, or
Digitized by
Google
454 THE TBIBD BOOS OF MOSES.
Deus (see Buxtorf, lex. talmud. pp. 2432 sqq.). The blasphemer
was brought before Moses and then put into confinement, " to
determine for them (such blasphemers) according to the mouth
(command) of Jehovah." the : to separate, distinguish, then to
determine exactly, which is the sense both here and in Num.
xv. 34, where it occurs in a similar connection. — Vers. 13-16.
Jehovah ordered the blasphemer to be taken out of the camp,
and the witnesses to lay their hands upon his head, and the
whole congregation to stone him ; and published at the same
time the general law, that whoever cursed his God should bear
(i.e. atone for) his sin (cf. Ex. xxii. 27), and whoever blasphemed
the name of Jehovah should be stoned, the native as well as the
foreigner. By laying (resting, cf. i. 4) their hands upon the
head of the blasphemer, the hearers or witnesses were to throw
off from themselves the blasphemy which they had heard, and
return it upon the head of the blasphemer, for him to expiate.
The washing of hands in Deut. xxi. 6 is analogous ; but the
reference made by Knobel to Deut. xvii. 7, where the witnesses
are commanded to turn their hand against an idolater who had
been condemned to death, i.e. to stone him, is out of place. —
Vers. 17-22. The decision asked for from God concerning the
crime of the blasphemer, who was the son of an Egyptian, and
therefore not a member of the congregation of Jehovah, fur-
nished the occasion for God to repeat those laws respecting
murder or personal injury inflicted upon a man, which had
hitherto been given for the Israelites alone (Ex. xxi. 12 sqq.),
and to proclaim their validity in the case of the foreigner also
(vers. 17, 21, 22). To these there are appended the kindred
commandments concerning the killing of cattle (vers. 18, 21,
22), which had not been given, it is true, expressis verbis, but
were contained implicite in the rights of Israel (Ex. xxi. 33 sqq.),
and are also extended to foreigners. D'lK ttto nan, to smite die
soul of a man, i.e. to put him to death; — the expression " soul
of a beast," in ver. 18, is to be understood in the same sense. —
Ver. 19. " Cause a blemisli," i.e. inflict a bodily injury. This is
still further defined in the cases mentioned (breach, eye, tooth),
in which punishment was to be inflicted according to the jus
talionis (see at Ex. xxi. 23 sqq.). — Ver. 23. After these laws
had been issued, the punishment was inflicted upon the blas-
phemer.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXV. 8-7. 455
SANCTIFIOATION OF THE POSSESSION OF LAND BY THE
SABBATICAL AND JUBILEE TEAKS. — CHAP. XXV.
The law for the sabbatical and jubilee years brings to a
close the laws given to Moses by Jehovah upon Mount Sinai.
This is shown by the words of the heading (ver. 1), which point
back to Ex. xxxiv. 32, and bind together into an inward unity
the whole round of laws that Moses received from God upon
the mountain, and then gradually announced to the people.
The same words are repeated, not only in Lev. vii. 38 at the
close of the laws of sacrifice, but also at chap. xxvi. 46, at the
close of the promises and threats which follow the law for the
sabbatical and jubilee years, and lastly, at chap, xxvii. 34, after
the supplementary law concerning vows. The institution of the
jubilee years corresponds to the institution of the day of atone-
ment (chap. xvi.). Just as all the sins and uncleannesses of the
whole congregation, which had remained nnatoned for and nn-
cleansed in the course of the year, were to be wiped away by
the all-embracing expiation of the yearly recurring day of
atonement, and an undisturbed relation to be restored between
Jehovah and His people ; so, by the appointment of the year of
jubilee, the disturbance and confusion of the divinely appointed
relations, which had been introduced in the course of time through
the inconstancy of all human or earthly things, were to be re-
moved by the appointment of the year of jubilee, and the king-
dom of Israel to be brought back to its original condition. The
next chapter (chap, xxvi.) bears the same relation to the giving
of the law upon Sinai as Ex. xxni. 20-33 to the covenant rights
in Ex. xx. 22-xxiii. 19.
Vers. 2-7. The Sabbatical Yeab. — When Israel had come
into the land which the Lord gave to it, it was to sanctify it to
the Lord by the observance of a Sabbath. As the nation at
large, with its labourers and beasts of burden, was to keep a
Sabbath or day of rest every seventh day of the week, so the
land which they tilled was to rest (to keep, IBB' rq& as in chap,
xxiii. 32) a Sabbath to the Lord. Six years they were to sow
the field and cut the vineyard, i.e. cultivate the corn-fields, vine-
yards, and olive-yards (Ex. xxiii. 11 : see the remarks on cerem
at chap. xix. 10), and gather in their produce ; but in the seventh
Digitized by
Google
456 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
year the land was to keep a Sabbath of rest (Sabbath sabbathon,
Ex. xxxi. 15), a Sabbath consecrated to the Lord (see Ex. xx.
10); and in this year the land was neither to be tilled nor reaped
(cf. Ex. xxiii. 10, 11). lot in Kal applies only to the cutting
of grapes, and so also in Niphal, Isa. v. 6 ; hence zemorah, a
vine-branch (Num. xiii. 23), and mazmerah, a pruning-knife
(Isa. ii. 4, etc.). 1 The omission of sowing and reaping presup-
posed that the sabbatical year commenced with the civil year,
in the autumn of the sixth year of labour, and not with the
ecclesiastical year, on the first of Abib (Nisan), and that it lasted
till the autumn of the seventh year, when the cultivation of the
land would commence again with the preparation of the ground
and the sowing of the seed for the eighth year ; and with this
the command to proclaim the jubilee year on " the tenth day of
the seventh month " throughout all the land (ver. 9), and the
calculation in vers. 21, 22, fully agree. — Ver. 5. " That which
has fallen out (been shaken out) of thy harvest (i.e. the corn
which had grown from the grains of the previous harvest that
had fallen out) thou shalt not reap, and the grapes of thine uncut
tliou shalt not gather." "i*B, the Nazarite, who let his hair grow
freely without cutting it (Num. vi. 5), is used figuratively, both
here and in ver. 11, to denote a vine not pruned, since by being
left to put forth all its productive power it was consecrated to
the Lord. The Roman poets employ a similar figure, and speak
of the viridis coma of the vine (Tibull. i. 7, 34; Propert. ii. 15,
12). — Vers. 6, 7. " And the Sabbath of the land (t.e. the produce
of the sabbatical year or year of rest, whatever grew that year
without cultivation) shall be to you for food, for thee and thy
servant, . . . and for the beasts that are in thy land shall all its
produce be for food." The meaning is, that what grew of itself
was not to be reaped by the owner of the land, but that masters
and servants, labourers and visitors, cattle and game, were to
eat thereof away from the field (cf. ver. 12). The produce
arising without tilling or sowing was to be a common good for
man and beast. According to Ex. xxiii. 11, it was to belong to
the poor and needy ; but the owner was not forbidden to par-
1 The meaning to sing and play, which is peculiar to the Piel, and is
derived from zamar, to hum, has hardly anything to do with this. At all
events the connection has not yet been shown to be a probable one. See
Hup/eld, Ps. iv. pp. 421-2, note.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXV. 2-7. 457
take of it also, so that there can be no discrepancy discovered
between this passage and the verse before us. The produce
referred to would be by no means inconsiderable, particularly if
there had not been a careful gleaning after the. harvest, or the
corn had become over-ripe. In the fertile portions of Palestine,
especially in the plain of Jezreel and on the table-land of
Galilee, as well as in other parts, large quantities of wheat and
other cereals are still self-sown from the ripe ears, the over-
flowing of which is not gathered by any of the inhabitants of
the land. Strabo gives a similar account of Albania, viz. that
in many parts a field once sown will bear fruit twice and even
three times, the first yield being as much as fifty-fold. The
intention of this law was not so much to secure the physical re-
creation of both the land and people, however useful and neces-
sary this might be for men, animals, and land in this sublunary
world ; but the land was to keep Sabbath to the Lord in the
seventh year. In the sabbatical year the land, which the Lord
had given to His people, was to observe a period of holy rest and
refreshment to its Lord and God, just as the congregation did
on the Sabbath-day ; and the hand of man was to be withheld
from the fields and fruit-gardens from working them, that they
might yield their produce for his use. The earth was to be
saved from the hand of man exhausting its power for earthly
purposes as his own property, and to enjoy the holy rest with
which God had blessed the earth and all its productions after
the creation. From this, Israel, as the nation of God, was to
learn, on the one hand, that although the earth was created for
man, it was not merely created for him to draw out its powers
for his own use, but also to be holy to the Lord, and participate
in His blessed rest ; and on the other hand, that the great pur-
pose for which the congregation of the Lord existed, did not
consist in the uninterrupted tilling of the earth, connected with
bitter labour in the sweat of his brow (Gen. iii. 17, 19), but in
the peaceful enjoyment of the fruits of the earth, which the
Lord their God had given them, and would give them still with-
out the labour of their hands, if they strove to keep His covenant
and satisfy themselves with His grace. This intention of the
sabbatical year comes out still more plainly in the year of
jubilee, in which the idea of the sanctification of the whole land
as the Lord's property is still more strongly expressed, and whose
Digitized by
Google
458 THE THIRD BOOK OF HOSES.
inward connection with the sabbatical year is indicated by the
fact that the time for observing it was regulated by the sab-
batical years (ver. 8).
Vers. 8-55. The law for the Yeab of Jubilee refers first
of all to its observance (vers. 8-12), and secondly to its effects
\ i (a) upon the possession of property (vers. 13-34), and (6) upon
the personal freedom of the Israelites (vers. 35—55). — Vers. 8-
12. Keeping the year of jubilee. Vers. 8, 9. Seven Sabbaths of
years — i.e. year-Sabbaths or sabbatical years, or seven times seven
years, the time of seven year-Sabbaths, that is to say, 49 years —
they were to count, and then at the expiration of that time to
cause the trumpet of jubilee to go (sound) through the whole
land on the tenth of the seventh month, i.e. the day of atone-
ment, to proclaim the entrance of the year of jubilee. This
mode of announcement was closely connected with the idea of
the year itself. The blowing of trumpets, or blast of the far-
sounding horn (shophar, see at chap, xxiii. 24), was the signal
of the descent of the Lord upon Sinai, to raise Israel to be His
people, to receive them into His covenant, to unite them to
Himself, and bless them through His covenant of grace (Ex.
xix. 13, 16, 19, xx. 18). Just as the people were to come up
to the mountain at the sounding of the ?5^, or the voice of the
shophar, to commemorate its union with the Lord, so at the
expiration of the seventh sabbatical year the trumpet-blast was
to announce to the covenant nation the gracious presence of its
God, and the coming of the year which was to bring " liberty
throughout the land to all that dwelt therein " (ver. 10), — de-
liverance from bondage (vers. 40 sqq.), return to their property
and family (vers. 10, 13), and release from the bitter labour of
cultivating the land (vers. 11, 12). This year of grace was pro-
claimed and began with the day of atonement of every seventh
sabbatical year, to show that it was only with the full forgive-
ness of sins that the blessed liberty of the children of God
could possibly commence. This grand year of grace was to
return after seven times seven years ; i.e., as is expressly stated
in ver. 10, every fiftieth year was to be sanctified as a year of
jubilee. By this regulation of the time, the view held by E.
Jehuda, and the chronologists and antiquarians who have fol-
lowed him, that every seventh sabbatical year, i.e. the 49th
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXV. 18-84. 459
year, was to be kept as the year of jubilee, is proved to be at
variance with the text, and the fiftieth year is shown to be the
year of rest, in which the sabbatical idea attained its fullest
realization, and reached its earthly temporal close. — Ver. 10.
The words, u Ye shall proclaim liberty throughout all the land
unto all the inhabitants thereof," are more closely defined by the
two clauses commencing with tfn ?$'' in vers. 10 and 11. " A
trumpet-blast shall it be to you, that ye return every one to his
own possession, and every one to his family:" a still further
explanation is given in vers. 23-34 and 39-55. This was to be
the fruit or effect of the blast, i.e. of the year commencing with
the blast, and hence the year was called " the year of liberty,"
or free year, in Ezek. xlvi. 17. Wh, from 7T to flow with a
rushing noise, does not mean jubilation or the time of jubilation
(Ges., Kn., and others) ; but wherever it is not applied to the
year of jubilee, it signifies only the loud blast of a trumpet (Ex.
xix. 13 ; Josh. vi. 5). This meaning also applies here in vers.
10J, 11 and 12 ; whilst in vers. 15, 28, 30, 31, 33, xxvii. 18, and
Num. xxxvi. 4, it is used 'as an abbreviated expression for >W
?3V, the year of the trumpet-blast. — Vers. 11, 12. The other
effect of the fiftieth year proclaimed with the trumpet-blast
consisted in the fact that the Israelites were not to sow or reap,
just as in the sabbatical year (see vers. 4, 5). "For it is ??V,"
i.e. not "jubilation or time of jubilation," but "the time or year
of the trumpet-blast, it shall be holy to you," i.e. a sabbatical
time, which is to be holy to you like the day of the trumpet-
blast (vers. 23, 24).
Vers. 13-34. One of the effects of the year of freedom is
mentioned here, viz. the return of every man to his own posses-
sion ; and the way is prepared for it by a warning against over-
reaching in the sale of land, and the assignment of a reason for
this. — Vers. 14-17. In the purchase and sale of pieces of land
no one was to oppress another, i.e. to overreach him by false
statements as to its value and produce, njin applies specially
to the oppression of foreigners (chap. xix. 33 ; Ex. xxii. 20), of
slaves (Deut. xxiii. 17), of the poor, widows, and orphans (Jer.
xxii. 3 ; Ezek. xviii. 8) in civil matters, by overreaching them
or taking their property away. The inf. abs. nij? : as in Gen.
xli. 43. The singular suffix in irvpg is to be understood dis-
tributively of a particular Israelite. — Vers. 15, 16. The pur-
Digitized by
Google
460 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
chase and sale were to be regulated by the number of years
that had elapsed since the year of jubilee, so that they were
only to sell the produce of the yearly revenues up to the next
jubilee year, and make the price higher or lower according to
the larger or smaller number of the years. — Vers. 17 sqq. Over-
reaching and oppression God would avenge ; they were there-
fore to fear before Him. On the other hand, if they kept His
commandments and judgments, He would take care that they
should dwell in the land in safety {secure, free from anxiety),
and be satisfied with the abundance of its produce. In this
way vers. 18-22 fit on exceedingly well to what precedes. 1 —
Vers. 20 sqq. Jehovah would preserve them from want, without
their sowing or reaping. He would bestow His blessing upon
them in the sixth year, so that it should bear the produce of
three (nfe*P for nnfe»v as in Gen. xxxiii. 11); and when they sowed
in the eighth year, they should eat the produce of the old year
up to the ninth year, that is to say, till the harvest of that year.
It is quite evident from vers. 21 and 22, according to which the
sixth year was to produce enough for" three years, and the sow-
ing for the ninth was to take place in the eighth, that not only
the year of jubilee, but the sabbatical year also, commenced in
the autumn, when they first began to sow for the coming year;
so that the sowing was suspended from the autumn of the sixth
year till the autumn of the seventh, and even till the autumn of
the eighth, whenever the jubilee year came round, in which case
both sowing and reaping were omitted for two years in succes-
sion, and consequently the produce of the sixth year, which was
harvested in the seventh month of that year, must have sufficed
for three years, not merely till the sowing in the autumn of the
1 To prove that this verse is an interpolation made by the Jehovist into
the Elohistic writings, Knobel is obliged to resort to two groundless assump-
tions : viz. (1) to regard vers. 23 and 24, which belong to what follows
(vers. 25 sqq.) and lay down the general rule respecting the possession and
redemption of land, as belonging to what precedes and connected with vers.
14-17 ; and (2) to explain vers. 18-22 in the most arbitrary manner, as at
supplementary clause relating to the sabbatical year, whereas the promise
that the sixth year should yield produce enough for three years (vers.
21, 22) shows as clearly as possible that they treat of the year of jubilee
together with the seventh sabbatical year which preceded it, and in ver.
20 the seventh year is mentioned simply as the beginning of the two years'
Sabbath which the land was to keep without either sowing or reaping.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXV. 18-84. 461
eighth or fiftieth year, but till the harvest of the ninth or fifty-
first year, as the Talmud and Rabbins of every age have under-
stood the law.
Vers. 23-28. What was already implied in the laws relating
to the purchase and sale of the year's produce (vers. 15, 16),
namely, that the land could not be alienated, is here clearly ex-
pressed ; and at the same time the rule is laid down, showing
how a man, who had been compelled by poverty to sell his
patrimony, was to recover possession of it by redemption. In
the first place, ver. 23 contains the general rule, " the land shall
not be sold raMM?" (lit. to annihilation), i.e. .so as to vanish away
from, or be for ever lost to, the seller. For " the laiid belongs to
Jehovah:" the Israelites, to whom He would give it (ver. 2),
were not actual owners or full possessors, so that they could do
what they pleased with it, but " strangers and sojourners with
Jehovah " in His land. Consequently (ver. 24) throughout the
whole of the land of their possession they were to grant f?K3 re-
lease, redemption to the land. There were three ways in which
this could be done. The first case (ver. 25) was this: if a brother
became poor and sold his property, his nearest redeemer was to
come and release what his brother had sold, i.e. buy it back
from the purchaser and restore it to its former possessor. The
nearest redeemer was the relative upon whom this obligation
rested according to the series mentioned in vers. 48, 49. — The
second case (vers. 26, 27) was this : if any one had no redeemer,
either because there were no relatives upon whom the obligation
rested, or because they were all too poor, and he had earned
and acquired sufficient to redeem it, he was to calculate the
years of purchase, and return the surplus to the man who had
bought it, i.e. as much as he had paid for the years that still
remained up to the next year of jubilee, that so he might come
into possession of it again. As the purchaser had only paid the
amount of the annual harvests till the next year of jubilee, all
that he could demand back was as much as he had paid for the
years that still remained. — Ver. 28. The third case was this : if
a man had not earned as much as was required to make com-
pensation for the recovery of the land, what he had sold was to
remain in the possession of the buyer till the year of jubilee,
and then it was to " go out," i.e. to become free again, so that
the impoverished seller could enter into possession without com-
Digitized by
Google
462 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
pensation. The buyer lost nothing by this, for he hod fully
recovered all that he paid for the annual harvests up to the
year of jubilee, from the amount which those harvests yielded.
Through these legal regulations every purchase of land became
simply a lease for a term of years.
Vers. 29-34. Alienation and redemption of houses. — Vers.
29, 30. On the sale of a dwelling-house in a wall-town (a town
surrounded by a wall) there was to be redemption till the com-
pletion of the year of its purchase. O'DJ, " days (i.e. a definite
period) shall its redemption be ;" that is to say, the right of re-
demption or repurchase should be retained. If it was not re-
deemed within the year, it remained to the buyer for ever for
his descendants, and did not go out free in the year of jubilee.
Oj> to arise for a possession, i.e. to become a fixed standing
possession, as in Gen. xxiii. 17. w "iCW for v "it?K as in chap.
xi. 21 (see at Ex. xxi. 8). This law is founded upon the as-
sumption, that the houses in unwalled towns are not so closely
connected with the ownership of the land, as that the alienation
of the houses would alter the portion originally assigned to each
family for a possession. Having been built by men, they be-
longed to their owners in full possession, whether they had
received them just as they were at the conquest of the land, or
had erected them for themselves. This last point of view, how-
ever, was altogether a subordinate one ; for in the case of u the
houses of the villages" (i.e. farm-buildings and villages, see
Josh. xiii. 23, etc.), which had no walls round them, it was not
taken into consideration at all. — Ver. 31. Such houses as these
were to be reckoned as part of the land, and to be treated as
landed property, with regard to redemption and restoration at
the year of jubilee. — Ver. 32. On the other hand, so far as the
Levitical towns, viz. the houses of the Levites in the towns be-
longing to them, were concerned, there was to be eternal re-
demption for the Levites ; that is to say, when they were parted
with, the right of repurchase was never lost. a$V (eternal) is
to be understood as a contrast to the year allowed in the case of
other houses (vers. 29, 30). — Ver. 33. u And whoever (if any
one) redeems, i.e. buys, of the Levites, the house that is sold
and (indeed in) the town of his possession is to go out free in
the year of jubilee ; for the houses of the Levitical towns are
their (the Levites') possession among the children of Israel."
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXV. 18-84. 463
The meaning is this : If any one bought a Levite's house in
one of the Levitical towns, the house he had bought was to
revert to the Levite without compensation in the year of jubilee.
The difficulty connected with the first clause is removed, if we
understand the word ?*0* (to redeem, i.e. to buy back), as the
Rabbins do, in the sense of njj? to buy, acquire. The use of ?W
for nji? may be explained from the fact, that when the land was
divided, the Levites did not receive either an inheritance in the
land, or even the towns appointed for them to dwell in as their
own property. The Levitical towns were allotted to the different
tribes in which they were situated, with the simple obligation to
set apart a certain number of dwelling-houses for the Levites,
together with pasture-ground for their cattle in the precincts
of the towns (cf. Num. xxxv. 1 sqq. and my Commentary on
Joshua, p. 453 translation). If a non-Levite, therefore, bought
a Levite's house, it was in reality a repurchase of property be-
longing to his tribe, or the redemption of what the tribe had
relinquished to the Levites as their dwelling and for their
necessities. 1 The words 'IW Tjn are an explanatory apposition —
"and that in the town of his possession," — and do not mean
" whatever he had sold of his house-property or anything else
in his town," for the Levites had no other property in the town
besides the houses, but "the house which he had sold, namely,
in the town of his possession." This implies that the right of
reversion was only to apply to the houses ceded to the Levites
in their own towns, and not to houses which they had acquired
in other towns either by purchase or inheritance. The singular
tfii is used after a subject in the plural, because the copula
agrees with the object (see JSwald, § 319c). As the Levites
were to have no hereditary property in the land except the
1 This is the way in which it is correctly explained by Hiskuni: Utitur
scriptura verbo redimendi rum emendi, quia quidquid Levitts vendunt ex
Israelitarum hsereditate est, non ex ipsorum htereditate. Nam ecce non habent
partes in terra, unde omnis qui accipit aut emit ab Mis est acsi redimeret,
quoniam ecce initio ipsius possessio fuit. On the other hand, the proposal
made by Ewald, Knobel, etc., after the example of the Vulgate, to supply
t& before iw is not only an unnecessary conjecture, bat is utterly unsuit-
able, inasmuch as the words " if one of the Levites does not redeem it "
would restrict the right to the Levites without any perceptible reason ; just
as if a blood-relation on the female side, belonging to any other tribe, might
not have done this.
Digitized by
Google
464 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
houses in the towns appointed for them, it was necessary that
the possession of their houses should be secured to them for all
time, if they were not to fall behind the other tribes. — Ver. 34.
The field of the pasture-ground of the Levitical towns was not
to be sold. Beside the houses, the Levites were also to receive
EH3D pasturage for their flocks (from BH3 to drive, to drive out
the cattle) round about these cities (Num. xxxv. 2, 3). These
meadows were not to be saleable, and not even to be let till the
year of jubilee ; because, if they were sold, the Levites would
have nothing left upon which to feed their cattle.
Vers. 35-55. The second effect of the jubilee year, viz. the
return of an Israelite, who had become a slave, to liberty and to
his family, is also introduced with an exhortation to support an
impoverished brother (vers. 35-38), and preserve to him his
personal freedom. — Ver. 35. " If thy brother (countryman, or
member of the same tribe) becomes poor, and his hand trembles
by thee, thou shalt lay hold of him ;" i.e. if he is no longer able
to sustain himself alone, thou shalt take him by the arm to help
him out of his misfortune. " Let him live with thee as a stranger
and sojourner." 'HJ introduces the apodosis (see Ges. § 126,
note 1). — Vers. 36 sqq. If he borrowed money, they were not
to demand interest ; or if food, they were not to demand any
addition, any larger quantity, when it was returned (cf . Ex. xxii.
24 ; Deut. xxiii. 20, 21), from fear of God, who had redeemed
Israel out of bondage, to give them the land of Canaan. In
ver. 37 TO is an abbreviation of TO? which only occurs here. —
From ver. 39 onwards there follow the laws relating to the bond-
age of the Israelite, who had been obliged to sell himself from
poverty. Vers. 39-46 relate to his service in bondage to an
(other) Israelite. The man to whom he had sold himself as
servant was not to have slave-labour performed by him (Ex. i.
14), but to keep him as a day-labourer and sojourner, and let
him serve with him till the year of jubilee. He was then to go out
free with his children, and return to his family and the possession
of his fathers (his patrimony). This regulation is a supplement
to the laws relating to the rights of Israel (Ex. xxi. 2-6), though
without a contradiction arising, as Knobel maintains, between
the different rules laid down. In Ex. xxi. nothing at all is de-
termined respecting the treatment of an Israelitish servant ; it is
simply stated that in the seventh year of his service he was to
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXV. 35-55. 465
recover his liberty. This limit is not mentioned here, because
the chapter before us simply treats of the influence of the year
of jubilee upon the bondage of the Israelites. On this point
it is decided, that the year of jubilee was to bring freedom
even to the Israelite who had been brought into slavery by his
poverty,— of course only to the man who was still in slavery when
it commenced and had not served seven full years, provided,
that is to say, that he had not renounced his claim to be set free
at the end of his seven years' service, according to Ex. xxi. 5, 6.
We have no right to expect this exception to be expressly men-
tioned here, because it did not interfere with the idea of the
year of jubilee. For whoever voluntarily renounced the claim
to be set free, whether because the year of jubilee was still so
far off that he did not expect to live to see it, or because he had
found a better lot with his master than he could secure for him-
self in a state of freedom, had thereby made a voluntary renun-
ciation of the liberty which the year of jubilee might have
brought to him (see Oehler's art. in Herzotfs Cycl., where the
different views on this subject are given). — Vers. 42, 43. Be-
cause the Israelites were servants of Jehovah, who had redeemed
them out of Pharaoh's bondage and adopted them as His people
(Ex. xix. 5, xviii. 10, etc.), they were not to be sold " a selling
of slaves," i.e. not to be sold into actual slavery, and no one of
them was to rule over another with severity (ver. 43, cf. Ex.
i. 13, 14). "Through this principle slavery was completely
abolished, so far as the people of the theocracy were con-
cerned" (Oehler). — Vers. 44 sqq. As the Israelites could only
hold in slavery servants and maid-servants whom they had bought
of foreign nations, or foreigners who had settled in the land,
these they might leave as an inheritance to their children, and
" through them they might work," i.e. have slave-labour per-
formed, but not through their brethren the children of Israel
(ver. 46, cf. ver. 43). — Vers. 47—55. The servitude of an
Israelite to a settler who had come to the possession of pro-
perty, or a non-Israelite dwelling in the land, was to be redeem-
able at any time. If an Israelite had sold_ himself because of
poverty to a foreign settler (3B^n "is, to distinguish the non-
Israelitish sojourner from the Israelitish, ver. 35), or to a stock
of a foreigner, then one of his brethren, or his uncle, or hi3
uncle's son or some one of his kindred, was to redeem him ; or
PENT. — VOL. II. 2 G .
Digitized by
Google
466 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
if he came into the possession of property, he was to redeem
himself. When this was done, the time was to be calculated from
the year of purchase to the year of jubilee, and " the money of
his purchase was to be according to the number of the years,"
i.e. the price at which he had sold himself was to be distributed
over the number of years that he would have to serve to the
year of jubilee ; and " according to the days of a day-labourer
shall he be with him," i.e. the time that he had worked was to
be estimated as that of a day-labourer, and be put to the credit
of the man to be redeemed. — Vers. 51, 52. According as there
were few or many years to the year of jubilee would the redemp-
tion-money to be paid be little or much. 0*3^3 Tfian much
in years : TViT\ neuter, and 3 as in Gen. vii. 21, viii. 17 etc.
JIVB? according to the measure of the same. — Ver. 53. During
the time of service the buyer was to keep him as a day-labourer
year by year, i.e. as a labourer engaged for a term of years, and
not rule over him with severe oppression. " In thine eyes," id.
so that thou (the nation addressed) seest it. — Ver. 54. If he
were not redeemed by these (the relations mentioned in vers.
48, 49), he was to go out free in the year of jubilee along with
his children, i.e. to be liberated without compensation. For
(ver. 55) he was not to remain in bondage, because the Israelites
were the servants of Jehovah (cf. ver. 42).
But although, through these arrangements, the year of jubi-
lee helped every Israelite, who had fallen into poverty and
slavery, to the recovery of his property and personal freedom,
and thus the whole community was restored to its original con-
dition as appointed by God, through the return of all the landed
property that had been alienated in the course of years to its
original proprietor ; the restoration of the theocratical state to
its original condition was not the highest or ultimate object of
the year of jubilee. The observance of sabbatical rest through-
out the whole land, and by the whole nation, formed part of the
liberty which it was to bring to the land and its inhabitants. In
the year of jubilee, as in the sabbatical year, the land of Jeho-
vah was to enjoy holy rest, and the nation of Jehovah to be set
free from the bitter labour of cultivating the soil, and to live
and refresh itself in blessed rest with the blessing which had
been given to it by the Lord its God. In this way the year of
jubilee became to the poor, oppressed, and suffering, in fact to
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVI. 467
the whole nation, a year of festivity and grace, which not only
brought redemption to the captives and deliverance to the poor
out of their distresses, but release to the whole congregation of
the Lord from the bitter labour of this world ; a time of refresh-
ing, in which all oppression was to cease, and every member of
the covenant nation find his redeemer in the Lord, who brought
every one back to his own property and home. Because Jeho-
vah had brought the children of Israel out of Egypt to give them
the land of Canaan, where they were to live as His servants and
serve Him, in the year of jubilee the.nation and land of Jeho-
vah were to celebrate a year of holy rest and refreshing before
the Lord, and in this celebration to receive a foretaste of the
times of refreshing from the presence of the Lord, which were
to be brought to all men by One anointed with the Spirit of the
Lord, who would come to preach the Gospel to the poor, to bind
up the broken-hearted, to bring liberty to the captives and the
opening of the prisons to them that were bound, to proclaim to
all that mourn a year of grace from the Lord (Isa. lxi. 1-3 ;
Luke iv. 17—21) ; and who will come again from heaven in the
times of the restitution of all things to complete the aTroKard-
oTYWts TV? fiaaCkei&i rod Oeov, to glorify the whole creation into
a kingdom of God, to restore everything that has been destroyed
by sin from the beginning of the world, to abolish all the slavery
of sin, establish the true liberty of the children of God, emanci-
pate every creature from the bondage of vanity, under which it
sighs on account of the sin of man, and introduce all His chosen
into the kingdom of peace and everlasting blessedness, which was
prepared for their inheritance before the foundation of the world
(Acts iii. 19, 20 ; Eom. viii. 19 sqq. ; Matt. xxv. 34 ; Col. i. 12 ;
1 Pet. i. 4).
PROMISES AND THREATS. — CHAP. XXVI.
Just as the book of the covenant, the kernel containing the
fundamental principles of the covenant fellowship, which the
Lord established with the children of Israel whom He had
adopted as His nation, and the rule of life for the covenant
nation (Ex. xx. 22-xxiii. 19), concluded with promises and
threats (Ex. xxiii. 20-33) ; so the giving of the law at Sinai, as
the unfolding of the inner, spiritual side of the whole of the
Digitized by
Google
468 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
covenant constitution, closes in this chapter with an elaborate
unfolding of the blessing which would be secured by a faithful
observance of the laws, and the curse which would follow the
transgression of them. But whilst the former promises and
threats (Ex. xxiii.) related to the conquest of the promised
land of Canaan, the promises in this chapter refer to the
blessings which were to be bestowed upon Israel when the land
was in their possession (vers. 3-13), and the threats to the judg-
ments with which the Lord would visit His disobedient people
in their inheritance, and in fact drive them out and scatter them
among the heathen (vers. 14-39). When this had been done,
then, as is still further proclaimed with a prophetic look into the
distant future, would they feel remorse, acknowledge their sin
to the Lord, and be once more received into favour by Him, the
eternally faithful covenant God (vers. 40-45).* The blessing
1 When modern critics, who are carried away by naturalism, maintain
that Moses was not the author of these exhortations and warnings, because
of their prophetic contents, and assign them to the times of the kings, the
end of the eighth, or beginning of the seventh century (see Ewald, Gesch.
i. 156), they have not considered, in their antipathy to any supernatural
revelations from God in the Old Testament, that even apart from any
higher illumination, the fundamental idea of these promises and threats
must have presented itself to the mind of the lawgiver Moses. It required
but a very little knowledge of the nature of the human heart, and a clear
insight into the spiritual and ethical character of the law, to enable him to
foresee that the earthly-minded, unholy nation would not fulfil the solemn
demand of the law that their whole life should be sanctified to the Lord God,
that they would transgress in many ways, and rebel against God and His holy
laws, and therefore that in any case times of fidelity and the corresponding
blessing would alternate with times of unfaithfulness and the corresponding
curse, but that, for all that, at the end the grace of God would obtain the
victory over the severely punished and deeply humbled nation, and bring
the work of salvation to a glorious close. It is true, the concrete character
of this chapter cannot be fully explained in this way, but it furnishes the
clue to the psychological interpretation of the conception of this prophetic
discourse, and shows us the subjective points of contact for the divine
revelation which Moses has announced to us here. For, as Auberlen ob-
serves, " there is a marvellous and grand display of the greatness of God in
the fact, that He holds out before the people, whom He has just delivered
from the hands of the heathen and gathered round Himself, the prospect of
being scattered again among the heathen, and that, even before the land is
taken by the Israelites, He predicts its return to desolation. These words
could only be spoken by One who has the future really before His mind,
who sees through the whole depth of sin, and who can destroy His own
Digitized by
Google
chap, xxvl i-m 469
and curse of the law were impressed upon the hearts of the people
in a still more comprehensive manner at the close of the whole law
(Deut. xxviii.-xxx.), and on the threshold of the promised land.
Vers. 1 and 2 form the introduction ; and the essence of the
whole law, the observance of which will bring a rich blessing,
and the transgression of it severe judgments, is summed up in
two leading commandments, and placed at the head of the
blessing and curse which were to be proclaimed. Ye shall not
make to you elilim, nugatory gods, and set up carved images and
standing images for worship, but worship Jehovah your God
with the observance of His Sabbaths, and fear before His sanc-
tuary. The prohibition of elilim, according to chap. xix. 4, calls
to mind the fundamental law of the decalogue (Ex. xx. 3, 4, cf.
chap. xxi. 23, Ex. xxiii. 24, 25). To peiel (cf. Ex. xx. 4) and
mazzebah (cf. Ex. xxiii. 24), which were not to be set up, there
is added the command not to put nvafc'D fax, " figure-stones," in
the land, to worship over (by) them. The " figure-stone " is a
stone formed into a figure, and idol of stone, not merely a stone
with an inscription or with hieroglyphical figures ; it is synony-
mous with VP2&0 in Num. xxxiii. 52, and consequently we are
to understand by pesel the wooden idol as in Isa. xliv. 15, etc.
The construction of WW?'} with ?V may be explained on the
ground that the worshipper of a stone image placed upon the
ground rises above it (for ?V in this sense, see Gen. xviii. 2). —
In ver. 3 the true way to serve God is urged upon the Israelites
once more, in words copied verbally from chap. xix. 30.
Vers. 3-13. The Blessing op Fidelity to the Law. —
Vers. 3-5. If the Israelites walked in the commandments of the
Lord (for the expression see chap, xviii. 3 sqq.), the Lord would
give fruitfulness to their land, that they should have bread to
the full. "I will give you rain-showers in season." The allusion
here is to the showers which fall at the two j-ainy seasons, and
work, and vet attain His end. But so much the more adorable and marvel-
lous is the grace, which nevertheless begins its work among such sinners,
and is certain of victory notwithstanding all retarding and opposing diffi-
culties." The peculiar character of this revelation, which must deeply have
affected Moses, will explain the peculiarities observable in the style, viz. the
heaping up of unusual words and modes of expression, several of which
never occur again in the Old Testament, whilst others are only used by the
prophets who followed the Pentateuch in their style.
Digitized by
Google
470 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
upon which the fruitfulness of Palestine depends, viz. the early
and latter rain (Deut. xL 14). The former of these occurs after
the autumnal equinox, at the time of the winter-sowing of wheat
and barley, in the latter half of October or beginning of No-
vember. It generally falls in heavy showers in November and
December, and then after that only at long intervals, and not
so heavily. The latter, or so-called latter rain, falls in March
before the beginning of the harvest of the winter crops, at the
time of sowing the summer seed, and lasts only a few days, in
some years only a few hours (see Robinson, PaL ii. pp. 97 sqq.).
— On vers. 5, 6, see chap. xxv. 18, 19. — Vers. 6-8. The Lord
would give peace in the land, and cause the beasts of prey which
endanger life to vanish out of the land, and suffer no war to
come over it, but would put to flight before the Israelites the
enemies who attacked them, and cause them to fall into their
sword. 2?^, to he without being frightened up by any one, is
a figure used to denote the quiet and peaceable enjoyment of life,
and taken from the resting of a flock in good pasture-ground
(Isa. xiv. 30) exposed to no attacks from either wild beasts or
men. °i*?no is generally applied to the frightening of men by
a hostile attack (Micah iv. 4 ; Jer. xxx. 10 ; Ezek. xxxix. 26 ;
Job xi. 19) ; but it is also applied to the frightening of flocks
and animals (Isa. xvii. 2 ; Deut. xxviii. 26 ; Jer. vii. 33, etc.).
fijn njn : an evil animal, for a beast of prey, as in Gen. xxxvii.
20. " Sword," as the principal weapon applied, is used for war.
The pursuing of the enemy relates to neighbouring tribes, who
would make war upon the Israelites. 3"Vv ?W does not mean
to be felled by the sword (KnobeT), but to fall into the sword.
The words, " five of you shall put a hundred to flight, and a
hundred ten thousand," are a proverbial expression for the
most victorious superiority of Israel over their enemies. It is
repeated in the opposite sense and in an intensified form in
Deut. xxxii. 30 and Isa. xxx. 17. — Ver. 9. Moreover the Lord
would bestow His covenant blessing upon them without inter-
mission. «f fUB signifies a sympathizing and gracious regard
(Ps. xxv. 16, lxix. 17). The multiplication and fruitfulness of
the nation were a constant fulfilment of the covenant promise
(Gen. xvii. 4-6) and an establishment of the covenant (Gen.
xvii. 7) ; not merely the preservation of it, but the continual
realization of the covenant grace, by which the covenant itself
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVI. 14-38. 471
was carried on farther and further towards its completion.
This was the real purpose of the blessing, to which all earthly
good, as the pledge of the constant abode of God in the midst
of His people, simply served as the foundation. — Ver. 10. Not-
withstanding their numerous increase, they would suffer no want
of food. "Ye shall eat that which has become old, and bring
out old for new." Multiplicabo vos et multiplicabo sirnul anno-
nam vestram, adeo ut illam pros multitudine et copia absumere
non possitis, sed illam diutissime servare adeoque abjicere coga-
mini, novarum frtcgum suavitate et copia superveniente (C. a
lap.). SOSin vetustum triticum ex horreo et vinum ex cellapromere
(Calvin). — Ver. 11. " I will make My dwelling among you, and
My soul will not despise you." t?fD, applied to the dwelling of
God among His people in the sanctuary, involves the idea of
satisfied repose. — Ver. 12. God's walking in the midst of Israel
does not refer to His accompanying and leading the people on
their journeyings, but denotes the walking of God in the midst
of His people in Canaan itself, whereby He would continually
manifest Himself to the nation as its God and make them a
people of possession, bringing them into closer and closer fellow-
ship with Himself, and giving them all the saving blessings of His
covenant of grace. — Ver. 13. For. He was their God, who had
brought them out of the land of the Egyptians, that they might
no longer be servants to them, and had broken the bands of their
yokes and made them go upright. ^J> nbb, Ut. the poles of the
yoke (cf. Ezek. xxxiv. 27), i.e. the poles which are laid upon the
necks of beasts of burden (Jer. xxvii. 2) as a yoke, to bend
their necks and harness them for work. It was with the bur-
den of such a yoke that Egypt had pressed down the Israelites,
so that they could no longer walk upright, till God by breaking
the yoke helped them to walk upright again. As the yoke is a
figurative description of severe oppression, so going upright is a
figurative description of emancipation from bondage. IWDDip,
lit. a substantive, an upright position ; here it is an adverb (cf .
Ges. § 100, 2).
Vers. 14-33. The Cuese for Contempt op the Law. —
The following judgments are threatened, not for single breaches
of the law, but for contempt of all the laws, amounting to in-
ward contempt of the divine commandments and a breach of the
Digitized by
Google
472 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
covenant (vers. 14, 15), — for presumptuous and obstinate rebel-
lion, therefore, against God and His commandments. For this,
severe judgments are announced, which were to be carried to their
uttermost in a fourfold series, if the hardening were obstinately
continued. If Israel acted in opposition to the Lord in the
manner stated, He would act towards them as follows (vers. 16,
17) : He would appoint over them n?na terror — a general notion,
which is afterwards particularized as consisting of diseases, sow-
ing without enjoying the fruit, defeat in war, and flight before
their enemies. Two kinds of disease are mentioned by which
life is destroyed : consumption and burning, i.e. burning* fever,
•nvpero<;, febris, which cause the eyes (the light of this life) to
disappear, and the soul (the life itself) to pine away ; whereas in
Ex. xxiii. 25, xv. 26, preservation from diseases is promised for
obedience to the law. Of these diseases, consumption is at pre-
sent very rare in Palestine and Syria, though it occurs in more
elevated regions; but burning fever is one of the standing
diseases. To these there would be added the invasion of the
land by enemies, so that they would labour in vain and sow their
seed to no purpose, for their enemies would consume the produce,
as actually was the case (e.g. Judg. vi. 3, 4). — Ver. 17. Yea,
the Lord would turn His face against them, so that they would
be beaten by their enemies, and be so thoroughly humbled in
consequence, that they would flee when no man pursued (cf.
ver. 36).
But if these punishments did not answer their purpose, and
bring Israel back to fidelity to its God, the Lord would punish
the disobedient nation still more severely, and chasten the rebel-
lious for their sin, not simply only, but sevenfold. This He
would do, so long as Israel persevered in obstinate resistance, and
to this end He would multiply His judgments by degrees. This
graduated advance of the judgments of God is so depicted in the
following passage, that four times in succession new and multi-
plied punishments are announced : (1) utter barrenness in their
land, — that is to say, one heavier punishment (vers. 18-20);
(2) the extermination of their cattle by beasts of prey, and
childlessness, — two punishments (vers. 21, 22) ; (3) war, plague,
and famine, — three punishments (vers. 23-26) ; (4) the destruc-
tion of all idolatrous abominations, the overthrow of their towns
and holy places, the devastation of the land, and the dispersion of
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVI. 18-22. 473
the people among the heathen,— /our punishments which would
bring the Israelites to the verge of destruction (vers. 27-33).
In this way would the Lord punish the stiffneckedness of His
people. — These divine threats embrace the whole of Israel's
future. But the series of judgments mentioned is not to be
understood historically, as a prediction of the temporal succes-
sion of the different punishments, but as an ideal account of the
judgments of God, unfolding themselves with inward necessity
in a manner answering to the progressive development of the
sin. As the nation would not resist the Lord continually, but
times *of disobedience and apostasy would alternate with times
of obedience and faithfulness, so the judgments of God would
alternate with His blessings; and as the opposition would not
increase in uniform progress, sometimes becoming weaker and
then at other times gaining greater force again, so the punish-
ments would not multiply continuously, but correspond in every
case to the amount of the sin, and only burst in upon the incor-
rigible race in all the intensity foretold, when ungodliness gained
the upper hand.
Vers. 18-20. First stage of the aggravated judgments. — If
they did not hearken TOK "l?, "up to these" (the punishments
named in vers. 16, 17), that is to say, if they persisted in their
disobedience even when the judgments reached to this height,
God would add a sevenfold chastisement on account of their
sins, would punish them seven times more severely, and break
down their strong pride by fearful drought. Seven, as the
number of perfection in the works of God, denotes the strength-
ening of the chastisement, even to the height of its full measure
(cf. Prov. xxiv. 16). ft? tftM, lit. the eminence or pride of strength,
includes everything upon which a nation rests its might ; then the
pride and haughtiness which rely upon earthly might and its
auxiliaries (Ex. xxx. 6, 18, xxxiii. 28) ; here it signifies the pride
of a nation, puffed up by the fruitfulness and rich produce of
its land. God would make their heaven (the sky of their land)
like iron and their earth like brass, i.e. as hard and dry as metal,
so that not a drop of rain and dew would fall from heaven to
moisten the earth, and not a plant could grow out of the earth
(cf. Deut. xxviii. 23) ; and when the land was cultivated, the
people would exhaust their strength for nought. DDPi, constant.
Vers. 21, 22. The second stage. — But if the people's resist-
Digitized by
Google
474 THE THIBD BOOK OF MOSES.
ance amounted to a hostile rebellion against God, He would
smite them sevenfold for their sin by sending beasts of prey and
childlessness. By beasts of prey He would destroy their cattle,
and by barrenness He would make the nation so small that the
ways would be deserted, that high roads would cease because
there would be no traveller upon them on account of the de-
population of the land (Isa. xxxiii. 8 ; Zeph. iii. 6), and the few
inhabitants who still remained would be afraid to venture be-
cause of the wild beasts (Ezek. xiv. 15). DJ? 'ijj v? (" to go a
meeting with a person" i.e. to meet a person in a hostile manner,
to fight against him) only occurs here in vers. 21 and 23, and
is strengthened in vers. 24, 27, 28, 40, 41 into DJ? ^a ^?, to
engage in a hostile encounter with a person. V?K* n|D, a seven-
fold blow. "According to your sins" i.e. answering to them
sevenfold. In ver. 22 the first clause corresponds to the third,
and the second to the fourth, so that Nos. 3 and 4 contain the
effects of Nos. 1 and 2.
Vers. 23-26. The third stage.-— But if they would not be
chastened by these punishments, and still rose up in hostility to
the Lord, He would also engage in a hostile encounter with
them, and punish them sevenfold with war, plague, and hunger.
— Ver. 25. He would bring over them " the sword avenging
{i.e. executing) the covenant vengeance." The " covenant ven-
geance" was punishment inflicted for a breach of the covenant,
the severity of which corresponded to the greatness of the cove-
nant blessings forfeited by a faithless apostasy. If they retreated
to their towns (fortified places) from the sword of the enemy,
the Lord would send a plague over them there, and give those
who were spared by the plague into the power of the foe. He
would, also " break in pieces the staff of bread," and compel
them by the force of famine to submit to the foe. The means
of sustenance should become so scarce, that ten women could
bake their bread in a single oven, whereas in ordinary times
every woman would require an oven for herself ; and they would
have to eat the bread which they brought home by weight, i.e.
not as much as every one pleased, but in rations weighed out
so scantily, that those who ate would not be satisfied, and would
only be able to sustain their life in the most miserable way.
Calamities such as these burst upon Israel and Judah more
than once when their fortified towns were besieged, particularly
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVL 27-38. 475
in the later times of the kings, e.g. upon Samaria in the reign
of Joram (2 Kings vi. 25 sqq.), and upon Jerusalem through
the invasions of the Chaldeans (cf . Isa. iii. 1, Jer. xiv. 18, Ezek.
iv. 16, v. 12).
Vers. 27-33. Fourth and severest stage. — If they should still
persist in their opposition, God would chastise them with wrath-
ful meeting, yea, punish them so severely in His wrath, that
they would be compelled to eat the flesh of their sons and
daughters, i.e. to slay their own children and eat them in the
extremity of their hunger, — a fact which literally occurred in
Samaria in the period of the Syrians (2 Kings vi. 28, 29), and in
Jerusalem in that of the Chaldeans (Lam. ii. 20, iv. 10), and in
the Roman war of extermination under Titus (Josephus bell,
jud. v. 10, 3) in the most appalling manner. Eating the flesh
of their own children is mentioned first, as indicating the ex-
tremity of the misery and wretchedness in which the people
would perish ; and after this, the judgment, by which the nation
would be brought to this extremity, is more minutely described in
its four principal features : viz. (1) the destruction of all idola-
trous abominations (ver. 30); (2) the overthrow of the towns and
sanctuaries (ver. 31) ; (3) the devastation of the land, to the
amazement of the enemies who dwelt therein (ver. 32) ; and (4)
the dispersion of the people among the heathen (ver. 33). The
" high places" are altars erected upon heights and mountains in
the land, upon which sacrifices were offered both to Jehovah in
an unlawful way and also to heathen deities. B^n, sun-pillars,
are idols of the Canaanitish nature-worship, either simple pillars
dedicated to Baal, or idolatrous statues of the sun-god (cf . Movers
PhOnizier i. pp. 343 sqq.). " And I give your carcases upon the
carcases of your idols" Q ???, lit. clods, from ??3 to roll, a con-
temptuous expression for idols. With the idols the idolaters
also were to perish, and defile with their corpses the images,
which had also become corpses as it were, through their over-
throw and destruction. For the further execution of this threat,
see Ezek. vi. 4 sqq. This will be your lot, for " My soul rejects
you." By virtue of the inward character of His holy nature,
Jehovah must abhor and reject the sinner. — Ver. 31. Their
towns and their sanctuaries He would destroy, because He took
no pleasure in their sacrificial worship. D'EnpD are the holy
things of the worship of Jehovah, the tabernacle and temple,
Digitized by
Google
476 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
with their altars and the rest of their holy furniture, as in Ps.
lxviii. 36, lxxiv. 7. nfw rn (chap. i. 9) is the odour of the
sacrifice ; and n^, to smell, an anthropomorphic designation of
divine satisfaction (cf. Amos v. 21, Isa. xi. 3). — Vers. 32, 33.
The land was to become a wilderness, so that even the enemies
who dwelt therein would be terrified in consequence (cf . Jer.
xviii. 16, xix. 8); and the Israelites would be scattered among
the heathen, because Jehovah would draw out His sword behind
them, i.e. drive them away with a jdrawn sword, and scatter
them to all the winds of heaven (cf. Ezek. v. 2, 12, xii. 14).
Vers. 34-45. Object op the Divine Judgments in
RELATION TO THE LAND AND NATION OF ISEAEL. — Vers. 34
and 35. The land would then enjoy and keep its Sabbaths, so
long as it was desolate, and Israel was in the land of its foes.
ne^n *p* 73 f during the whole period of its devastation. n S^n }
inf. Hophal with the suffix, in which the mappik is wanting, as
in Ex. ii. 3 (cf. Ewald, § 131e). nyi to have satisfaction : with
3 and an accusative it signifies to take delight, take pleasure, in
anything, e.g. in rest after the day's work is done (Job xiv. 6) ;
here also to enjoy rest (not " to pay its debt :" Ges., Kn.). The
keeping of the Sabbath was not a performance binding upon
the land, nor had the land been in fault because the Sabbath
was not kept. As the earth groans under the pressure of the
sin of men, so does it rejoice in deliverance from this pressure,
and participation in the blessed rest of the whole creation.
'Hi -\m m natOT : the land " will rest (keep) what it has not
rested on your Sabbaths and whilst you dwelt in it ;" i.e. it will
make up the rest which you did not give it on your Sabbaths
(daily and yearly). It is evident from this, that the keeping
of the Sabbaths and sabbatical years was suspended when the
apostasy of the nation increased, — a result which could be
clearly foreseen in consequence of the inward dislike of a sinner
to the commandments of the holy God, and which is described
in 2 Chron. xxvi. 31 as having actually occurred. — Vers.
36-38. So far as the nation was concerned, those who were
left when the kingdom was overthrown would find no rest in
the land of their enemies, but would perish among the heathen
for their own and their fathers' iniquities, till they confessed
their sins and bent their uncircumcised hearts under the right-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVL 34-48. . 477
eousness of the divine punishments. M3 D^Wfn (nominative
abs.) : " as for those who are left in (as in chap. v. 9), i.e. of,
yon," who have not perished in the destruction of the kingdom
and dispersion of the people, God will bring despair into their
heart in the lands of your enemies, that the sound (" voice") of
a moving leaf will hunt them to flee as before the sword, so that
they will fall in their anxious flight, and stumble one over another,
though no one is pursuing. The air. Xey. Wp from ^po, related
to rno and pnt? to rub, rub to pieces, signifies that inward anguish,
fear, and despair, which rend the heart and destroy the life,
SeiXut, pavor (LXX., Vulg.), what is described in Deut. xxviii.
65 in even stronger terms as " a trembling heart, and failing
of eyes, and sorrow of mind." There should not be to them
nwpn, standi et resistendi facultas (Rosenmuller), standing before
the enemy ; but they should perish among the nations. " The
land of their enemies will eat them up," sc. by their falling under
the pressure of the circumstances in which they were placed (cf .
Num. xiii. 32 ; Ezek. xxxvi. 13). — Ver. 39. But those who still
remained under this oppression would pine away in their iniqui-
ties ('P??, lit. to rot, moulder away), and u also in the iniquities of
their fathers with them." DRK refers to nWg, " which are with
them," which they carry with them and must atone for (see at Ex.
xx. 5). — Vers. 40-43. In this state of pining away under their ene-
mies, they would confess to themselves their own and their fathers'
sins, i.e. would make the discovery that their sufferings were a
punishment from God for their sins, and acknowledge that they
were suffering what they had deserved, through their unfaithful-
ness to their God and rebellion against Him, for which He had
been obliged to set Himself in hostility to them, and bring them
into the land of their enemies ; or rather their uncircumcised hearts
would then humble themselves, and they would look with satisfac-
tion upon this fruit of their sin. The construction is the following :
WJ1) (ver. 42) corresponds to Wtfin (ver. 40) as the apodosis ; so
that, according to the more strictly logical connection, which is
customary in our language, we may unite vers. 40, 41 in one
period with ver. 42. " If they shall confess their iniquity ... or
rather their uncircumcised heart shall humble itself ... I will
remember My covenant." With Q?V03 a parenthetical clause is
introduced into the main sentence explanatory of the iniquity,
and reaches as far as " into the land of their enemies." With
Digitized by
Google
478 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
j»3^ HpK, " or if, etc.," the main sentence is resumed, te, " or
rather" (as in 1 Sam. xxix. 3), bringing out the humiliation of
the heart as the most important result to which the confession of
sin ought to deepen itself. The heart is called " uncircumcised"
as being unsanctified, and not susceptible to the manifestations
of divine grace. D^lTTiK «rj1 evBotaja-ovtri ra? a/iapruK avrwv
(LXX.), they will take pleasure, rejoice in their misdeeds, i.e.
in the consequences and results of them — that their misdeeds
have so deeply humbled them, and brought them to the know-
ledge of the corruption into which they have fallen : a bold and,
so to speak, paradoxical expression for their complete change of
heart, which we may render thus : " they will enjoy their mis-
deeds," as FWi may be rendered in the same way in ver. 43 also. 1
But where punishment bears such fruit, God looks upon the
sinner with favour again. When Israel had gone so far, He
would remember His covenant with the fathers (" My covenant
with Jacob," 3f>£ TO ; the suffix is attached to the governing
noun, as in chap. vi. 3, because the noun governed, being a
proper name, could not take the suffix), and remember the land
(including its inhabitants), which, as is repeated again in ver. 43,
would be left by them (become desolate) and enjoy its Sabbaths
whilst it was waste (depopulated) from (i.e. away from, without)
them ; and they would enjoy their iniquity, because they had
despised the judgments of the Lord, and their soul had rejected
His statutes. — Ver. 44. "And yet, even with regard to this,
when they shall be in the land of their enemies, have I not de-
spised them." That is to say, if it shall have come even so far
as that they are in the land of their enemies (the words nt&~D|
stand first in an absolute sense, and are strengthened or intensi-
fied by 1*0 and more fully explained by 'U1 DTri'iia), I have not
rejected them, to destroy them and break My covenant with
them. For I am Jehovah their God, who, as the absolutely exist-
1 Luther has translated f\y in this sense, "punishment of iniquity," and
observes in the marginal notes, — " (Pleasure), i.e. just as they had pleasure
in their sins and felt disgust at My laws, so they would now take pleasure
in their punishment and say, ' We have just what we deserve. This is what
we have to thank our cursed sin for. It is just, God, quite just.' And
these are thoughts and words of earnest repentance, hating itself from the
bottom of the heart, and crying out, Shame upon me, what have I done?
This pleases God, so that He becomes gracious once more."
Digitized by
Google
chap, xxvii. 479
ing and unchangeably faithful One, keeps His promises and does
not repent of His calling (Rom. xi. 29). — Ver. 45. He would
therefore remember the covenant with the forefathers, whom
He had brought out of Egypt before the eyes of the nations, to
be a God to them ; and He would renew the covenant with
the fathers to them (the descendants), to gather them again out
of the heathen, and adopt them again as His nation (cf. Dent,
xxx. 3-5). In this way the judgment would eventually turn to
a blessing, if they would bend in true repentance under the
mighty hand of their God.
Ver. 46 contains the close of the entire book, or rather of
the whole of the covenant legislation from Ex. xxv. onwards,
although the expression " in Mount Sinai" points back primarily
to Lev. xxv. 1.
op vows. — CHAP. XXVII.
The directions concerning vows follow the express termina-
tion of the Sinaitic lawgiving (chap. xxvi. 46), as an appendix
to it, because vows formed no integral part of the covenant
laws, but were a freewill expression of piety common to almost
all nations, and belonged to the modes of worship current in all
religions, which were not demanded and might be omitted al-
together, and which really lay outside the law, though it was
necessary to bring them into harmony with the demands of the
law upon Israel. Making a vow, therefore, or dedicating any-
thing to the Lord by vowing, was not commanded, but was pre-
supposed as a manifestation of reverence for God, sanctified by
ancient tradition, and was simply regulated according to the
principle laid down in Deut. xxiii. 22-24, that it was not a sin
to refrain from vowing, but that every vow, when once it had
been made, was to be conscientiously and inviolably kept (cf.
Prov. xx. 25, Eccl. v. 3—5), and the neglect to keep it to be
atoned for with a sin-offering (chap. v. 4). — The objects of a
vow might be persons (vers. 2-8), cattle (vers. 9-13), houses
(vers. 14, 15), and land (vers. 16-25), all of which might be
redeemed with the exception of sacrificial animals ; but not the
first-born (ver. 26), nor persons and things dedicated to the Lord
by the ban (vers. 28, 29), nor tithes (vers. 30-33), because all
of these were to be handed over to the Lord according to the
Digitized by
Google
480 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
' law, and therefore could not be redeemed. This followed from
the very idea of the vow. For a vow was a promise made by
any one to dedicate and give his own person, or a portion of his
property, to the Lord for averting some danger and distress, or
for bringing to his possession some desired earthly good. — Be-
sides ordinary vowing or promising to give, there was also vow-
ing away, or the vow of renunciation, as is evident from Num.
xxx. The chapter before us treats only of ordinary vowing,
and gives directions for redeeming the thing vowed, in which it
is presupposed that everything vowed to the Lord would fall to
His sanctuary as corban, an offering (Mark vii. 11) ; and there-
fore, that when it was redeemed, the money would also be paid
to His sanctuary. — (On the vow, see my Archceologie, § 96 ;
Oehler in Herzog's Cycl.)
Vers. 2-8. The vowing of persons. — " If any one make a
special vow, souls shall be to the Lord according to thy valua-
tion." TTJ N"??? does not mean to dedicate or set apart a vow,
but to make a special vow (see at chap. xxii. 21). The words
^3"}JD, " according to thy (Moses') valuation," it is more simple
to regard as an apodosis, so as to supply to njfv the substantive
verb '"WW, than as a fuller description of the protasis, in which
case the apodosis would follow in ver. 3, and the verb K^i?!
would have to be supplied. But whatever may be the conclu-
sion adopted, in any case this thought is expressed in the words,
that souls, i.e. persons, were to be vowed to the Lord according
to Moses' valuation, i.e. according to the price fixed by Moses.
This implies clearly enough, that whenever a person was vowed,
redemption was to follow according to the valuation. Otherwise
what was the object of valuing them? Valuation supposes
either redemption or purchase. But in the case of men (i.e.
Israelites) there could be no purchasing as slaves, and therefore
the object of the valuing could only have been for the purpose
of redeeming, buying off the person vowed to the Lord, and
the fulfilment of the vow, could only have consisted in the pay-
ment into the sanctuary of the price fixed by the law. 1 — Vers.
1 Saalschiltz adopts this explanation in common with the Mishnah.
Oehler is wrong in citing 1 Sam. ii. 11, 22, 28 as a proof of the opposite.
For the dedication of Samuel did not consist of a simple vow, but was a
dedication as a Nazarite for the whole of his life, and Samuel was thereby
vowed to service at the sanctuary, whereas the law says nothing about
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVII. 9-18. 481
3-7. This was to be, for persons between twenty and thirty
years of age, 50 shekels for a man and 30 for a woman ; for a
boy between 5 and 20, 20 shekels, for a girl of the same age
10 shekels; for a male child from a month to five years 5
shekels, for a female of the same age 3 shekels ; for an old man
above sixty 15 shekels, for an old woman of that age 10; the
whole to be in shekels of the sanctuary (see at Ex. xxx. 15).
The valuation price was regulated, .therefore, according to
capacity and vigour of life, and the female sex, as the weaker
vessel (1 Pet. iii. 7), was only appraised at half the amount of
the male. — Ver. 8. But if the person making the vow was
" poor before thy valuation," i.e. too poor to be able to pay the
valuation price fixed by the law, he was to be brought before
the priest, who would value him according to the measure of
what his hand could raise (see chap, v. 11), i.e. what he was
able to pay. This regulation, which made it possible for the
poor man to vow his own person to the Lord, presupposed that
the person vowed would have to be redeemed. For otherwise a
, person of this kind would only need to dedicate himself to the
sanctuary, with all his power for work, to fulfil his vow com-
pletely.
Vers. 9-13. When animals were vowed, of the cattle that
were usually offered in sacrifice, everything that was given to
Jehovah of these (i.e. dedicated to Him by vowing) was to be
holy and not changed, i.e. exchanged, a good animal for a bad,
or a bad one for a good. But if such an exchange should be
made, the animal first dedicated and the one substituted were
both to be holy (vers. 9, 10). The expression " it shall be holy"
unquestionably implies that an animal of this kind could not be
redeemed ; but if it was free from faults, it was offered in sacri-
fice : if, however, it was not fit for sacrifice on account of some
blemish, it fell to the, portion of the priests for their maintenance
like the first-born of cattle (cf. ver. 33). — Vers. 11, 12. Every
unclean beast, however, — an ass for example, — which could not
be offered in sacrifice, was to be placed before the priest for him
attachment to the sanctuary in the case of the simple vowing of persons.
But because redemption in the case of persons was not left to the pleasure
or free-will of the 'person making the tow as iu the case of material pro-
perty, no addition is made to the valuation price as though for a merely
possible circumstance.
PENT. — VOL. II. 2 IT
Digitized by
Google
482 THB THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
to value it " between good and bad," i.e. neither veuy high as if
it were good, nor very low as if it were bad, but at a medium
price ; and it was to be according to this valuation, i.e. to be
worth the value placed upon it (JfjSin 1?"]?? according to thy, the
priest's, valuation), namely, when sold for the good of the sanc-
tuary and its servants. — Ver. 13. But if the person vowing
wanted to redeem it, he was to add a fifth above the valuation
price, as a kind of compensation for taking back the animal he
had vowed (cf. chap. v. 16).
Vers. 14 and 15. When a house was vowed, the same rules
applied as in the case of unclean cattle. KnobeVs supposition,
that the person making the vow was to pay the valuation price
if he did not wish to redeem the house, is quite a groundless sup-
position. The house that was not redeemed was sold, of course,
for the good of the sanctuary.
Vers. 16-25. With regard to the vowing of land, a difference
was made between a field inherited and one that had been pur-
chased. — Ver. 16. If any one sanctified to the Lord "of the
field of his possession," i.e. a portion of his hereditary property,
the valuation was to be made according to the measure of the
seed sown ; and an omer of barley was to be appraised at fifty
shekels, so that a field sown with an omer of barley would be
valued at fifty shekels. As an omer was equal to ten ephahs
(Ezek. xlv. 11), and, according to the calculation made by
Thenius, held about 225 lbs., the fifty shekels cannot have been
the average value of the yearly produce of such a field, but must
be understood, as it was by the Eabbins, as the value of the pro-
duce of a complete jubilee period of 49 or 50 years ; so that who-
ever wished to redeem the field had to pay, according to Mishnah,
Eraehin vii. 1, a shekel and a fifth per annum. — Vers. 17, 18.
If he sanctified his field from the year of jubilee, i.e. immedi-
ately after the expiration of that year, it was to " stand accord-
ing to thy valuation," i.e. no alteration was to be made in the
valuation. But if it took place after the year of jubilee, i.e.
some time or some years after, the priest was to estimate the
value according to the number of years to the next year of
jubilee, and "it shall be abated from thy valuation" sc. prceteri-
tum tempus, the time that has elapsed since the year of jubilee.
Hence, for example, if the field was vowed ten years after the
year of jubilee, the man who wished to redeem it had only forty
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVII. 16-25. 483
shekels to pay for the forty years remaining up to the next year
of jubilee, or, with the addition of the fifth, 48 shekels. The
valuation was necessary in both cases, for the hereditary field
was inalienable, and reverted to the original owner or his heirs in
the year of jubilee without compensation (cf. ver. 21 and chap,
xxv. 13, 23 sqq.) ; so that, strictly speaking, it was not the field
itself, but the produce of its harvests up to the next year of
jubilee, that was vowed, whether the person making the vow left
it to the sanctuary in natura till the year of jubilee, or wished to
redeem it again by paying the valuation price. In the latter
case, however, he had to put a fifth over and above the valuation
price (ver. 19, like vers. 13 and 15), that it might be left to him.
— Vers. 20, 21. In case he did not redeem it, however, namely,
before the commencement of the next year of jubilee, or sold it
to another man, i.e. to a man not belonging to his family, he
could no longer redeem it ; but on its going out, i.e. becoming
free in the 'year of jubilee (see chap. xxv. 28), it was to be holy
to the Lord, like a field under the ban (see ver. 28), and to fall
to the priests as their property. Sine colligere est, redimendum
fuisse ante Jubikeum comecratum agrum, nisi quis vellet eum
plane abalienari (Clerieus). According to the distinct words of
the text (observe the correspondence of DK1 • • • OKI), the field,
that had been vowed, fell to the sanctuary in the jubilee year
not only when the owner had sold it in the meantime, but also
when he had not previously redeemed it. The reason for selling
the field at a time when he had vowed it to the sanctuary, need
not be sought for in caprice and dishonesty, as it is by Knobel.
If the field was vowed in this sense, that it was not handed over
to the sanctuary (the priesthood) to be cultivated, but remained
in the hands of the proprietor, so that every year he paid to the
sanctuary simply the valuation price, — and this may have been
the rule, as the priests whose duties lay at the sanctuary could
not busy themselves about the cultivation of the field, but would
be obliged either to sell the piece of land at once, or farm it, —
the owner might sell the field up to the year of jubilee, to be
saved the trouble of cultivating it, and the purchaser could not
only live upon what it yielded over and above the price to be
paid every year to the sanctuary, but might possibly realize
something more. In such a case the fault of the seller, for
which he had to make atonement by the forfeiture of his field to
Digitized by
Google
484 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
the sanctuary in the year of jubilee, consisted simply in the fact
that he had looked upon the land which he vowed to the Lord
as though it were his own property, still and entirely at his own
disposal, and therefore had allowed himself to violate the rights
of the Lord by the sale of his land. At any rate, it is quite
inadmissible to supply a different subject to 13D from that of the
parallel ?*W, viz. the priest. — Vers. 22-24. If on the other hand
any one dedicated to the Lord a "field of his purchase," i.e. a
field that had been bought and did not belong to his patrimony,
he was to give the amount of the valuation as estimated by the
priest up to the year of jubilee u on that day," i.e. immediately,
and all at once. This regulation warrants the conclusion, that
on the dedication of hereditary fields, the amount was not paid
all at once, but year by year. In the year of jubilee the field
that had been vowed, if a field acquired by purchase, did not
revert to the buyer, but to the hereditary owner from whom it
had been bought, according to the law in chap. xxv. 23-28. —
Ver. 25. All valuations were to be made according to the shekel
of the sanctuary.
Vers. 26-29. What belonged to the Lord by law could not
be dedicated to Him by a vow, especially the first-born of clean
cattle (cf. Ex. xiii. 1, 2). The first-born of unclean animals were
to be redeemed according to the valuation of the priest, with the
addition of a fifth ; and if this was not done, it was to be sold
at the estimated 'value. By this regulation the earlier law, which
commanded that an ass should either be redeemed with a sheep
or else be put to death (Ex. xiii. 13, xxxiv. 20), was modified in
favour of the revenues of the sanctuary and its servants. —
Vers. 28, 29. Moreover, nothing put under the ban, nothing
that a man had devoted (banned) to the Lord of his property,
of man, beast, or the field of his possession, was to be sold or
redeemed, because it was most holy (see at chap. ii. 3). The
man laid under the ban was to be put to death. According to
the words of ver. 28, the individual Israelite was quite at liberty
to ban, not only his cattle and field, but also men who belonged
to him, that is to say, slaves and children. 0*"?£!!? signifies to
dedicate something to the Lord in an unredeemable manner, as
eherem, Le. ban, or banned. Din (to devote, or ban), judging
from the cognate words in the Arabic, signifying prohibere,
vetare, illicitum facere, illicitum, sacrum, has the primary signi-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVII. 30-88. 485
fication u to cot off," and denotes that which is taken away
from use and abuse on the part of men, and surrendered to
God in an irrevocable and unredeemable manner, viz. human
beings by being put to death, cattle and inanimate objects by
being either given up to the sanctuary for ever or destroyed
for the glory of the Lord. The latter took place, no doubt,
only with the property of idolaters ; at all events, it is com-
manded simply for the infliction of punishment on idolatrous
towns (Deut. xiii. 13-sqq.). It follows from this, however, that
the vow of banning could only be made in connection with
persons who obstinately resisted that sanctification of life which
was binding upon them ; and that an individual was not at
liberty to devote a human being to the ban simply at his own
will and pleasure, otherwise the ban might have been abused to
purposes of ungodliness, and have amounted to a breach of the
law, which prohibited the killing of any man, even though he were
a slave (Ex. xxi. 20). In a manner analogous to this, too, the
owner of cattle and fields was only allowed to put them under <
the ban when they had been either desecrated by idolatry or
abused to unholy purposes. For there can be no doubt that
the idea which lay at the foundation of the ban was that of ,a
compulsory dedication of something which resisted or impeded
sanctification ; so that in all cases in which it was carried into
execution by the community or the magistracy, it was an act of
the judicial holiness of God manifesting itself in righteousness
and judgment.
Vers. 30-33. Lastly, the tenth of the land, both of the seed
of the land — i.e. not of what was sown, but of what was yielded,
the produce of the seed (Deut. xiv. 22), the harvest reaped, or
" corn of the threshing-floor," Num. xviii. 27 — and also of the
fruit of the tree, i.e. u the fulness of the press " (Num. xviii. 27),
the wine and oil (Deut. xiv. 23), belonged to the Lord, were holy
to Him, and could not be dedicated to Him by a vow. At the
same time they could be redeemed by the addition of a fifth be-
yond the actual amount. — Ver. 32. With regard to all the tithes
of the flock and herd, of all that passed under the rod of the herds-
man, the tenth (animal) was to be holy to the Lord. No discrimi-
nation was to be made in this case between good and bad, and
no exchange to be made : if, however, this did take place, the
tenth animal was to be holy as well as the one for which it was
Digitized by
Google
480 THE THIRD BOOK OF MOSES.
exchanged, and could not be redeemed. The words u whatso-
ever passeth under the rod" may be explained from the custom
of numbering the flocks by driving the animals one by one past
the shepherd, who counted them with a rod stretched out over
them (cf. Jer. xxxiii. 13, Ezek. xx. 37). They mean every-
thing that is submitted to the process of numbering, and are
correctly explained by the Rabbins as referring to the fact that
every year the additions to the flock and herd were tithed, and
not the whole of the cattle. In these directions the tithe is
referred to as something well known. In the laws published
hitherto, it is true that no mention has been made of it ; but, like
the burnt-offerings, meat-offerings, and peace-offerings, it formed
from time immemorial an essential part of the worship of God ;
so that not only did Jacob vow that he would tithe for the Lord
all that He should give him in a foreign land (Gen. xxviii. 22),
but Abraham gave a tenth of his booty to Melchizedek the priest
(Gen. xiv. 20). Under these circumstances, it was really un-
necessary to enjoin upon the Israelites for the first time the
offering of tithe to Jehovah. All that was required was to
incorporate this in the covenant legislation, and bring it into
harmony with the spirit of the law. This is done here in con-
nection with the holy consecrations ; and in Num. xviii. 20-32
instructions are given in the proper place concerning their ap-
propriation, and further directions are added in Deut. xii. 6, 11,
xiv. 22 sqq. respecting a second tithe. — The laws contained in
this chapter are brought to a close in ver. 34 with a new con-
cluding formula (see chap. xxvi. 4?), by which they are attached
to the law given at Sinai.
END OF VOLUME II.
JJDRBAY AND GIBB, PRINTERS, EDINBURGH.
Digitized by
Google
Now Complete, in Six Volumes, Demy 8vo, Price £1, 15s.,
THE LIFE
OF
THE LORD JESUS CHRIST:
A COMPLETE CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF THE ORIGIN, CONTENTS,
AND CONNECTION OF
THE GOSPELS.
CransSlatrtl from tijt &nmnn of
J. P. LANGE, D.D.,
PROFESSOR OF DmUITY IN TIIE CMIVEBSITY OF BOSH.
EDITED, WITH ADDITIONAL NOTES,
BY
THE REV. MARCUS DODS, A.M.
The object of this comprehensive and masterly work is at once to refute
the views of the Life of our Lord which have been propagated by negative
criticism, and to substitute that consistent history which a truly scientific,
enlightened, and incontrovertible criticism educes from the Gospels.
EDINBURGH : T. AND T. CLARK, 38, GEORGE STREET.
LONDON: HAMILTON, ADAMS, AND CO.
[Turn over.
Digitized by
Google
LANCE'S LIFE OF OUR LORD JESUS.
The work is divided into three Books. The First Book is introductory.
In this the Author explodes the philosophical fallacies on which the negative
criticism rests, and exposes its unsound and inconsistent principles of criti-
cism, establishing, in opposition, the fundamental ideas of the Gospel History
(especially that of an individual incarnation), and delivering the principles
and method of a trustworthy criticism. The sources of the Life of Jesus
are then also discussed, and the authenticity and credibility of the Gospels
are vindicated, their origin unfolded, their unity exhibited, and their pecu-
liarities illustrated with greater detail, and in a more interesting manner,
than has elsewhere been done.
The Second Book, which is the bulk of the work, presents a detailed
history of the Life of Jesus, drawn from the Gospels by a minute critical
examination. This is given in what is technically called a pragmatical nar-
rative ; that is to say, it is so narrated that it is explained; every character
introduced is rendered distinct and intelligible ; every word and action ap-
pears in connection with its motive and meaning, and the whole is set in a
framework of careful, historical, chronological, and topographical research.
It thus forma virtually a pregnant commentary on the Gospels, while the
reader is not interrupted by discussions of controverted points, nor by verbal
criticism. All this is relegated to the notes which accompany each section,
and which further confirm or show the grounds of those views which are
stated in the text.
TJvTiile the Second Book presents the Life of Jesus in that unity which is
formed by the four accounts taken together, the Third Book gives us that
same life in its four different aspects, according to the four different Evan-
gelists. In the Second Book one representation is given, formed from the
four narratives : in the Third, these four representations are separately given
in their individual integrity. This is not the least instructive portion of the
work, bringing out, as it does very distinctly, the fine arrangement of each
Gospel, and the propriety and harmony of its various material.
Dr Lange is well known as the author of the ' Theological and Homile-
tical Commentary on St Matthew's Gospel,' etc. And in Bishop Elli-
COTt's Hidsean Lectures, where Lange's ' Life of Christ' is constantly quoted
with approbation, it is spoken of thus:
' See especially the eloquent and thoughtful work of Dr Lange, already several
times referred to — a work which, we sincerely hope, may ere long meet with a com-
petent translator.' — Page 35.
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
/'
Date Loaned
1
1
nov 17
li-l?
Library Bureau
Cat. No. 1138
Digitized by
Google
i ne DUHU LIBRARY
II
5 0343 056
,-rH
il
J
-L
Keil, C. 7. &
DKLS
K27
-4a)-
t.tle Biblical comme ntary on
the O.T. 148639
The Library of the
Union Theological Seminary
Broadway at 120th St.
New York 27, N. Y.
Digitized by VjOOQ l£
LIBRARY BUREAU CAT. NO. 1 166.;
This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project
to make the world's books discoverable online.
It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.
Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the
publisher to a library and finally to you.
Usage guidelines
Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:
+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.
+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.
+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.
+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.
About Google Book Search
Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web
at |http : //books . qooqle . com/
m
i H I
Digitizi
ed by Google
Digitizi
ed by Google
Digitized by
Google
Digitizi
ed by Google
Digitizi
ed by Google
Bow Complete,, in Six Volumes, Demy 8vo, Price £1, 15s.,
THE LIFE
OF
THE LORD JESUS CHRIST:
A COMPLETE CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF THE OEIGIN, CONTENTS,
AND CONNECTION OF
THE GOSPELS.
Cratuitattfc front % ©mnan of
J. P. LANGE, D.I).,
PKOFESSOB OF DIVINITY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF BONN.
EDITED, WITH ADDITIONAL NOTES,
BY
THE REV. MARCUS DODS,. A.M.
The object of this comprehensive and masterly work is at once to refute
the views of the Life of our Lord which have been propagated by negative
criticism, and to substitute that consistent history which a truly scientific,
enlightened, and incontrovertible criticism educes from the Gospels.
The work is divided into three Books. The First Book is introductory!
In this the Author explodes the philosophical fallacies on which the negative
criticism rests, and exposes its unsound and inconsistent principles of criti-
cism, establishing, in opposition, the fundamental ideas of the Gospel History
(especially that of an individual incarnation), and delivering the principles
and method of a trustworthy criticism. The sources of the Life of Jesus
EDINBURGH : T. AND T. CLARK, 38, GEORGE STREET.
LONDON: HAMILTON, ADAMS, AND CO.
[Turn over.
Digitizi
ed by Google
LANGE'S LIFE OF OUR LORD JESUS.
are then also discussed, and the authenticity and credibility.of the Gospels
are vindicated, their origin unfolded, their unity exhibited, and their pecu-
liarities illustrated with greater detail, and in a more interesting manner,
than has elsewhere been done.
The Second Book, which is the bulk of the work, presents a detailed
history of the Life of Jesus, drawn from the Gospels by a minute critical
examination. This is given in what is technically called a pragmatical nar-
rative ; that is to say, it is so narrated that it is explained; every character
introduced is rendered distinct and intelligible ; every word and action ap-
pears in connection with its motive and meaning, and the whole is set in a
framework of careful, historical, chronological, and topographical research.
It thus forms virtually a pregnant commentary on the Gospels, while the
reader is not interrupted by discussions of controverted points, nor by verbal ■
criticism. All this is relegated to the notes which accompany each section,
and which further confirm or show the grounds of those views which are
stated in the text.
While the Second Book presents the Life of Jesus in that unity which is
formed by the four accounts taken together, the Third Book gives us that
same life in its four different aspects, according to the four different Evan-
gelists. In the Second Book one representation is given, formed from the
four narratives : in the Third, these four representations are separately given
in their individual integrity. This is not the least instructive portion of the
work, bringing out, as it does very distinctly, the fine arrangement of each
Gospel, and the propriety and harmony of its various material.
Dr Lange is well known as the author of the ' Theological and Homi-
letical Commentary on St Matthew's Gospel,' etc. And in Bishop Elli-
COTT's Hulsean Lectures, where Zange's ' Life of Christ' is constantly quoted
with approbation, it is spoken of thus :
1 See especially the eloquent and thoughtful work of Dr Lange, already several
times referred to — a work which, we sincerely hope, may ere long meet with a com-
petent translator.' — Page 35.
From the Christian Observer.
' We notice it again as a comprehensive and masterly production. Of course we
do not, nor would any upright critic, pledge ourselves to every opinion it expresses.
It is a complete critical examination, as it professes to be, of the origin, contents, and
connection of the Gospels. Its object is at once to refute the views of the life of the
Lord which have been propagated by negative criticism, and to substitute that con-
sistent history which a truly scientific, enlightened, and incontrovertible criticism
educes from the Gospels. It has received high praise from Bishop Ellicott in his
Lectures before the University of Cambridge.'
Digitizi
ed by Google
NOTICE TO SUBSCRIBERS.
M
ESSRS CLARK have pleasure in forwarding to their Subscribers the
First Issue of Foreign Theological Library for 1865 :—
Keil and Delitzsch's Commentary on the Old Testament, Vol. III.
Hengstenbebg's Commentary on St John's Gospel, Vol. I.
The remaining Volumes for this year will be Keil and Delttzsch, Vol. IV.,
comprising Joshua, Judges, and Ruth, and the second (completing the work)
of Hengstenberg on St John.
A desire has. been expressed that a New Series should be commenced, and
Messrs Clark trust this will be generally satisfactory ; but in order to do so, it
is necessary to include the works published in 1864: they therefore enclose new
Serial title-pages, which any who may think it worth while may introduce.
By way of experiment, they have bound Hengstenberg on St John in a
different style, so as to relieve the dead uniformity which so long a range of
works bound alike is apt to produce on the book-shelf ; and if this is gene-
rally approved of, they will continue the system with such new works as are
introduced. The works in progress are : Delttzsch on Job, Martensen's
System of Doctrine, Harless's Christian Ethics, Delttzsch on the Epistle
to the Hebrews, Schmid's New Testament Theology.
May the publishers request an early remittance of the Subscription for the
year, and also a continuance of the kind recommendation by Subscribers to
their friends interested in such studies, of this series of works.
To remote parts of the country the Four Annual Volumes can be sent by Post
for an addition of 2s. 8d. to the Subscription.
RITTER'S PALESTINE.
MESSRS CLARK beg also to intimate that they have in preparation,
under the Editorship of the Rev. W. L. Gage, that portion of CARL
RITTER'S great work on ASIA which relates to
PALESTINE, SYRIA, AND THE SINAITIC PENINSULA.
All Biblical Scholars will welcome this announcement, as Ritter's immense
erudition and unrivalled reputation are so fully recognised, that his work on
the Holy Land will take the first place, and supply one of the great wants of
our literature.
The work will be carefully edited, including references to all the more recent
discoveries, and will occupy three or four volumes.
It will be offered on favourable terms to Subscribers to
Foreign Theological Library.
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
CLARK'S
FOREIGN
THEOLOGICAL LIBRARY.
FOURTH SERIES.
VOL. VI.
Seil anK Stlitpci) on tf)e -BtntaUufl).
VOLUME III.
EDINBURGH:
T. AND T. CLARK, 38, GEORGE STREET.
MDCCCLXV.
Digitizi
ed by Google
Digitizi
ed by Google
f
BIBLICAL COMMENTARY
ON
THE OLD TESTAMENT.
BT
0. F. KEIL, D.D., and F. DELITZSCH, D.D.,
PEOFESSOKS OF THEOLOGY.
VOLUME III.
THE PENTATEUCH.
TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN
BT THE
REV. JAMES MARTIN, B.A,
NOTTINGHAM. ,-^ lU^" ' ' H-
V N UNION
■HLi.Ll.>-, GAL SEMINARS
— " — a & L-
EDINBURGH:
T. AND T. CLARK, 38, GEORGE STREET.
LONDON: HAMILTON, ADAMS, & CO. DUBLIN: JOHN EOBEBTSON & CO.
MDCCCLXV.
Digitizi
ed by Google
MURRAY AND QIBB, PRINTERS, EDINBURGH.
Digitizi
ed by Google
3>Kfl
ha.7
\4 %W\ ^
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES (NUMBERS).
INTEOD0CTION.
Contents and Arrangement of the Book of Numbers,
P»ge
1
Exposition.
I. Preparations for the Departure of Israel from Sinai (Chap. i. 1-x. 10) : —
Numbering of the People of Israel at Sinai (Chap, i.-iv.), . . 4
Spiritual Organization of the Congregation of Israel (Chap. v. and
vi.), 28
Closing Events at Sinai (Chap, vii.-ix. 14), . . .42
Signs and Signals for the March (Chap. ix. 15-x. 10), . . 52
II. Journey from Sinai to the Steppes of Moab (Chap. x. 11-xxi.), . 56
From Sinai to Kadesh (Chap. x. 11-xiv. 45) : —
Removal of the Camp from the Desert of Sinai (Chap. x.
11-36), . 56
Occurrences at Tabeerah and Kibroth-Hattaavah (Chap. xL), . 64
Rebellion of Miriam and Aaron against Moses (Chap, xii.), . 75
Spies sent out. Murmuring of the People, and their Punish-
ment (Chap. xiii. and xiv.), . . . .88
Occurrences during the Thirty-seven Tears of Wandering in the
Wilderness (Chap, xv.-xix.), . . . .99
Various Laws of Sacrifice. Punishment of a Sabbath-breaker.
Command to wear Tassels upon the Clothes (Chap, xv.), . 100
Rebellion of Koran's Company (Chap, xvi.-xvii. 5), . . 105
Punishment of the murmuring Congregation, and Confirmation
of the High-priesthood of Aaron (Chap. xvi. 41-xvii. 13 ;
or, Chap. xvii. 6-28), . . . . .111
Service and Revenues of the Priests and Levites (Chap, xviii.), 115
The Law concerning Purification from the Uncleanness of
Death (Chap, xix.), 120
Digitized by
Google
VI
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
Page
Israel's Last Journey from Kadesh to the Heights of Pisgah in the
Fields of Moab (Chap. xx. and xxi.), . . . 126
Death of Miriam. Water out of the Bock. Refusal of a Passage
through Edom. Aaron's Death. Conquest over the King
of Arad (Chap, xx.-xxi. 3), . . . . 127
March round the Land of Edom and Moab. Conquest of Sihon
and Og, Kings of the Amorites (Chap. xxi. 4-35), . 138
III. Occurrences in the Steppes of Moab, with Instructions relating to
the Conquest and Distribution of the Land of Canaan (Chap.
xxii.-xxxvi.), . . ..... 156
Balaam and his Prophecies (Chap. xxii. 2-xxiv. 25), . 157
Whoredom of Israel, and Zeal of Phinehas (Chap, xxv.), . . 203
Mustering of Israel in the Steppes of Moab (Chap, xxvi), . . 207
The Daughters of Zelophehad claim to Inherit. The Death of
Moses foretold : Consecration of Joshua as his Successor (Chap.
xxvii.), . . . . . . . .212
Order of the Daily and Festal Offerings of the Congregation (Chap.
xxviii. and xxix.), ...... 216
Instructions as to the. Force of Vows (Chap, xxx.), . . 223
War of Revenge against the Midianites (Chap, xxxi.), . 225
Division of the Conquered Land beyond the Jordan among the
Tribes of Reuben, Gad, and half-Manasseh (Chap, xxxii), 231
List of Israel's Encampments (Chap, xxxiii. 1-49), . . 241
Instructions concerning the Conquest and Distribution of Canaan
(Chap, xxxiii. 60-xxxvi. 13), . . . . . 248
Law concerning the Marriage of Heiresses (Chap, xxxvi.), . 267
THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES (DEUTERONOMY).
INTBODUCTIOH.
Contents, Arrangement, and Character of Deuteronomy,
Exposition.
Heading and Introduction (Chap. i. 1-5), .... 277
I. The First Preparatory Address (Chap. i. 6-iv. 40), . . 282
Review of the Divine Guidance of Israel from Horeb to Kadesh
(Chap. i. 6-46), 284
Digltizi
ed by Google
TABLE OP CONTENTS. VU
Page
Review of the Divine Guidance of Israel round Edom and Moab to
the Frontier of the Amorites, and of the Gracious Assistance
afforded by the Lord in the Conquest of the Kingdoms of
Sihon and Og (Chap. ii. and iii.), .... 291
Exhortation to a Faithful Observance of the Law (Chap. iv. 1-40), 308
II. Second Address, or Exposition of the Law (Chap. iv. 44-xxvi.
19), . . 318
A. The True Essence of the Law and its Fulfilment : —
Exposition of the Decalogue, and its Promulgation (Chap, v.), 319
On Loving Jehovah, the One God, with all the Heart (Chap.
vi.), 321
Command to destroy the Canaanites and their Idolatry (Chap.
vii.), ....... 326
Review of the Guidance of God, and their Humiliation in the
Desert, as a Warning against Highmindedness and Forget-
fulness of God (Chap, viii.), .... 330
Warning against Self -righteousness, founded upon the Recital
of their previous Sins (Chap, ix.-x. 11), . . . 384
Admonition to fear and love God. The Blessing or Curse con-
sequent upon the Fulfilment or Transgression of the Law
(Chap. x. 12-xi. 32), 343
B. Exposition of the Principal Laws (Chap. xii.-xxvi.), . . 351
The one Place for the Worship of God, and the Right Mode of
worshipping Him (Chap, xii.), .... 352
Punishment of Idolaters, and Tempters to Idolatry (Ghap.
xiii.), ....... 362
Avoidance of the Mourning Customs of the Heathen, and Un-
clean Food. Application of the Tithe of Fruits (Chap,
xiv.), ....... 366
On the Year of Release, the Emancipation of Hebrew Slaves,
and the Sanotification of the First-born of Cattle (Chap,
xv.), 369
On the Celebration of the Feasts of Passover, of Pentecost, and
of Tabernacles (Chap. xvi. 1-17), . . . • . 374
On the Administration of Justice and the Choice of a King
(Chap. xvi. 18-xvii. 20), ... . . .378
Rights of the Priests, the Levites, and the Prophets (Chap.
xviii.), .387
Laws concerning the Cities of Refuge, the Sacredness of Land-
marks, and the Punishment of False Witnesses (Chap,
xix.), 397
Digitized by
Google
vm TABLE OF CONTENTS.
Instructions for future Ware (Chap, xx.), . 400
Expiation of an uncertain Murder. Treatment of a Wife who
had been taken captive. Eight of the First-born. Punish-
ment of a Refractory Son. Burial of a Man who had been
hanged (Chap, xxi.), ..... 404
The Duty to love one's Neighbour ; and Warning against a
Violation of the Natural Order of Things. Instructions to
sanctify the Marriage State (Chap. xxiL), 409
Regulations as to the Right of Citizenship in the Congregation
of the Lord (Chap. xxiiL), .... 418
On Divorce. Warnings against Want of Affection or Injustice
(Chap, xxiv.), 416
Laws relating to Corporal Punishment; Levirate Marriages;
and Just Weights and Measures (Chap, xxv.), . 423.
Thanksgiving and Prayer at the Presentation of First-fruite
and Tithes (Chap. xxvL), ....
III. Third Discourse, or Renewal of the Covenant (Chap, xxvii.-xxx.),
On the setting up of the Law in the Land of Canaan (Chap, xxvii.), 429
Blessing and Curse (Chap. xxviiL 1-68),
Conclusion of the Covenant in the Land of Moab (Chap, rxix, and
nt),
IV. Moses' Farewell and Death (Chap. xxxi.-xxxiv.), .
Moses' Final Arrangements. Completion and handing over of the
Book of the Law (Chap. xxxL),
Song of Moses, and Announcement of his Death (Chap, xxxii.),
Moses' Blessing (Chap. xxxiiL), ....
Death and Burial of Moses (Chap, xxxiv.), .
Digitized by
Google
425
429
435
446
455
455
464
492
514
Concluding Remarks on the Composition of the Pentateuch, . 517
THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
NUMBERS.)
INTRODUCTION.
CONTENTS AND ARRANGEMENT OF THE BOOK OP NUMBERS.
j]HE fourth book of Moses, which the Jews call either
Vayedabber (*OTl), from the opening word, onfiDD (^Api0-
fiai, Numeri, LXX., Vulg.), or DHIpD recen&iones (=liber
recensionum), and to which the heading "lanoa (in the
wilderness) is given in the Masoretic texts with a more direct refer-
ence to its, general contents, narrates the guidance of Israel through
the desert, from Mount Sinai tq the border of Canaan by the river
Jordan, and embraces the whole period from the second month of
the second year after the exodus from Egypt to the tenth month of
the fortieth year.
As soon as their mode of life in a spiritual point of view had
been fully regulated by the laws of Leviticus, the Israelites were to
enter upon their journey to .Canaan, and take possession of the
inheritance promised to their fathers. But just as the way from
Goshen to Sinai was a preparation of the chosen people for their
reception into the covenant with God, so the way from Sinai to
Canaan was also a preparation for the possession of the promised
land. On their journey through the wilderness the Israelites were
to experience on the one' hand the faithful watchfulness and gracious
deliverance of their God in every season of distress and danger, as
well as the stern severity of the divine judgments upon the despisers
of their God, that they might learn thereby to trust entirely in the
Lord, and strive after His kingdom alone ; and on the other hand
they were to receive during their journey the laws and ordinances
relating to their civil and political constitution, and thereby to be
PENT. — VOL. III. A
Digitized by
Google
2 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
placed in a condition to form and maintain themselves as a consoli-
dated nation by the side of and in opposition to the earthly king-
doms formed by the nations of the world, and to fulfil the task
assigned them by God in the midst of the nations of the earth.
These laws, which were given in part at Sinai, in relation to the
external and internal organization of the tribes of Israel as the army
and the congregation of Jehovah, and in part on various occasions
during the march through the desert, as well as after their arrival
in the steppes of Moab, dn the other side of the Jordan opposite to
Jericho, with especial reference to the conquest of Canaan and
their settlement there, are not only attached externally to the his-
tory itself in the order in which they were given, but are so incor-
porated internally into the historical narrative, according to their
peculiar character and contents, as to form a complete whole, which
divides itself into three distinct parts corresponding to the chrono-
logical development of the history itself.
The first part, which extends from chap. i.-x. 10, contains
the preparations for departing from Sinai, arranged in four
groups: — viz. (1) the outward arrangement and classification of
the tribes in the camp and on their march, or the numbering and
grouping of the twelve tribes around the sanctuary of their God
(chap. i. and ii.), .and the appointment of the Levites in the place
of the first-born of the nation to act as servants of the priests in
the sanctuary (chap. iii. and iv.) ; (2) *he internal or moral and
spiritual organization of the nation as the congregation of the
Lord, by laws relating to the maintenance of the cleanliness of the
camp, restitution for trespasses, conjugal fidelity, the fulfilment of
the vow of the Nazarite, and the priestly blessing (chap. v. and vi.) ;
(3) the closing events at Sinai, viz. the presentation of dedica-
tory offerings on the part of the tribe princes for the transport of
the tabernacle and the altar service (chap, vii.), the consecration
of the Levites (chap, viii.), and the feast of Passover, with an
arrangement for a supplementary Passover (chap. ix. 1-14) ; (4)
the appointment of signs and signals for the march in the desert
(chap. ix. 5-x. 10). In the second part (chap. x. 11-xxi.), the
history of the journey is given in the three stages of its progress
from Sinai to the heights of Pisgah, near to the Jordan, viz.
(1) from their departure from the desert of Sinai (chap. x. 11^36)
to their arrival at the desert of Paran, at Kadesh, including the
occurrences at Tabeerah, at the graves of lust, and at Hazeroth
(chap. xi. and xii.), and the events at Kadesh which led God to
Digitized by
Google
INTRODUCTION. 3
condemn the people who had revolted against Him to wander in
the wilderness for forty years, until the older generation that came
out of Egypt had all died (chap. xiii. and xiv.) ; (2) all that is
related of the execution of this divine judgment, extending from
the end of the second year to the reassembling of the congregation
at Kadesh at the beginning of the fortieth year, is the history of
the rebellion and destruction of Korah (chap. xvi.-xvii. 15), which
is preceded by laws relating to the offering of sacrifices after enter-
ing Canaan, to the punishment of blasphemers, and to mementos
upon the clothes (chap, xv.), and followed by the divine institution
of the Aaronic priesthood (chap. xvii. 16-28), with directions as to
the duties and rights of the priest3 and Levites (chap, xviii.), and
the law concerning purification from uncleanness arising from con-
tact with the dead (chap, xix.) ; (3) the journey of Israel in the
fortieth year from Kadesh to Mount Hor, round Mount Seir, past
Moab, and through the territory of the Amorites to the heights of
Pisgah, with the defeat of the kings of the Amorites, Sihon and
Og, and the conquest of their kingdoms in Gilead and Bashan
(chap. xx. and xxi.). In the third part (chap, xxii.-xxxvi.), the
events which occurred in the steppes of Moab, on the eastern side
of the plain of Jordan, are gathered into five groups, with the laws
that were given there, viz. (1) the attempts of the Moabites and
Midianites to destroy the people of Israel, first by the force of
Balaam's curse, which was turned against his will into a blessing
(chap, xxii.-xxiv.), and then by the seduction of the Israelites to
idolatry (chap, xxv.) ; (2) the fresh numbering of the people
according to their families (chap, xxvi.), together with a rule for
the inheritance of landed property by daughters (chap.xxvii. 1— 11),
and the appointment of Joshua as the successor of Moses (chap.
xxvii. 12-23) ; (3) laws relating to the sacrifices to be offered by
the congregation on the Sabbath and feast days, and to the binding
character of vows made by dependent persons (chap, xxviii.-xxx.) ;
(4) the defeat of the Midianites (chap, xxxi.), the division of the
land that had been conquered on the other side of the Jordan
among the tribes of Beuben, Gad, and half Manasseh (chap, xxxii.),
and the list of the halting-places (chap, xxxiii. 1-49) ; (5) direc-
tions as to the expulsion of the Canaanites, the conquest of Canaan
and division of it among the tribes of Israel, the Levites and free
cities, and the marriage of heiresses (chap, xxxiii. 50-xxxvi.).
Digitized by
Google
4 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
EXPOSITION.
I. PREPARATIONS FOR THE DEPARTURE OF ISRAEL FROM SINAI.
Chap. i. 1-x. 10.
numbering of the people of israel at sinai. —
CHAP. I.-IV.
Four weeks after the erection of the tabernacle (cf. chap. i. 1 and
Ex. xl. 17), Moses had the number of the whole congregation taken,
by the command of God, according to the families and fathers'
houses of the twelve tribes, and a list made of all the males above
twenty years of age for service in the army of Jehovah (chap. i.
1-3). Nine months before, the numbering of the people had taken
place for the purpose of collecting atonement-money from every
male of twenty years old and upwards (Ex. xxx. 11 sqq., compared
with chap, xxxviii. 25, 26), and the result was 603,550, the same
number as is given here as the sum of all that were mustered in the
twelve tribes (chap. i. 46). This correspondence in the number of
the male population after the lapse of a year is to be explained, as
we have already observed at Ex. xxx. 16, simply from the fact that
the result of the previous census, which was taken for the purpose
of raising head-money from every one who was fit for war, was
taken as the basis of the mustering of all who were fit for war,
which took place after the erection of the tabernacle; so that,
strictly speaking, this mustering -merely consisted in the registering
of those who had been numbered in the public records, according
to their families and fathers' houses. It is most probable, however,
that the numbering and registering took place according to the
classification adopted at Jethro's suggestion for the administration
of justice, viz. in thousands, hundreds, fifties, and tens (Ex. xviii.
25), and that the number of men in the different tribes was reckoned
in this way simply by thousands, hundreds, and tens, — a conclusion
which we may draw from the fact, that there are no units given in
the case of any of the tribes. On this plan the supernumerary
units might be used to balance the changes that had taken place in
the actual condition of the families and fathers' houses, between the
numbering and the preparation of the muster-rolls, so that the few
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. I.-IV. 5
changes that had occurred in the course of nine months among those
who were fit for war were not taken any further into consideration,
on account of their being so inconsiderable in relation to the total
result. A fresh census was taken 38 years later in the steppes of
Moab (chap, xxvi.), for the division of the land of Canaan among
the tribes according to the number of their families (chap, xxxiii.
54). The number which this gave was 601,730 men of twenty
years old and upwards, not a single one of whom, with the excep-
tion of Joshua and Caleb, was included among those that were
mustered at Sinai, because the whole of that generation had died in
the wilderness (chap. xxvi. 63 sqq.). In the historical account, in-
stead of these exact numbers, the number of adult males is given in
a round sum of 600,000 (chap. xi. 21 ; Ex. xii. 37). To this the
Levites had to be added, of whom there were 22,000 males at the
first numbering and 23,000 at the second, reckoning the whole from
a month old and upwards (chap. iii. 39, xxvi. 62). Accordingly, on
the precarious supposition that the results obtained from the official
registration of births and deaths in our own day furnish any ap-
proximative standard for the people of Israel, who had grown up
under essentially different territorial and historical circumstances,
the whole number of the Israelites in the time of Moses would have
been about two millions. 1
Modern critics have taken offence at these numbers, though
without sufficient reason. 2 When David had the census taken by
1 Statistics show that, out of 10,000 inhabitants in any country, about 5580
are over twenty years of age (cf. Chr. Bernoulli, Hdb. der Populationistik, 1841).
This is the case in Belgium, where, out of 1000 inhabitants, 421 are under
twenty years of age. According to the Danish census of 1840, out of 1000 in-
habitants there were —
In Denmark, under twenty years of age, 482 ; above twenty, 568
Schleswig, „ „ 486; „ 664
Holstein, „ ,, 460; ,, 540
Lauenburg, „ ,, 458; „ 542
According to this standard, if there were 600,000 males in Israel above twenty
years of age, there would be in all 1,000,000 or 1,100,000 males, and therefore,
including the females, more than two millions.
2 Knobel has raised the following objections to the historical truth or validity
of the numbers given above : (1.) So large a number could not possibly have
lived for any considerable time in the peninsula of Sinai, as modern travellers
estimate the present population at not more than from four to seven thousand,
and state that the land could never have been capable of sustaining a population
of 50,000. But the boots of Moses do not affirm that the Israelites lived for
forty years upon the natural produce of the desert, but that they were fed mira-
Digitized by
Google
6 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Joab, in the closing years of his reign, there were 800,000 men
capable of hearing arms in Israel, and 500,000 in Judah (2 Sam.
xxiv. 9). Now, if we suppose the entire population of a country to
be about four times the number of its fighting men, there would be
culously with manna by God (see at Ex. xvi. 31). Moreover, the peninsula of
Sinai yielded much more subsistence in, ancient times than is to be found there
at present, as is generally admitted, and only denied by Kndbel in the interests
of rationalism. The following are Ruler's remarks in his Erdkunde, 14, pp. 926-7 :
" We have repeatedly referred above to the earlier state of the country, which
must have been vastly different from that of the present time. The abundant
vegetation, for example ; the larger number of trees, and their superiority in
size, the destruction of which would be followed by a decrease in the quantity
of smaller shrubs, etc. ; also the greater abundance of the various kinds of food
of which the children of Israel could avail themselves in their season ; the more
general cultivation of the land, as seen in the monumental period of the earliest
Egyptians, viz. the period of their mines and cities, as well as in Christian
times in the wide-spread remains of monasteries, hermitages, walls, gardens,
fields, and wells ; and, lastly, the possibility of a better employment of the tem-
porary flow of water in the wadys, and of the rain, which falls by no means
unfrequently, but which would need to be kept with diligence and by artificial
means for the unfruitful periods of the year, as is the case in other districts of
the same latitude. These circumstances, which are supported by the numerous
inscriptions of Sinai and Serbal, together with those in the Wady Mokatteb and
a hundred other valleys, as well as upon rocky and mountainous heights, which
are now found scattered in wild solitude and utter neglect throughout the whole
of the central group of mountains, prove that at one time a more numerous
population both could and did exist there." (2.) " If the Israelites had been a
nation of several millions in the Mosaic age, with their bravery at that time, they
would have conquered the small land more easily and more rapidly than they
seem to have done according to the accounts in the books of Joshua, Judges,
and Samuel, which show that they were obliged to tolerate the Canaanites for
a long time, that they were frequently oppressed by them, and that it was not
till the time of David and Solomon that their supremacy was completely estab-
lished." This objection of Knobel's is founded upon the supposition that the
tribes of Canaan were very small and weak. But where has he learned that ?
As they had no less than 31 kings, according to Josh, xii., and dwelt in many
hundreds of towns, they can hardly have been numerically weaker than the
Israelites with their 600,000 men, but in all probability were considerably
stronger in numbers, and by no means inferior in bravery ; to say nothing of the
fact that the Israelites neither conquered Canaan under Joshua by the strength
of their hands, nor failed to exterminate them afterwards from want of physical
strength. (3.) Of the remaining objections, viz. that so large a number could
not have gone through the Arabian Gulf in a single night, or crossed the Jordan
in a day, that Joshua could not have circumcised the whole of the males, etc.,
the first has been answered in vol. ii. (pp. 46, 47), by a proof that it was pos-
sible for the Red Sea to be crossed in the given time, and the others will be
answered when we come to the particular events referred to.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. L-IV. 7,
about five millions of inhabitants in Palestine at that time. The
area of this land, according to the boundaries given in chap, xxxiv.
2-12, the whole of which was occupied by Israel and Judah in the
time of David, with the exception of a small strip of the Phoenician
coast, was more than 500 square miles. 1 Accordingly there would
be 10,000 inhabitants to each square mile (German) ; a dense though
by no means unparalleled population ; 2 so that it is certainly pos-
sible that in the time of Christ it may have been more numerous
still, according to the accounts of Josephus, which are confirmed by
Dio Cassius (cf. C. v. Raumer, Palaatina, p. 93). And if Canaan
could contain and support five millions of inhabitants in the flourish-
ing period of the Israelitish kingdom, two millions or more could
easily have settled and been sustained in the time of Joshua and the
Judges, notwithstanding the fact that there still remained large
tracts of land in the possession of the Canaanites and Philistines,
and that the Israelites dwelt in the midst of the Canaanitish popu-
lation which had not yet been entirely eradicated (Judg. iii. 1-5).
If we compare together the results of the two numberings in
the second and fortieth years of their march, we shall find a con-
siderable increase in some of the tribes, and a large decrease in
others. The number of men of twenty years old and upwards in
the different tribes was as follows : —
Reuben, .
Simeon, .
Gad, . .
Judah,
Issachar, .
Zebulon, .
Ephraim,
Manasseh,
Benjamin,
Dan, . .
Asher,
Naphtali,
Total, .... 603,550 601,730
Consequently by the second numbering Dan had increased 1700,
1 The German mile being equal to about fire English miles, this would give
12,500 square miles English.
2 In the kingdom of Saxony (acoording to the census of the year 1855) there
are 7501 persons to the square mile ; in Belgium (according to the census of
First Numbering.
Second Numbering.
46,500
43,730
59,300
22,200
,45,650
40,500
74,600
76,500
54,400
64,300
67,400
60,500
40,500
32,500
. 32,200
52,700
35,400
45,600
62,700
64,400
41,500
53,400
53,400
45,400
Digltizi
ed by Google
8 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Judah 1900, Zebulon 3100, Issachar 9900, Benjamin 10,200,
Asher 11,900, Manasseh 20,900. This increase, which was about
19 per cent, in the case of Issachar, 29 per cent, in that of Ben-
jamin and Asher, and 63 per cent, in that of Manasseh, is very
large, no doubt; but even that of Manasseh is not unparalleled.
The total population of Prussia increased from 10,349,031 to
17,139,288 between the end of 1816 and the end of 1855, that
is to say, more than 65 per cent, in 39 years ; whilst in England
the population increased 47 per cent, between 1815 and 1849,
i.e. in 34 years. On the other hand, there was a decrease in
Eeuben of 2770, in Gad of 5150, in Ephraim of 8000, in Naph-
tali of 8000, and in Simeon of 37,100. The cause of this dimi-
nution of 6 per cent, in the case of Reuben, 12 per cent, in Gad,
15 per cent, in Naphtali, 20 per cent, in Ephraim, and nearly
63 per cent, in Simeon, it is most natural to seek for in the
different judgments which fell upon the nation. If it be true, as
the earlier commentators conjectured, with great plausibility, on
account of the part taken by Zimri, a prince of the tribe (chap,
xxv. 6, 14), that the Simeonites were the worst of those who joined
in the idolatrous worship, of Baal Peor, the plague, in which 24,000
men were v destroyed (chap. xxv. 9), would fall upon them with
greater severity than upon the other tribes ; and this would serve
as the principal explanation of the circumstance, that in the census
which was taken immediately afterwards, the number of men in
that tribe who were capable of bearing arms had melted away to
22,200. But for all that, the total number included in the census
had only been reduced by 1820 men during the forty years of their
journeying through the wilderness.
The tribe of Levi appears very small in comparison with the
rest of the tribes. In the second year of their journey, when the
first census was taken, it only numbered 22,000 males of a month
old and' upwards ; and in the fortieth year, when the second was
taken, only 23,000 (chap. iii. 39, xxvi. 62). " Beckoning," says
1856) 8462 ; and in the district of Diisseldorf there are 98*32 square miles and
(according to the census of 1855) 1,007,570 inhabitants, so that there must be
10,248 persons to the square mile. Consequently, not only could more than Ave
millions have lived in Palestine, but, if we take into account on the one hand
what is confirmed by both biblical and other testimonies, viz. the extraordinary
fertility of the land in ancient times (cf. v. Raumer, Pal. pp. 92 sqq.), and on
the other hand the well-known fact that the inhabitants of warm countries
require less food than Europeans living in colder climates, they could also have
found a sufficient supply of food.
Digitized by
Google
I
CHAP. I.-IV. 9
Knobel, u that in Belgium, for example, in the rural districts, out of
10,000 males, 1074 die in the first month after their birth, and 3684
between the first month and the twentieth year, so that only 5242
are then alive, the tribe of Levi would only number about 13,000
men of 20 years old and upwards, and consequently would not be
half as numerous as the smallest of the other tribes, whilst it would
be hardly a sixth part the size of Judah, which was the strongest
of the tribes." But notwithstanding this, the correctness of the
numbers given is not to be called in question. It is not only sup-
ported by the fact, that the number of the Levites capable of service
between the ages of 30 and 50 amounted to 8580 (chap. iv. 48), —
a number which bears the most perfect proportion to that of 22,000
of a month old and upwards, — but is also confirmed by the fact,
that in the time of David the tribe of Levi only numbered 38,000
of thirty years old and upwards (1 Chron. xxiii. 3) ; so that in the
interval between Moses and David their rate of increase was still
below that of the other tribes, which had grown from 600,000 to
1,300,000 in the same time. Now, if we cannot discover any reason
for this smaller rate of increase in the tribe of Levi, we see, at any
rate, that it was not uniform in the other tribes. If Levi was not half
as strong as Manasseh in the first numbering, neither Manasseh nor
Benjamin was half as strong as Judah ; and in the second number-
ing, even Ephraim had not half the number of men that Judah had.
A much greater difficulty appears to lie in the fact, that the
number of all the male first-born of the twelve tribes, which was
only 22,273 according to the census taken for the purpose of their
redemption by the Levites (chap. iii. 43), bore no kind of propor-
tion to the total number of men capable of bearing arms in the
whole of the male population, as calculated from these. If the
603,550 men of twenty years old and upwards presuppose, accord-
ing to what has been stated above, a population of more than a
million males ; then, on the assumption that 22,273 was the sum total
of the first-born sons throughout the entire nation, there would be
only one first-born to 40 or 45 males, and consequently every father
of a family must have begotten, or still have had, from 39 to 44
sons; whereas the ordinary proportion of first-born sons to the
whole male population is one to four. But the calculation which
yields this enormous disproportion, or rather this inconceivable pro-
portion, is founded upon the supposition that the law, which com-
manded the sanctification of the male first-born, had a retrospective
force, and was to be understood as requiring that not only the first-
Digitized by
Google
10 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
born sons, who were born from the time when the law was given,
but all the first-born sons throughout the entire nation, should be
offered to the Lord and redeemed with five shekels each, even
though they were fathers or grandfathers, or even great-grand-
fathers, at that time. Now if the law is to be interpreted in this
sense, as having a retrospective force, and applying to those who
were born before it was issued, as it has been from the time of
J. D. Michaelis down to that of Knobel, it is an unwarrantable
liberty to restrict its application to the first-born sons, who had not
yet become fathers themselves, — a mere subterfuge, in fact, invented
for the purpose of getting rid of the disproportion, but without
answering the desired end. 1 If we look more closely at the law, we
cannot find in the words themselves " all the first-born, whatsoever
1 This is evident from the different attempts which have been made to get
rid of the difficulty, in accordance with this hypothesis. J. D. Michaelis
thought that he could explain the disproportion from the prevalence of poly-
gamy among the Israelites ; ' but he has overlooked the fact, that polygamy
never prevailed among the Israelites, or any other people, with anything like
the. universality which this would suppose. Havernick adopted this view, but
differed so far from Michaelis, that he understood by first-born only those who
were so on both the father's and mother's side, — a supposition which does not
remove the difficulty, but only renders it perfectly incredible. Others ima-
gined, that only those first-born were counted who had been born as the result
of marriages contracted within the last six years. Baumgarten supports this on
the ground that, according to Lev. xxvii. 6, the redemption-fee for boys of this
age was five shekels (chap. iii. 47) ; but this applies to vows, and proves
nothing in relation to first-born, who could not have been the object of a vow
(Lev. xxvii. 26). Bunsen comes to the same conclusion, on the ground that it was
at this age that children were generally dedicated to Moloch (sic!). Lastly,
Kurtz endeavours to solve the difficulty, first, by referring to the great f ruitf ul-
ness of the Israelitish women ; secondly, by excluding, (a) the first-born of the
father, unless at the same time the first-born of the mother ; (6) all the first-
born who were fathers of families themselves ; and thirdly, by observing, that
in a population of 600,000 males above 20 years of age, we may assume that
there would be about 200,000 under the age of fifteen. Now, if we deduct
these 200,000 who were not yet fifteen, from the 600,000 who were above
twenty, there would remain 400,000 married men. " In that case the total
number of 22,273 first-born would yield this proportion, that there would be
one first-born to nine male births. And on the ground assigned under No. 2 (a),
this proportion would have to be reduced one-half. So that for every family
we should have, on an average, four or five sons, or nine children, — a result by
no means surprising, considering the fruitfulness of Hebrew marriages." This
would be undoubtedly true, and the facit of the calculation quite correct, as
9 X 22,273 =200,457, if only the subtraction upon which it is based were recon-
cilable with the rules of arithmetic, or if the reduction of 600,000 men to
400,000 could in any way be justified.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. I.-IV. 11
openeth the womb" (Ex. xiii. 2, cf. Num. iii. 12), or in the ratio
legis, or in the circumstances under which the law was given, either
a necessity or warrant for any such explanation or extension. Ac-
cording to Ex. xiii. 2, after the institution of the Passover and its
first commemoration, God gave the command, " Sanctify unto Me
all the first-born both of man and of beast ;" and added, according
to vers. 11 sqq., the further explanation, that when the Israelites
came into the land of Canaan, they were to set apart every first-
born unto the Lord, but to redeem their first-born sons. This
further definition places it beyond all doubt, that what God pre-
scribed to His people was not a supplementary sanctification of all
the male first-born who were then to be found in Israel, but simply
the sanctification of all that should be born from that time forward.
A confirmation of this is to be found in the explanation given in
Num. iii. 13 and viii. 17 : " All the first-born are Mine ; for on the
day that I smote all the first-born in the land of Egypt, I hallowed
unto Me all the first-born in Israel, both man and beast." According
to this distinct explanation, God had actually sanctified to Himself
all the first-born of Israel by the fact, that through the blood of
the paschal lamb He granted protection to His people from the
stroke of the destroyer (Ex. xii. 22, 23), and had instituted the
Passover, in order that He might therein adopt the whole nation of
Israel, with all its sons, as the people of His possession, or induct
the nation which He had chosen as His first-born son (Ex. iv. 22)
into the condition of a child of God. This condition of sonship
was henceforth to be practically manifested by the Israelites, not
only by the yearly repetition of the feast of Passover, but also by
the presentation of all the male first-born of their sons and their
cattle to the Lord, the first-born of the cattle being sacrificed to
Him upon the altar, and the first-born sons being redeemed from
the obligation resting upon them to serve at the sanctuary of their
God. Of course the reference was only to the first-born of men
and cattle that should come into the world from that time forward,
and not to those whom God had already sanctified to Himself, by
sparing the Israelites and their cattle. 1
1 Vitringa drew the correct conclusion from Ex. xiii. 11, 12, in combination
with the fact that this law was not carried out previous to the adoption of the
Levites in the place of the first-born for service at the sanctuary — that the law
was intended chiefly for the future : " This law," he observes (in his 06*. ss. L.
ii. c. 2, § 13), " relates to the tabernacle to be afterwards erected, and to the
regular priests to be solemnly appointed j when this law, with many others of a
Digitizi
ed by Google
12 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
This being established, it follows that the 22,273 first-born, who
were exchanged for the Levites (ch. iii. 45 sqq.), consisted only of
the first-born sons who had been born between the time of the
exodus from Egypt and the numbering of the twelve tribes, which
took place thirteen months afterwards. Nowj if, in order to form an
idea of the proportion which this number would bear to the whole
of the male population of the twelve tribes of Israel, we avail our-
selves of the results furnished by modern statistics, we may fairly
assume, according to these, that in a nation comprising 603,550
males above 20 years of age, there would be 190,000 to 195,100
between the ages of 20 and 30. 1 And, supposing that this was
the age at which the Israelites married, there would be from
19,000 to 19,500 marriages contracted upon an average every year ;
and in a nation which had grown up in a land so celebrated as
Egypt was in antiquity for the extraordinary fruitfulness of its in-
habitants, almost as many first-born, say at least 19,000, might be
expected to come into the world. This average number would be
greater if we fixed the age for marrying between 18 and 28, or
reduced it to the seven years between 18 and 25. 2 , But even with-
out doing this, we must take into consideration the important fact
that such averages, based upon a considerable length of time, only
give an approximative idea of the actual state of things in any
single year ; and that, as a matter of fact, in years of oppression and
distress the numbers may sink to half the average, whilst in other
similar kind, would have to be observed. The first-born were set apart by God to
be consecrated to Him, as servants of the priests and of the sacred things, either
in their own persons, or in that of others who were afterwards substituted
in the goodness of God. This command therefore presupposed the erection of
the tabernacle, the ordination of priests, the building of an altar, and the cere-
monial of the sacred service, and showed from the very nature of the case, that
there could not be any application of this law of the first-born before that time."
1 According to the census of the town of Basle, given by Bernoulli in his
Populationistik, p. 42, and classified by age, out of 1000 inhabitants in the year
1837, there were 326 under 20 years of age, 224 between 20 and 30, and 450 of
30 years old and upwards. Now, if we apply this ratio to the people of Israel,
out of 603,550 males of 20 years old and upwards, there would be 197,653
between the ages of 20 and 30. The statistics of the city of Vienna and its
suburbs, as given by Brachelli (Geographie und Statistik, 1861), yield very
nearly the same results. At the end of the year 1856 there were 88,973 male
inhabitants under 20 years of age, 44,000 between 20 and 80, and 97,853 of 80
years old and upwards, not including the military and those who were in hos-
pitals. According to this ratio, out of the 603,550 Israelites above 20 years of
age, 187,209 would be between 20 and 30.
3 From a comparison with the betrothals which take place every year in
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. L-IV. 13
years, under peculiarly favourable circumstances, they may rise
again to double the amount. 1 When the Israelites were groaning
under the hard lash of the Egyptian taskmasters, and then under
the inhuman and cruel edict of Pharaoh, which commanded all the
Hebrew boys that were born to be immediately put to death, the
number of marriages no doubt diminished from year to year. But
the longer this oppression continued, the greater would be the
number of marriages concluded at once (especially in a nation
rejoicing in the promise of numerous increase which it had re-
ceived from its God), when Moses had risen up and proved himself,
hy the mighty signs and wonders with which he smote Egypt and
its haughty king, to be the man whom the God of the fathers had
sent and endowed with power to redeem His nation out of the
bondage of Egypt, and lead it into Canaan, the good land that He
had promised to the fathers. At that time, when the spirits of the
nation revived, and the hope of a glorious future filled every heart,
there might very well have been about 38,000 marriages contracted in
a year, say from the time of the seventh plague, three months before
the exodus, and about 37,600 children born by the second month
of the second year after the exodus, 22,273 of them being boys, as
the proportion of male births to female varies very remarkably, and
may be shown to have risen even as high as 157 to 100, whilst
among the Jews of modern times it has frequently been as high as
6 to 5, and has even risen to 3 to- 2 (or more exactly 29 to 20). 2
the Prussian state, it is evident that the number given in the text as the average
number of marriages contracted every year is not too high, but most assuredly
too low. In the year 1858 there were 167,387 betrothals in a population of
17,798,900 ; in 1816, on the other hand, there were 117,448 in a population of
10,402,600 (vid. Brachelli, Geog. und Statistik von Preussen, 1861). The first
ratio, if applied to Israel with ite two millions, would yield 19,000 marriages
annually ; the second, 22,580 ; whilst we have, in addition, to bear in mind how
many men there are in the European states who would gladly marry, if they
were not prevented from doing so by inability to find the means of supporting
a house of their own.
1 How great the variations are in the number of marriages contracted year
by year, even in large states embracing different tribes, and when no unusual
circumstances have disturbed the ordinary course of things, is evident from
the statistics of the Austrian empire as given by Brachelli, from which we may
see that in the year 1851, with a total population of 86 J millions, there were
361,249 betrothals, and in the year 1854, when the population had increased
by half a million, only 279,802. The variations in particular districts are, as
might be supposed, considerably larger.
8 According to Bernoulli (p. 148), in the city of Geneva, there were 167 boys
born to every 100 girls in the year 1832. He also observes, at p. 153 : " It is
Digitized by
Google
14 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
In this way the problem before us may be solved altogether
independently of the question, whether the law relates to all the first-
born sons on the father's side, or only to those who were first-born
on both father's and mother's side, and without there having been
a daughter born before. This latter view we regard as quite un-
founded, as a mere subterfuge resorted to for the purpose of re-
moving the supposed disproportion, and in support of which the
expression " opening the womb" (fissura uteri, i.e. quifindit uterum)
is pressed in a most unwarrantable manner. On this point, J. D.
Michaelis has correctly observed, that "the etymology ought not
to be too strongly pressed, inasmuch as it is not upon this, but
upon usage chiefly, that the force of words depends." It is a fact
common to all languages, that in many words the original literal
signification falls more. and more into the background in the course
of years, and at length is gradually lost sight of altogether. More-
over, the expression " openeth the womb" is generally employed in
cases in which a common term is required to designate the first-born
of both man and beast (Ex. xiii. 2, 12-15, xxxiv. 19, 20 ;- Num.
iii. 12, 13, viii. 16, 17, xviii. 15 ; Ezek. xx. 16) ; but even then,
wherever the two are distinguished, the term "ti33 is applied as a
rule to the first-born sons, and "IBB to the first-born of animals
(comp. Ex. xiii. 136 with vers. 12 and 13a ; and chap, xxxiv.
206 with vers. 19 and 20a). On the other hand, where only first-
born sons are referred to, as in Deut. xxi. 15-17, we look in vain
for the expression peter rechem, u openeth the womb." Again, the
Old Testament, like modern law, recognises only first-born sons, and
does not apply the term first-born to daughters at all ; and in rela-
tion to the inheritance, even in the case of two wives, both of whom
had born sons to their husband, it recognises only one first-born son,
so that the fact of its being the first birth on the mother's side is
not taken into consideration at all (cf. Gen. xlvi. 8, xlix. 3 ; Deut.
xxi. 15-17). And the established rule in relation to the birth-
right, — namely, that the first son of the father was called the first-
born, and possessed all the rights of the first-born, independently
remarkable that, according to a very frequent observation, there are an unusual
number of boys born among the Jews ; " and as a proof, he cites the fact that,
according to Burdach, the lists of births in Leghorn show 120 male children
born among the Jews to 100 female, whilst, according to Huf eland, there were
528 male Jews and 365 female born in Berlin in the course of 16 years, the pro-
portion therefore being 145 to 100. And, according to this same proportion,
we have calculated above, that there would be 15,827 girls to 22,278 boys.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. I. 1-16. 15
altogether of the question whether there had been daughters born
before, — would no doubt be equally applicable to the sanctification
of the first-born sons. Or are we really to believe, that inas-
much as the child first born is quite as often a girl as a boy, God
exempted every father in Israel whose eldest child was a daughter
from the obligation to manifest his own sonship by consecrating
his first-born son to God, and so demanded the performance of this
duty from half the nation only ? We cannot for a moment believe
that such an interpretation of the law as this would really be in
accordance with the spirit of the Old Testament economy.
Chap. i. Muster op the Twelve Tribes, with the ex-
ception OF that OF Levi. — Vers. 1-3. Before the departure of
Israel from Sinai, God commanded Moses, on the first of the second
month in the second year after the exodus from Egypt, to take the
number of the whole congregation of the children of Israel, " ac-
cording to their families, according to their fathers' houses (see Ex.
vi. 14), in (according to) the number of ilieir names" i.e. each one
counted singly and entered, but only " every male according to ilieir
heads of twenty years old and upwards" (see Ex. xxx. 14), viz. only
N3S S^"?? " all who go forth of the army" i.e. all the men capable
of bearing arms, because by means of this numbering the tribes
and their subdivisions were to be organized as hosts of Jehovah,
that the whole congregation might fight as an army for the cause
of their Lord (see at Ex. vii. 4).
Vers. 4-16. Moses and Aaron, who were commanded to num-
ber, or rather to muster, the people, were to have with them " a man
of every tribe, who was headrman of his fathers' houses" i.e. a tribe-
prince, viz. to help them to carry out the mustering. Beth aboth
("fathers' houses"), in ver. 2, is a technical expression for the sub-
divisions in which the mishpachoth, or families of the tribes, were
arranged, and is applied in ver. 4 according to its original usage,
based upon the natural division of the tribes into mishpachoth and
families, to the fathers' houses which every tribe possessed in the
family of its first-born. In vers. 5-15, these heads of tribes are
mentioned by name, as in chap. ii. 3 sqq., vii. 12 sqq., x. 14 sqq.
In ver. 16 they are designated as "called men of the congregation"
because they were called to diets of the congregation, as represen-
tatives of the tribes, to regulate the affairs of the nation ; also
11 princes of the tribes of their fathers" and "heads of the thou-
sands of Israel:" "princes" from the nobility of their birth ; and
Digitized by
Google
16 " THE FOUETH BOOK OF MOSES.
" heads" as chiefs of the alaphim composing the tribes. Alaphim
is equivalent to mishpachoth (cf. chap. x. 4 ; Josh. xxii. 14) ; be-
cause the number of heads of families in the mishpachoth of a tribe
might easily amount to a thousand (see at Ex. xviii. 25). In a
similar manner, the term " hundred" in the old German came to be
used in several different senses (see Grimm, deutsche Mechts-alter-
thumer, p. 532).
Vers. 17-47. This command was carried out by Moses and
Aaron. They took for this purpose the twelve heads of tribes who
are pointed out (see at Lev. xxiv. 11) by name, and had the whole
congregation gathered together by them and enrolled in genealogical
tables, "win, to announce themselves as born, i.e. to have themselves
entered in genealogical registers (books of generations). This
entry is called a 1£B, mustering, in ver. 19, etc. In vers. 20-43 the
number is given of those who were mustered of all the different
tribes, and in vers. 44-47 the total of the whole nation, with the
exception of the tribe of Levi. " Their generations " (vers. 20, 22,
24, etc.), i.e. those who were begotten by them, so that " the sons
of Reuben, Simeon" etc., are mentioned as the fathers from whom
the mishpachoth' and fathers' houses had sprung. The ? before
jiyoB* \>3 in ver. 22, and the following names (in vers. 24, 26, etc.),
signifies " with regard to " (as in Isa. xxxii. 1 ; Ps: xvii. 4, etc.).
Vers. 48—54. Moses was not to muster the tribe of Levi along
with the children of Israel, i.e. with the other tribes, or take their
number, but to appoint the Levites for the service of the dwelling
of the testimony (Ex. xxxviii. 21), i.e. of the tabernacle, that they
might encamp around it, might take it down when the camp was
broken up, and set it up when Israel encamped again, and that no
stranger (zar, non-Levite, as in Lev. xxii. 10) might come near it
and be put to death (see chap. iii.). The rest of the tribes were to
encamp every man in his place of encampment, and by his banner
(see at chap. ii. 2), in their hosts (see chap, ii.), that wrath might
not come upon the congregation, viz, through the approach of a
stranger. ^Vj?, the wrath of Jehovah, breaking in judgment upon
the unholy who approached His sanctuary in opposition to His
command (chap. viii. 19, xviii. 5, 22). On the expression u keep the
charge" (shamar mishmereth), see at Gen. xxvi. 5 and Lev. viii. 35.
Chap. ii. Order op the Twelve Tribes in the Camp and
on the March. — Vers. 1, 2. The twelve tribes were to- encamp
each one by his standard, by the signs of their fathers' houses,
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. II. 1, 2. 17
opposite to the tabernacle (at some distance) round about, and,
according to the more precise directions given afterwards, in such
order that on every side of the tabernacle three tribes were en-
camped side by side and united under one banner, so that the twelve
tribes formed four large camps or divisions of an army. Between
these camps and the court surrounding the tabernacle, the three
leading mishpachoth of the Levites were to be encamped ofl three
sides, and Moses and Aaron with the sons of Aaron (i.e. the priests)
upon the fourth, i.e. the front or eastern side, before the entrance
(chap. in. 21-38). ?W, a standard, banner, or flag, denotes primarily
the larger field sign, possessed by every division composed of three
tribes, which was also the banner of the tribe at the head of each
division; and secondarily, in a derivative signification, it denotes
the army united under one standard, like a-rjfieia, or vexillum. It
is used thus, for example, in vers. 17, 31, 34, and in combination
with '"UTO in vers. 3, 10, 18, and 25, where u standard of the camp
of Judah, Reuben, Ephraim, and Dan " signifies the hosts of the
tribes arranged under these banners, nhk, the signs (ensigns), were
the smaller flags or banners which were carried at the head of the
different tribes and subdivisions of the tribes (the fathers' houses).
Neither the Mosaic law, nor the Old Testament generally, gives ns
any intimation as to the form or character of the standard (degel).
According to rabbinical tradition, the standard of Judah bore the
figure of a lion, that of Reuben the likeness of a man or of a man's
head, that of Ephraim the figure of an ox, and that of Dan the
figure of an eagle ; so that the four living creatures united in the
cherubic forms described by Ezekiel were represented upon these
four standards. 1
1 Jerome Prado, in his commentary upon Ezekiel (chap. i. p. 44), gives the
following minute description according to rabbinical tradition : " The different
leaders of the tribes had their own standards, with the crests of their ancestors
depicted upon them. On the east, above the tent of Naasson the first-born of
Judah, there shone a standard of a green colour, this colour having been adopted
by bim because it was in a green stone, viz, an emerald, that the name of his
forefather Judah was engraved on the breastplate of the high priest (Ex. xxv.
15 sqq.), and on this standard there was depicted a lion, the crest and hiero-
glyphic of his ancestor Judah, whom Jacob had compared to a lion, saying,
' Judah is a lion's whelp.' Towards the south, above the tent of Elisur the son
of Reuben, there floated a red standard, having the colour of the sardus, on
which the name of his father, viz. Reuben, was engraved upon the breastplate of
the high priest. The symbol depicted upon this standard was a human head,
because Reuben was the first-born, and head of the family. On the west, above
the tent of Elishamah the son of Ephraim, there was a golden flag, on which the
PENT. — VOL. III. B
Digitizi
ed by Google
18 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Vers. 3-31. Order of the tribes in the camp and on the march. —
Vers. 3-9. The standard of the tribe of Judah was to encamp in
front, namely towards the east, according to its hosts ; and by its
side the tribes of Issachar and Zebulun, the descendants of Leah,
under the command and banner of Judah : an army of 186,400
men, which was to march oat first when the camp was broken up
(ver. 9), so that Judah led the way as the champion of his brethren
(Gen. xlix. 10). — Ver. 4. (i His host, and those that were numbered
of them " (cf. vers. 6, 8, 11, etc.), i.e. the army according to its
numbered men. — Vers. 10-16. On the south side was the standard
of Reuben, with which Simeon and Gad, descendants of Leah and
her maid Zilpah, were associated, and to which they were subordi-
nated. In ver. 14, Reuel is a mistake for Deuel (chap. i. 14, vii.
42, x. 20), which is the reading given here in 118 MSS. cited by
Kennicott and De Rossi, in several of the ancient editions, and in
the Samaritan, Vulgate, and Jon. Saad., whereas the LXX., Onk.,
Syr., and Pers. read Reuel. This army of 151,450 men was to
break up and march as the second division. — Ver. 17. The taber-
nacle, the camp of the Levites, was to break up after this in the
midst of the camps {i.e. of the other tribes). u As they encamp, so
shall they break up," that is to say, with Levi in the midst of the
tribes, " every man in his place, according to his banner." T, place,
as in Deut. xxiii. 13, Isa. lvii. 8. — Vers. 18-24. On the west the
standard of Ephraim, with the tribes of Manasseh and Benjamin,
that is to say, the whole of the descendants of Rachel, 108,100 men,
as the third division of the army. — Vers. 25-31. Lastly, towards the
north wa3 the standard of Gad, with Asher and Naphtali, the de-
scendants of the maids Bilhah and Zilpah, 157,600 men, who were
head of a calf was depicted, because it was through the vision of the calves or
oxen that his ancestor Joseph had predicted and provided for the famine in
Egypt (Gen. xli.) ; and hence Moses, when blessing the tribe of Joseph, i.e.
Ephraim (Deut. xxxiii. 17), said, ' his glory is that of the first-born of a bull.'
The golden splendour of the standard of Ephraim resembled that of the chryso-
lite, in which the name of Ephraim was engraved upon the breastplate. Towards
the north, above the tent of Ahiezer the son of Dan, there floated a motley
standard of white and red, like the jaspis (or, as some say, a carbuncle), in
which the name of Dan was engraved upon the breastplate. The crest upon
this was an eagle, the great foe to serpents, which had been chosen by the
leader in' the place of a serpent, because his forefather Jacob had compared Dan
to a serpent, saying, ' Dan is a serpent in the way, an adder (cerastes, a horned
snake) in the path ; ' but Ahiezer substituted the eagle, the destroyer of serpents,
as he shrank from carrying an adder upon his flag."
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. IIL 1-4. 19
to be the last to break up, and formed the rear on the march. — Ver.
31. bifxn? (according to their standards) is equivalent to Dnioxi?
(according to their hosts) in vers. 9, 16, and 24, i.e. according to the
hosts of which they consisted.
Vers. 32-34. In ver. 32 we have the whole number given,
603,550 men, not including the Levites (ver. 33, see at chap. i. 49) ;
and in ver. 34 the concluding remark as to the subsequent execution
of the divine command, — an anticipatory notice, as in Ex. xii. 50,
xl. 16, etc.
Chap. iii. Muster of the Tribe of Levi. — As Jacob had
adopted the two sons of Joseph as his own sons, and thus promoted
them to the rank of heads of tribes, the tribe of Levi formed,
strictly speaking, the thirteenth tribe of the whole nation, and was
excepted from the muster of the twelve tribes who were destined
to form the army of Jehovah, because God had chosen it for the
service of the sanctuary. Out of this tribe God had not only called
Moses to be the deliverer, lawgiver, and leader of His people,
but Moses' brother Aaron, with the sons of the latter, to be the
custodians of the sanctuary. And now, lastly, the whole tribe was
chosen, in the place of the first-born of all the tribes, to assist the
priests in performing the duties of the sanctuary, and was numbered
and mustered for this its special calling.
Vers. 1-4. In order to indicate at the very outset the position
which the Levites were to occupy in relation to the priests (viz.
Aaron and his descendants), the account of their muster commences
not only with the enumeration of the sons of Aaron who were
chosen as priests (vers. 2-4), but with the heading : " These are the
generations of Aaron and Moses in the day (i.e. at the time) when
Jelwvah spake with Moses in Mount Sinai (ver. 1). The toledoth
(see at Gen. ii. 4) of Moses and Aaron are not only the families
which sprang from Aaron and Moses, but the Levitical families
generally, which were named after Aaron and Moses, because they
were both of them raised into the position of heads or spiritual
fathers of the whole tribe, namely, at the time when God spoke to
Moses upon Sinai. Understood in this way, the notice as to the
time is neither a superfluous repetition, nor introduced with refer-
ence to the subsequent numbering of the people in the steppes of
Moab (chap. xxvi. 57 sqq.). Aaron is placed before Moses here
(see at Ex. vi. 26 sqq.), not merely as being the elder of the two,
hnt because his sons received the priesthood, whilst the sons of
Digitized by
Google
20 THE FOUBTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Moses, on the contrary, were classed among the rest of the Levitical
families (cf. 1 Ohron. xxiii. 14). — Vers. 2 sqq. Names of the sons of
Aaron, the " anointed priests (see Lev. viii. 12), whose hand they filled
to be priests" i.e.. who were appointed to the priesthood (see at Lev.
vii. 37). On Nadab and Abihu, see Lev. x. 1, 2. As they had
neither of them any children when they were put to death, Eleazar
and Ithamar were the only priests " in the sight of Aaron their father"
i.e. during his lifetime. " In the sight of: " as in Gen. xi. 28.
Vers. 5-10. The Levites are placed before Aaron the priest, to
be his servants. — Ver. 6. " Bring near :" as in Ex. xxviii. 1. The
expression 'JB? 10V is frequently met with in connection with the
position of a servant, as standing before his master to receive his
commands. — Ver. 7. They were to keep the charge of Aaron and
the whole congregation before the tabernacle, to attend to the ser-
vice of the dwelling, i.e. to observe what Aaron (the priest) and
the whole congregation were bound to perform in relation to the
service at the dwelling-place of Jehovah. " To keep the charge :"
see chap. i. 53 and Gen. xxvi. 5. In ver. 8 this is more fully
explained : they were to keep the vessels of the tabernacle) and to
attend to all that was binding upon the children of Israel in relation
to them, i.e. to take the oversight of the furniture, to keep it safe
and clean. — Ver. 9. Moses was also to give the Levites to Aaron
and his sons. a They are wholly given to him out of the children of
Israel:" the repetition of DJtfO here and in chap. viii. 16 is emphatic,
and expressive of complete surrender (Ewald, § 313). The Levites,
however, as nethunim, must be distinguished from the nethinim of
non-Israelitish descent, who were given to the Levites at a later
period as temple slaves, to perform the lowest duties connected with
the sanctuary (see at Josh. ix. 27). — Ver. 10. Aaron and his sons
were to be appointed by Moses to take charge of the priesthood ; as
no stranger, no one who was not a son of Aaron, could approach
the sanctuary without being put to death (cf. chap. i. 53 and Lev.
xxii. 10).
Vers. 11-13. God appointed the Levites for this service, because
He had decided to adopt them as His own in the place of all the
first-born of Egypt. When He slew the first-born of Egypt, He
sanctified to Himself all the first-born of Israel, of man and beast,
for His own possession (see Ex. xiii. 1, 2). By virtue of this
sanctification, which was founded upon the adoption of the whole
nation as His first-born son (see vol. ii. p. 33), the nation was re-
quired to dedicate to Him its first-born sons for service at the sanc-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. III. U-26. . 21
tuary, and sacrifice all the first-born of its cattle to Him. But now
the Levites and their cattle were to be adopted in their place, and
the first-born sons of Israel to be released in return (vers. 40 sqq.).
By this arrangement, through which the care of the service at the
sanctuary was transferred to one tribe, which would and should
henceforth devote itself with undivided interest to this vocation, not
only was a more orderly performance of this service secured, than
could have been effected through the first-born of all the tribes ;
but so far as the whole nation was concerned, the fulfilment of its
obligations in relation to this service was undoubtedly facilitated.
Moreover, the Levites had proved themselves to be the most suit-
able of all the tribes for this post, through their firm and faithful
defence of the honour of the Lord at the worship of the golden
calf (Ex. xxxii. 26 sqq.). It is in this spirit, which distinguished
the tribe of Levi, that we may undoubtedly discover the reason
why they were chosen by God for the service of the sanctuary, and
not in the fact that Moses and Aaron belonged to the tribe, and
desired to form a hierarchical caste of the members of their own
tribe, such as was to be found among other nations : the magi,
for example, among the Medes, the Chaldeans among the Persians,
and the Brahmins among the Indians, rrtnj "OK v, " to Me, to Me,
Jehovah" (vers. 13, 41, and 45 ; cf. Ges. §121,3).
Vers. 14-20. The muster of the Levites included all the males
from a month old and upwards, because they were to be sanctified
to Jehovah in the place of the first-born ; and it was at the age of a
month that the latter were either to be given up or redeemed (comp.
vers. 40 and 43 with chap, xviii. 16). In vers. 17-20 the sons of
Levi and their sons are enumerated, who were the founders of the
mishpachoth among the Levites, as in Ex. vi. 16-19.
Vers. 21-26. The Gershonites were divided into two families,
containing 7500 males. They were to encamp under their chief
Eliasaph, behind the tabernacle, i.e. on the western side (vers. 23,
24), and were to take charge of the dwelling-place and the tent,
the covering, the curtain at the entrance, the hangings round the
court with the curtains at the door, and the cords of the tent, u in
relation to all the service thereof" (vers. 25 sqq.) ; that is to say,
according to the more precise injunctions in chap. iv. 25-27, they
were to carry the tapestry of the dwelling (the inner covering, Ex.
xxvi. 1 sqq.), and of the tent (i.e. the covering made of goats' hair,
Ex. xxvi. 7 sqq.), the covering thereof {i.e. the covering of rams'
skins dyed red, and the covering of sea-cow skin upon the top of
Digltizi
ed by Google
22 . THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
it, Ex. xxvii. 16), the hangings of the court and the curtain at the
entrance (Ex. xxvii. 9, 16), which surrounded the altar (of burnt-
offering) and the dwelling round about, and their cords, i.e. the
cords of the tapestry, coverings, and curtains (Ex. xxvii. 14), and
all the instruments of their service, i.e. the things used in connec-
tion with their service (Ex. xxvii. 19), and were to attend to every-
thing that had to be done to them ; in other words, to perform
whatever was usually done with those portions of the sanctuary that
are mentioned here, especially in setting up the tabernacle or taking
it down. The suffix in TOO (ver. 26) does not refer to the court
mentioned immediately before ; for, according to ver. 37, the Me-
rarites were to carry the cords of the hangings of the court, but to
the " dwelling and tent," which stand farther off. In the same way
the words, " for all tlie service thereof" refer to all those portions of
the sanctuary that are mentioned, and mean " everything that had
to be done or attended to in connection with these things."
Vers. 27-32. The Kohathites, who were divided into four fami-
lies, and numbered 8600, were to encamp on the south side of the
tabernacle, and more especially to keep the charge of the sanctuary
(ver. 28), viz. to take care of the ark of the covenant, the table
(of shew-bread), the candlestick, the altars (of incense and burnt-
offering), with the holy things required for the service performed
in connection therewith, and the curtain (the veil before the most
holy place), and to perform whatever had to be done (" all the
service thereof," see at ver. 26), i.e. to caiTy the said holy things
after they had been rolled up in covers by the priests (see chap. iv.
5 sqq.). — Ver. 32. As the priests also formed part of the Kohathites,
their chief is mentioned as well, viz. Eleazar the eldest son of Aaron
the high priest, who was placed over the chiefs of the three Levitical
families, and called rr: Ji?B, oversight of the keepers of the charge of the
sanctuary," i.e. authority, superior, of the servants of the sanctuary.
Vers. 33-37. The Aferarites, who formed ,two families, com-
prising, 6200 males, were to encamp on the north side of the taber-
nacle, under their prince Zuriel, and to observe the boards, bolts,
pillars, and sockets of the dwelling-place (Ex. xxvi. 15, 26, 32, 37),
together with all the vessels thereof (the plugs and tools), and all
that had to be done in connection therewith, also the pillars of the
court with their sockets, the plugs and the cords (Ex. xxvii. 10, 19,
xxxv. 18) ; that is to say, they were to take charge of these when
the tabernacle was taken down, to carry them on the march, and to
fix them when the tabernacle was set up again (chap. iv. 31, 32).
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. IIL 88-61. 23
Vers. 38, 39. Mbses and Aaron, with the sons of the latter
(the priests), were to encamp in front, before the tabernacle, viz.
on the eastern side, " as keepers of the charge of the sanctuary for
the charge of the children of Israel" i.e. to attend to everything that
was binding upon the children of Israel in relation to the care of
the sanctuary, as no stranger was allowed to approach it on pain
of death (see chap. i. 51). — Ver. 39. The number of the Levites
mustered, 22,000, does not agree with the numbers assigned to
the three families, as 7500 + 8600 + 6200 =■■ 22,300. But the total
is correct ; for, according to ver. 46, the number of the first-born,
22,273, exceeded the total number of the Levites by 273. The
attempt made by the Rabbins and others to reconcile the two, by
supposing the 300 Levites in excess to be themselves first-born, who
were omitted in the general muster, because they were not qualified
to represent the first-born of the other tribes, is evidently forced
and unsatisfactory. The whole account is so circumstantial, that
such a fact as this would never have been omitted. We must
rather assume that there is a copyist's error in the number of one of
the Levitical families ; possibly in ver. 28 we should read EW for
E'tf (8300 for 8600). The puncta extraordinaria above fin*) are
intended to indicate that this word is either suspicious or spurious
(see at Gen. xxxiii. 5) ; and it is actually omitted in Sam., Syr., and
12 MSS., but without sufficient reason : for although the divine
command to muster the Levites (vers. 5 and 14) was addressed to
Moses alone, yet if we compare chap. iv. 1, 34, 37, 41, 45, where
the Levites qualified for service are said to have been mustered by
Moses and Aaron, and still more chap. iv. 46, where the elders of
Israel are said to have taken part in the numbering of the Levites
as well as in that of the twelve tribes (chap. i. 3, 4), there can be no
reason to doubt that Aaron also took part in the mustering of the
whole of the Levites, for the purpose of adoption in the place of
the first-born of Israel ; and no suspicion attaches to this introduc-
tion of his name in ver. 39, although it is not mentioned in vers.
5, 11, 14, 40, and 44.
Vers. 40-51. After this, Moses numbered the first-born of the
children of Israel, to exchange them for the Levites according to
the command of God, which is repeated in vers. 41 and 44-45 from
vers. 11-13, and to adopt the latter in their stead for the service at
the sanctuary (on vers. 41 and 45, cf. vers. 11-13). The number
of the first-born of the twelve tribes amounted to 22,273 of a month
old and upwards (ver. 43). Of this number 22,000 were exchanged
Digitized by
Google
24 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
for the 22,000 Levites, and the cattle of the Levites were also set
against the first-born of the cattle of the tribes of Israel, though
without their being numbered and exchanged head for head. In
vers. 44 and 45 the command of God concerning the adoption of
the Levites is repeated, for the purpose of adding the further in-
structions with regard to the 273, the number by which the first-
born of the tribes exceeded those of the Levites. " And as for the
redemption of the 273 (lit. the 273 to be redeemed) of the first-born
of tlie children of Israel which are more ilian the Levites, thou shalt
take five shekels a head" etc. This was the general price established
by the law for the redemption of the first-born of men (see chap,
xviii. 16). On the sacred shekel, see at Ex. xxx. 13. The redemp-
tion money for 273 first-born, in all 1365 shekels, was to be paid to
Aaron and his sons as compensation for the persons who properly
belonged to Jehovah, and had been appointed as first-born for the
service of the priests. — Ver. 49. " The redeemed of the Levites " are
the 22,000 who were redeemed by means of the Levites. In ver.
50, the Chethibh D^BH is the correct reading, and the Keri 0?iBri an
unnecessary emendation. The number of the first-born and that
of the Levites has already been noticed at pp. 8, 9.
Chap. iv. Kules of Seevice, and numbeeing of the Levites
qualified foe Seevice. — After the adoption of the Levites for
service at the sanctuary, in the place of the first-born of Israel,
Moses and Aaron mustered the three families of the Levites by
the command of God for the service to be performed by those
who were between the ages of 30 and 50. The particulars of the
service are first of all described in detail (vers. 4-33); and then the
men in each family are taken, of the specified age for service (vers.
34-49). The three families are not arranged according to the
relative ages of their founders, but according to the importance
or sacredness of their service. The Kohathites take the lead, be- -
cause the holiest parts of the tabernacle were to be carried and kept
by this family, which included the priests, Aaron and his sons.
The service to be performed by each of the three Levitical families
is introduced in every case by a command from God to take the
sum of the men from 30 years old to 50 (see vers. 1-3, 21-23, 29
and 30).
Vers. 2-20. Service of the Kohathites, and the number qualified
for service. — Vers. 2, 3. " Take the sum of the sons of Kohath from
among the sons of Levi:" i.e. by raising them out of the sum total
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. IV. 2-20. 25
of the Levites, by numbering them first and specially, viz. the
men from 30 to 50 years of age, " every one who comes to the service"
i.e. who has to enter upon service u to do work at the tabernacle."
NJW (Angl. 'Jiost') signifies military service, and is used here with
special reference to the service of the Levites as the militia sacra of
Jehovah. — Ver. 4. The service of the Kohathites at the tabernacle
is (relates to) " the most holy " (see at Ex. xxx. 10). This term
includes, as is afterwards explained, the most holy things in the
tabernacle, viz. the ark of the covenant, the table of shew-bread,
the candlestick, the altar of incense and altar of burnt-offering,
together with all the other things belonging to these. When the
camp was broken up, the priests were to roll them up in wrappers,
and hand them over in this state to the Kohathites, for them to
carry (vers. 5-15). First of all (vers. 5, 6), Aaron and his sons
were to take down the curtain between the holy place and the most
holy (see Ex. xxvi. 31), and to cover the ark of testimony with it
(Ex* xxv. 10). Over this they were to place a wrapper of sea-cow
skin (tachash, see Ex. xxv. 5), and over this again another covering
of cloth made entirely of hyacinth-coloured purple (as in Ex. xxviii.
31). The sea-cow skin was to protect the inner curtain, which was
covered over the ark, from storm and rain ; the hyacinth purple, to
distinguish the ark of the covenant as the throne of the glory of
Jehovah. Lastly, they were to place the staves into the rings again,
that is to say, the bearing poles, which were always left in their
places on the ark (Ex. xxv. 15), but had necessarily to be taken
out while it was being covered and wrapped up. — Vers. 7, 8. Over
the table of shew-bread (Ex. xxv. 23) they were to spread a hyacinth
cloth, to place the plates, bowls, wine-pitchers, and drink-offering
bowls (Ex. xxv. 29) upon the top of this, and to lay shew-bread
thereon ; and then to spread a crimson cloth over these vessels and
the shew-bread, and cover this with a sea-cow skin, and lastly to put
the bearing poles in their places. — Vers. 9, 10. The candlestick,
with its lamps, snuffers, extinguishers (Ex. xxv. 31-37), and all its
oil-vessels (oil-cans), u wherewith they serve it" i.e. prepare it for the
holy service, were to be covered with a hyacinth cloth, and then with
a wrapper of sea-cow skin, and laid upon the carriage. Bio (vers.
10 and 12), bearing frame, in chap. xiii. 23 bearing poles. — Vers.
11, 12. So again they Were to wrap up the altar of incense (Ex.
xxx. 1), to adjust its bearing poles ; and having wrapped it up in
such coverings, along with the vessels belonging to it, to lay it upon
the frame. — Vers. 13, 14. The altar of burnt-offering was first of
Digitized by
Google
26 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
alj to be cleansed from the ashes ; a crimson cloth was then to be
covered over it, and the whole of the furniture belonging to it to be
placed upon the top ; and lastly, the whole was to be covered with a
sea-cow skin. The only thing not mentioned is the copper laver
(Ex. xxx. 18), probably because it was carried without any cover
at all. The statement in the Septuagint and the Samaritan text,
which follows ver. 14, respecting its covering and conveyance upon
a frame, is no doubt a spurious interpolation. — Ver. 15. After the
priests had completed the wrapping up of all these things, the
Kohathites were to come up to carry them ; but they were not to
touch " the holy " (the holy things), lest they should die (see chap. i.
53, xviii. 3, and comp. 2 Sam. vi. 6, 7). — Ver. 16. The oversight
of the oil for the candlestick (Ex. xxvii. 20), the incense (Ex.
xxx. 34), the continual meat-offering (Ex. xxix. 40), and the anoint-
ing oil (Ex. xxx. 23), belonged to Eleazar as the head of all the
Levites (chap. iii. 32). He had also the oversight of the dwelling'
and all the holy things and furniture belonging to it ; and, as a
comparison of vers. 28 and 33 clearly shows, of the services of the
Kohathites also. — Vers. 17- 20. In order to prevent as far as possible
any calamity from befalling the Levites while carrying the most
holy things, the priests are again urged by the command of God to
do what has already been described in detail in vers. 5-15, lest through
any carelessness on their part they should cut off the tribe of the
families of the Kohathites, i.e. should cause their destruction ; viz. if
they should approach the holy things before they had been wrapped
up by Aaron and his sons in the manner prescribed and handed
over to them to carry. If the Kohathites should come for only a
single moment to look at the holy things, they would die. wprrPK,
" cut ye not off" i.e. " take care that the Kohathites are not cut off
through your mistake and negligence " (Ros.). u TJie tribe of the
families of the Kohathites : " shebet, the tribe, is not used here, as it
frequently is, in its derivative sense of tribe (tribus), but in the ori-
ginal literal sense of stirps. — Ver. 19. u Tliis do to them : " sc. what
is prescribed in vers. 5-15 with reference to their service. — Ver. 20.
JJ933, " like a swallow, a gulp," is probably a proverbial expression,
according to the analogy of Job vii. 19, for " a single instant," of
which the Arabic also furnishes examples (see A. Schultens on Job
vii. 19). The Sept. rendering, i^diriva, conveys the actual sense.
A historical illustration of ver. 20 is furnished by 1 Sam. vi. 19. 1
1 According to Knobel, vers. 17-20 have been interpolated by the Jehovist
into the Elohistic text. But the reasons for this assumption are weak through-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. IV. 21-49. 27
Vers. 21-28. The service of the Gershonites is introduced in vers.
21-23 in the same manner as that of the Kohathites in vers. 1-3 ;
and in vers. 24-26 it is described in accordance with the brief
notice and explanation already given in chap. iii. 24-26.— Ver. '27.
Their service was to be performed "according to the mouth (i.e.
according to the appointment) of Aaron and his sons, with regard
to all their carrying (all that they were to carry), and all their
doing." — "And ye (the priests) shall appoint to them for attendance
(in charge) all their carrying," i.e. all the things they were to
carry. rnDBtoa "IpS, to give into keeping. The combination of
"ipS with 3 and the accusative of the object is analogous to 3 jn^ to
give into a person's hand, in Gen. xxvii. 17; and there is no satisfac-
tory reason for any such emendations of the text as Knobel proposes.
— Ver. 28. " Their charge (mishmereth) is in the hand of Ithamar,"
i.e. is to be carried out under his superintendence (cf. Ex. xxxviii.
21).
Vers. 29-33. Service of the Merarites. — Vers. 29 and 30, like
vers. 22 and 23. Ipf, to muster, i.e. to number, equivalent to
vth keo, to take the number.— Vers. 31 and 32, like chap. iii. 36
and 37. " The charge of their burden" (their carrying), i.e. the
things which it was their duty to carry. — Ver. 32. DiTCnw : with
regard to all their instruments, i.e.., all the things used for setting
up, fastening, or undoing the beams, bolts, etc. ; see chap. iii. 36,
and Ex. xxvii. 19.
Vers. 34-49. Completion of the prescribed mustering, and
statement of the number of men qualified for service in the three
Levitical families : viz. 2750 Kohathites, 2630 Gershonites, and
3200 Merarites — in all, 8580 Levites fit for service : a number
which bears a just proportion to the total number of male Levites
of a month old and upwards, viz. 22,000 (see above, p. 9). — Ver.
49. "According to the commandment of Jehovah, they appointed
them through the hand of Moses (i.e. under his direction), each one
out. Neither the peculiar use of the word shebet, to which there is no corre-
sponding parallel in the whole of the Old Testament, nor the construction of e>jj .
with riN, which is only met with in 1 Sam. ix. 18 and xxx. 21, nor the Hiphil
IVOn, can be regarded as criteria of a- Jehovistic usage. And the assertion,'
that the Elohist lays the emphasis upon approaching and touching the holy
things (ver. 15, chap. viii. 19, xviii. 8, 22), and not upon seeing or looking at
them, rests upon an antithesis which is arbitrarily forced upon the text, since
not only seeing (ver. 20), but touching also (ver. 19), is described as causing
death; so that seeing and touching form no antithesis at all.
Digitizi
ed by Google
28 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
to his service, and his burden, arid his mustered things (l v li?S), i.e. the
things assigned to him at the time of the mustering as his special
charge (see Ex. xxxviii. 21).
SPIRITUAL ORGANIZATION OP THE CONGREGATION OP ISRAEL.—
CHAP. V. AND VI.
From the outward organization of the tribes of Israel as the
army of Jehovah, the law proceeds to their internal moral and spi-
ritual order, for the purpose of giving an inward support, both
moral and religious, to their outward or social and political unity.
This is the object of the directions concerning the removal of
unclean persons from the camp (chap. v. 1-4), "the restitution
of anything unjustly appropriated (vers. 5-10), the course to be
pursued with a wife suspected of adultery (vers. 11-31), and also
of the laws relating to the Nazarite (chap. vi. 1-21), and to the
priestly blessing (vers. 22-27).
Chap. v. 1-4. Eemoval op Unclean Persons out op the
Camp. — As Jehovah, the Holy One, dwelt in the midst of the
camp of His people, those who were affected with the uncleanness
of leprosy (Lev. xiii.), of a diseased flux, or of menstruation (Lev.
xv. 2 sqq., 19 sqq.), and those who had become unclean through
touching a corpse (chap. xix. 11 sqq., cf. Lev. xxi. 1, xxii. 4),
whether male or female, were to be removed out of the camp, that
they might not defile it by their uncleanness. The command of
God, to remove these persons out of the camp, was carried out at
once by the nation ; and even in Canaan it was so far observed,
that lepers at any rate were placed in special pest-houses outside
the cities (see at Lev. xiii. 45, 46).
Vers. 5-10. Eestitution in case op a Trespass. — No crime
against the property of a neighbour was to remain without expia-
tion in the congregation of Israel, which was encamped or dwelt
around the sanctuary of Jehovah ; and the wrong committed was
not to remain without restitution, because such crimes involved
unfaithfulness (?Jf?, see Lev. v. 15) towards Jehovah. "If a man
or a woman do one of the sins of men, to commit unfaithfulness
against Jehovah, and the same soul lias incurred guilt, they shall
confess their sin which they have done, and (the doer) shall recom-
Digitizi
ed by Google
CHAP. V. 11-31. 29
pense his debt according to its sum" (iB>N"i3, as in Lev. v. 24), etc.
tHKii D^BrrpSDj one of the sins occurring among men, not u a sin
against a man" (Luther, Ros., etc). The meaning is a sin, with which
a ?y» was committed against Jehovah, i.e. one of the acts described
in Lev. v. 21, 22, by which injury was done to the property of
a neighbour, whereby a man brought, a debt upon himself, for the
wiping out of which a material restitution of the other's property
was prescribed, together with the addition of a fifth of its value,
and also the presentation of a sin-offering (Lev. v. 23—26). To
guard against that disturbance of fellowship and peace in the con-
gregation, which would arise from such trespasses as these, the law
already given in Lev. v. 20 is here renewed and supplemented by
the additional stipulation, that if the man who had been unjustly
deprived of some of his property had- no Goel, to whom restitution
could be made for the debt, the compensation should be paid to
Jehovah for the priests. The Goel was the nearest relative, upon
whom the obligation rested to redeem a person who had fallen into
slavery through poverty (Lev. xxv. 25). The allusion to the GoSl
in this connection presupposes that the injured person was no
longer alive. To this there are appended, in vers. 9 and 10, the
directions which are substantially connected with this, viz. that
every heave-offering (terumah, see at Lev. ii. 9) in the holy gifts of
the children of Israel, which they presented to the priest, was to
belong to him (the priest), and also all the holy gifts which were
brought by different individuals. The reference is not to literal
sacrifices, i.e. gifts intended for the altar, but to dedicatory offer-
ings, first-fruits, and such like. VBhjrnK t^K, « w ith regard to every
man's, his holy gifts . . . to him (the priest) shall they be ; what
any man gives to the priest shall belong to him." The second clause
serves to explain and confirm the first. n« : as far, with regard to,
quoad (see JCwald, § 277, d; Ges. § 117, 2, note).
Vers. 11-31. Sentence op God upon Wives suspected
of Adultery. — As any suspicion cherished by a man against his
wife, that she either is or has been guilty of adultery, whether well-
founded or not, is sufficient to shake the marriage connection to its
very roots, and to undermine, along with marriage, the foundation
of the civil commonwealth, it was of the greatest importance to
guard against this moral evil, which was so utterly irreconcilable
with the holiness of the people of God, by appointing a process
in harmony with the spirit of the theocratical law, and adapted
Digitizi
ed by Google
30 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.'
to bring to light the guilt or innocence of any wife who had fallen
into such suspicion, and at the same time to warn fickle wives
against unfaithfulness. This serves to explain not only the intro-
duction of the law respecting the jealousy-offering in this place,
but also the general importance of the subject, and the reason for
its being so elaborately described.
Vers. 12-15. If a man's wife went aside, and was guilty of
unfaithfulness towards him (ver. 13 is an explanatory clause),
through a (another) man having lain with her with emissio seminis,
and it was hidden from the eyes of her husband, on account of her
having defiled herself secretly, and there being no witness against
her, and her not having been taken (in the act) ; but if, for all that,
a spirit of jealousy came upon him, and he was jealous of his wife,
and she was defiled, ... or she was not defiled : the man was to
take his wife to the priest, and bring as her sacrificial gift, on her
account, the tenth of an ephah of barley meal, without putting oil
or incense, " for it is a meat-offering of jealousy, a meat-offering of
memory, to bring iniquity to remembrance." As the woman's crime,
of which her husband accused her, was naturally denied by herself,
and was neither to be supported by witnesses nor proved by her
being taken in the very act, the only way left to determine whether
there was any foundation or not for the spirit of jealousy excited in
her husband, and to prevent an unrighteous severance of the divinely
appointed marriage, was to let the thing be decided" by the verdict
of God Himself. To this end the man was to bring his wife to the
priest with a sacrificial gift, which is expressly called Pi33~il?, her
offering, brought ilvff " on her account," that is to say, with a meat-
offering, the symbol of the fruit of her walk and conduct before
God. Being the sacrificial gift of a wife who had gone aside and
was suspected of adultery, this meat-offering could not possess the
character of the ordinary meat-offerings, which shadowed forth the
fruit of the sanctification of life in good works (vol. ii. p. 207); could
not consist, that is to say, of fine wheaten flour, but only of barley
meal. Barley was worth only half as much as wheat (2 Kings vii.
1, 16, 18), so that only the poorer classes, or the people generally in
times of great distress, used barley meal as their daily food (Judg.
vii. 13 ; 2 Kings iv. 42 ; Ezek. iv. 12 ; John vi. 9, 13), whilst those
who were better off used it for fodder (1 Kings v. 8). Barley meal
was prescribed for this sacrifice, neither as a sign that the adulteress
had conducted herself like an irrational animal (JPhih, Jonathan,
Talm., the Rabb., etc.), nor " because the persons presenting the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. V. 16-22. 31
offering were invoking the punishment of a crime, and not the
favour of God" (Cler., Ros.) : for the guilt of the woman was not
yet established ; nor even, taking a milder view of the matter, to
indicate that the offerer might be innocent, and in that case no
offering at all was required (Knobel), but to represent the question-
able repute in which the woman stood, or the ambiguous, suspicious
character of her conduct. Because such conduct as hers did not
proceed from the Spirit of God, and "was not carried out in prayer i
oil and incense, the symbols of the Spirit of God and prayer (see
vol. ii. pp. 174 and 209), were not to be added to her offering. It
was an offering of jealousy (ntop, an intensive plural), and the
object was to bring the ground of that jealousy to light ; and in this
respect it is called the " meat-offering of remembrance" sc. of the
woman, before Jehovah (cf . chap. x. 10, xxxi. 54 ; Ex. xxviii. 12,
29, xxx. 16 ; Lev. xxiii. 24), namely, " the remembrance of iniquity,"
bringing her crime to remembrance before the Lord, that it might
be judged by Him.
Vers. 16-22. The priest was to bring her near to the altar at
which he stood, and place her before Jehovah, who had declared
Himself to be present at the altar, and then to take holy water,
probably water out of the basin before the sanctuary, which served
for holy purposes (Ex. xxx. 18), in an earthen vessel, and put dust
in it from the floor of the dwelling. He was then to loosen the
hair of the woman who was standing before Jehovah, and place
the jealousy-offering in her hands, and holding the water in his own
hand, to pronounce a solemn oath of purification before her, which
she had to appropriate to herself by a confirmatory Amen, Amen.
The water, which the priest had prepared for the woman to drink,
was taken from the sanctuary, and the dust to be put into it from
the floor of the dwelling, to impregnate this drink with the power of
the Holy Spirit that dwelt in the sanctuary. The dust was strewed
upon the water, not to indicate that man was formed from dust
and must return to dust again, but as an allusion to the fact, that
dust was eaten by the serpent (Gen. iii. 14) as the curse of sin,
and therefore as the symbol of a state deserving a curse, a state of
the deepest humiliation and disgrace (Micah vii. 17 ; Isa. xlix. 23 ;
Ps. lxxii. 9). On the veiy same ground, an earthen vessel was
chosen ; that is to say, one quite worthless in comparison with the
copper one. The loosening of the hair of the head (see Lev. xiii.
45), in other cases a sign of mourning, is, to be regarded here as a
removal or loosening of the female head-dress, and a symbol of the
Digitized by
Google
32 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES. '
loss of the proper ornament of female morality and conjugal
fidelity. During the administration of the oath, the offering was
placed in her hands, that she might bring the fruit of her own
conduct before God, and give it up to His holy judgment. The
priest, as the representative of God, held the vessel in his hand,
with the water in it, which was called the " water of bitterness, the
curse-bringing," inasmuch as, if the crime imputed to her was well-
founded, it would bring upon the woman bitter suffering as the
curse of God. — Ver. 19. The oath which the priest required her to
take is called, in ver. 21, fwn njOB>, " oath of cursing" (see Gen.
xxvi. 28) ; but it first of all presupposes the possibility of the woman
being innocent, and contains the assurance, that in that case the
curse-water would do her no harm. " If no (other) man has lain
with thee, and thou hast not gone aside to union (^NOD, accus. of more
precise definition, as in Lev. xv. 2, 18), under thy husband," i.e. as
a wife subject to thy husband (Ezek. xxiii. 5 ; Hos. iv. 12), " then
remain free from the water of bitterness, this curse-bringing," i.e. from
the effects of this curse-water. The imperative is a sign of certain
assurance (see Gen. xii. 2, xx. 7 ; cf. Ges. § 130, 1). " But if
thou hast gone aside under thy husband, if thou Itast defiled thyself,
and a man has given thee his seed beside thy husband," . . . (the
priest shall proceed to say ; this is the meaning of the repetition of
new . . . J?3B'rn, ver. 21), " Jehovah shall make thee a curse and an
oath among thy people, by making thy hip to- fall and thy belly to swell;
and this, curse-bringing water shall come into thy bowels, to make the
belly to vanish and the hip to fall." To this oath that was spoken
before her the woman was to reply, " true, true," or " truly, truly,"
and thus confirm it as taken by herself (cf. Dent, xxvii. 15 sqq. ;
Neh. v. 13). It cannot be determined with any certainty what
was the nature of the disease threatened in this curse. Michaelis
supposes it to be dropsy of the ovary (hydrops ovarii), in which a
tumour is formed in the place of the ovarium, which may even
swell so as to contain 100 lbs. of fluid, and with which the patient
becomes dreadfully emaciated. Josephus says it is ordinary dropsy
(hydrops ascites : Ant. iii. 11, 6). At any rate, the idea of the
curse is this : AC &v yap fj aftapria, Sea tovtcov 17 ri/xcopla (" the
punishment shall come from the same source as the sin," Theodoret).
The punishment was to answer exactly to the crime, and to fall
upon those bodily organs which had been the instruments of the
woman's sin, viz. the organs of child-bearing.
Vers. 23-28. After the woman's Amen, the priest was to write
Digitized by
Google
CHAT. V. 29-31. 33
" these curses" those contained in the oath, in a book-roll, and wash
them in the hitter water, i.e. wash the writing in the vessel with
water, so that the words of the curse should pass into the water,
and be imparted to it; a symbolical act, to set forth the truth,
that God imparted to the water the power to act injuriously upon
a guilty body, though it would do no harm to an innocent one.
The remark in ver. 24, that the priest was to give her this water to
drink, is anticipatory ; for according to ver. 26 this did not take
place till after the presentation of the sacrifice and the burning of
the memorial of it upon the altar. The woman's offering, however,
was not presented to God till after the oath of purification, because
it was by the oath that she first of all purified herself from the sus-
picion of adultery, so that the fruit of her conduct could be given
up to the fire of the holiness of God. As a known adulteress, she
could not have offered a meat-offering at all. But as the suspicion
which rested upon her was not entirely removed by her oath, since
she might have taken a false oath, the priest was to give her the
curse-water to drink after the offering, that her guilt or innocence
might be brought to light in the effects produced by the drink.
This is given in ver. 27 as the design of the course prescribed :
" When he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to
pass, that if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband,
the water that causeth the curse shall come (enter) into her as bitter-
ness (i.e. producing bitter sufferings), namely, her belly shall swell
and her hip vanish : and so the woman shall become a curse in the midst
of her people." — Ver. 28. "But if she have not defiled herself, and
is clean (from the crime of which she was suspected), she will remain
free (from the threatened punishment of God), and will conceive
seed," i.e. be blessed with the capacity and power to conceive and
bring forth children.
Vers. 29-31 bring the law of jealousy to a formal close, with the
additional remark, that the man who adopted this course with a wife
suspected of adultery was free from sin, but the woman would bear
her guilt (see Lev. v. 1), i.e. in case she were guilty, would bear the
punishment threatened by God. Nothing is said about what was
to be done in case the woman refused to take the oath prescribed,
because that would amount to a confession of her guilt, when she
would have to be put to death as an adulteress, according to the
law in Lev. xx. 10 ; and not she alone, but the adulterer also. In
the law just mentioned the man is placed on an equality with the
woman with reference to the sin of adultery ; and thus the apparent
PENT. — VOL. III.
Digitized by
Google
34 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
partiality, that a man could sue his wife for adultery, bat not the
wife her husband, is removed. But the law before us applied to the
woman only, because the man was at liberty to marry more than
one wife, or to take concubines to his own wife ; so that he only
violated the marriage tie, and was guilty of adultery, when he
formed an illicit connection with another man's wife. In that case,
the man whose marriage had been violated could proceed against
his adulterous wife, and in most instances convict the adulterer also,
in order that he might receive his punishment too. For a really
guilty wife would not have made up her mind so easily to take the
required oath of purification, as the curse of God under which she
came was no easier to bear than the punishment of death; For this
law prescribed no ordeal whose effects were uncertain, like the
ordeals of other nations, but a judgment of God, from which the
guilty could not escape, because it had been appointed by the
living God.
Chap. vi. 1-21. The Nazabite. — The legal regulations con-
cerning the vow of the Nazarite are appended quite appropriately
to the laws intended to promote the spiritual order of the congre-
gation of Israel. For the Nazarite brought to light the priestly
character of the covenant nation in a peculiar form, which had
necessarily to ba incorporated into the spiritual organization of the
community, so that it might become a means of furthering the
sanctification of the people in covenant with the Lord. 1
Vers. 1 and 2. The words, " if a man or woman make a separate
vow, a Nazarite vow, to live consecrated to the Lord" with which the
law is introduced, show not only that the vow of the Nazarite was
a matter of free choice, but that it was a mode of practising godli-
ness and piety already customary among the people. Nazir, from
1M to separate, lit. the separated, is applied to the man who vowed
that he would make a separation to (for) Jehovah, i.e. lead a sepa-
rate life for the Lord and His service. The origin of this custom
is involved in obscurity. There is no certain clue to indicate that
it was derived from Egypt, for the so-called hair-offering vows are
met with among several ancient tribes (see the proofs in Spencer, de
legg. Hebr, Ht. iv. 16, and Knobel in loc), and have no special rela-
1 The rules of the Talmud are found in the tract. Nasir in the Mishnah.
See also Lundius,jild. Heiligthiimer, B. iii. p. 53. Eahr, Symbolik, ii. pp.430sqq.;
Hengstetiberg, Egypt and the Books of Moses, pp. 190 sqq. My Archseologie, i. §
67 ; and Herzog's Cyclopsedia.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VI. 3-8. .„ 35
tionship to the Nazarite, whilst vows of abstinence were common to
all the religions of antiquity. The Nazarite vow was taken at first
for a particular time, at the close of which the separation terminated
with release from the vow. This is the only form in which it is
taken into consideration, or rules are laid down for it in the law
before us. In after times, however, we find life-long Nazarites
among the Israelites, e.g. Samson, Samuel, and John the Baptist,
who were vowed or dedicated to the Lord by their parents even
before they were born (Judg. xiii. 5, 14 ; 1 Sam. i. 11 ; Luke i. 15). 1
Vers. 3-8. The vow consisted of the three following points,
vers. 1—4 : In the first place, he was to abstain from wine and
intoxicating drink (shecar, see Lev. x. 9) ; . and neither to drink
vinegar of wine, strong drink, nor any juice of the grape (lit. dis-
solving of grapes, i.e. fresh must pressed out), nor to eat fresh
grapes, or dried (raisins). In fact, during the whole period of his
vow, he was not to eat of anything prepared from the vine, " from
the kernels even to the husk," i.e. not the smallest quantity of the
fruit of the vine. The design of this prohibition can hardly have
been, merely that, by abstaining from intoxicating drink, the Naza-
rite might preserve perfect clearness and temperance of mind, like
the priests when engaged in their duties, and so conduct himself as
one sanctified to the Lord (Bohr) ; but it goes much further, and
embraces entire abstinence from all the delicia carnis by which
holiness could be impaired. Vinegar, fresh and dried grapes, and
food prepared from grapes and raisins, e.g. raisin-cakes, are not
intoxicating ; but grape-cakes, as being the dainties sought after by
epicures and debauchees, are cited in Hos. iii. 1 as a symbol of the
sensual attractions of idolatry, a luxurious kind of food, that was
not in harmony with the solemnity of the worship of Jehovah. The
Nazarite was to avoid everything that proceeded from the vine,
because its fruit was regarded as the sum and substance of all
sensual enjoyments. — Ver. 5. Secondly, during the whole term of
his vow of consecration, no razor was to come upon his head. Till
the days were fulfilled which he had consecrated to the Lord, he
was to be holy, " to make great the free growth (see Lev. x. 6) of
the hair of his head." The free growth of the hair is called, in
1 This ia also related by Hegesippus (in Euseb. hist. eccl. ii. 23) of James the
Just, the first bishop of Jerusalem. On other cases of this kind in the Talmud,
and particularly on the later form of the Nazarite vow, — for example, that of the
Apostle Paul (Acts xviii. 18),— see Winer, Ubl. R. W. ii. pp. 138-9, and Oehler
in Herzog's Cycl.
Digitized by
Google
36 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
ver. 7, " tJie diadem of his God upon his head," like the golden
diadem upon the turban of the high priest (Ex. xxix. 6), and the
anointing oil upon the high priest's head (Lev. xxi. 12). By this
he sanctified his head (ver. 11) to the Lord, so that the consecration
of the Nazarite' culminated in his uncut hair, and expressed in the
most perfect way the meaning of his vow (Oehler). Letting the
hair grow, therefore, was not a sign of separation, because it was
the Israelitish custom to go about with the hair cut ; nor a practical
profession of a renunciation of the world, and separation from
human society (Hengstenberg, pp. 190-1) ; nor a sign of abstinence
from every appearance of self-gratification (Baur on Amos ii. 11) ;
nor even a kind of humiliation and self-denial (Lightfoot, Carpzov.
appar. p. 154) ; still less a " sign of dependence upon some other
present power" (M. Baumgarten), or " the symbol of a state of
perfect liberty" (Vitringa, obss. ss. 1, c. 6, § 9; cf. vi. 22, 8). The
free growth of the hair, unhindered by the hand of man, was rather
" the symbol of strength and abundant vitality" (cf. 2 Sam. xiv.
25, 26). It was not regarded by the Hebrews as a sign of sanctity,
as Bahr supposes, but simply as an ornament, in which the whole
strength and fulness of vitality were exhibited, and which the
Nazarite wore in honour of the Lord, as a sign that he " belonged
to the Lord, and dedicated himself to His service," with all his
vital powers. 1 — Vers. 6-8. Because the Nazarite wore the diadem
of his God upon his head in the growth of his hair, and was holy
to the Lord during the whole period of his consecration, he was to
approach no dead person during that time, not even to defile him-
self for his parents, or his brothers and sisters, when they died,
according to the law laid down for the high priest in Lev. xxi. 11.
Consequently, as a matter of course, he was to guard most scrupu-
lously against other defilements, not only like ordinary Israelites,
but also like the priests. Samson's mother, too, was not allowed to
eat anything unclean during the period of her pregnancy (Judg.
xiii. 4, 7, 14).
Vers. 9-12. But if any one died suddenly in a moment " by
him" (V?y, in his neighbourhood), and he therefore involuntarily
1 In support of this explanation, Oehler calls to mind those heathen hair-
offerings of the Athenian youths, for example (Plut. Thes. c. 5), which were
founded upon the idea, that the hair in general was a symbol of vital power,
and the hair of the beard a sign of virility; and also more especially the
example of Samson, whose hair was not only the symbol, but the vehicle, of the
power which fitted him to be the deliverer of his people
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VI. 9-12. 37
defiled his consecrated head, he was to shave his head on the day of
his purification, i.e. on the. seventh day (see chap. six. 11, 14, 16,
and 19), not " because such uncleanness was more especially caught
and retained by the hair," as Knobel fancies, but because it was the
diadem of his God (ver. 7), the ornament of his condition, which
was sanctified to God. On the eighth day, that is to say, on the
day after the legal purification, he was to bring to the priest at the
tabernacle two turtle-doves or young pigeons, that he might make
atonement for him (see at Lev. xv. 14, 15, 29 sqq., xiv. 30, 31, and
xii. 8), on account of his having been defiled by a corpse, by pre-
paring the one as a sin-offering, and the other as a burnt-offering ;
he was also " to sanctify his head that same day" i.e. to consecrate
it to God afresh, by the unimpeded growth of his hair. — Ver. 12.
He was then " to consecrate to Jehovah the days of his consecration,"
i.e. to commence afresh the time of dedication that he had vowed,
and " to bring a yearling sheep as a trespass-offering ;" and the days
that were before were " to fall" i.e. the days of consecration that
had already elapsed were not to be reckoned on account of their
having fallen, " because his consecration had become unclean." He
was therefore to commence the whole time of his consecration
entirely afresh, and to observe it as required by the vow. To this
end he was to bring a trespass-offering, as a payment or recompense
for being reinstated in the former state of consecration, from which
he had fallen through his defilement, but not as compensation " for
having prolonged the days of separation through his carelessness
with regard to the defilement ; that is to say, for having extended
the time during which he led a separate, retired, and inactive life,
and suspended his duties to his own family and the congregation,
thus doing an injury to them, and incurring a debt in relation to
them through his neglect" (Knobel). For the time that the Naza-
rite yow lasted was not a lazy life, involving a withdrawal from
the duties of citizenship, by which the congregation might be in-
jured, but was perfectly reconcilable with the performance of all
domestic and social duties, the burial of the dead alone excepted ;
and no harm could result from this, either to his own relations or
the community generally, of sufficient importance to require that
the omission should be repaired by a trespass-offering, from which
neither his relatives nor the congregation derived any actual advan-
tage. Nor was it a species of fine, for having deprived Jehovah of
the time dedicated to Him through the breach of the vow, or for
withholding the payment of his vow for so much longer a time
Digitized by
Google
38 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
(Oehler in Herzog). For the position of a Nazarite was only
assumed for a definite period, according to the. vow ; and after this
had been interrupted, it had to be commenced again from the very
beginning : so that the time dedicated to God was not shortened
in any way by the interruption of the period of dedication, and
nothing whatever was withheld from God of what had been vowed
to Him, so as to need the presentation of a trespass-offering as a
compensation or fine. And there is no more reason for saying that
the payment of the vow was withheld, inasmuch as the vow was
fulfilled or paid by the punctual observance of the three things of
which it was composed ; and the sacrifices to be presented after the
time of consecration was over, had not in the least the character of
a payment, but simply constituted a solemn conclusion, correspond-
ing to the idea of the consecration itself, and were the means by
which the Nazarite came out of his state of consecration, without
involving the least allusion to satisfaction, or reparation for any
wrong that had been done.
The position of the Nazarite, therefore, as Philo, Maimonides,
and others clearly saw, was a condition of life consecrated to the
Lord, resembling the sanctified relation in which the priests stood
to Jehovah, and differing from the priesthood solely in the fact that
it involved no official service at the sanctuary, and was not based
upon a divine calling and institution, but was undertaken sponta-
neously for a certain time and through a special vow. The object
was simply the realization of the idea of a priestly life, with its
purity and freedom from all contamination from everything con-
nected with death and corruption, a self-surrender to God stretching
beyond the deepest earthly ties, "a spontaneous appropriation of
what was imposed upon the priest by virtue of the calling connected
with his descent, namely, the obligation to conduct himself as a
person betrothed to God, and therefore to avoid everything that
would be opposed to such surrender" {Oehler). In this respect the
Nazarite' s sanctification of life was a step towards the realization of
the priestly character, which had been set before the whole nation
as its goal at the time of its first calling (Ex. xix. 5) ; and although
it was simply the performance of a vow, and therefore a work of
perfect spontaneity, it was also a work of the Spirit of God which
dwelt in the congregation of Israel, so that Amos could describe the
raising up of Nazarites along with prophets as a special manifesta-
tion of divine grace. The offerings, with which the vow was brought
to a close after the time of consecration had expired, and the Nazarite
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VI. 18-21. 89
was released from his consecration, also corresponded to the character
we have described.
Vers. 13-21. The directions as to the release from consecration
are called u the law of the Nazarite " (ver. 13), because the idea
of the Nazarite's vows culminated in the sacrificial festival which
terminated the consecration, and it was in this that it attained to
its fullest manifestation. " On the day of the completion of the days
of his consecration" i.e. on the day when the time of consecration
expired, the Nazarite was to bring to the tabernacle, or offer as his
gifts to the Lord, a sheep of a year old as a burnt-offering, and an
ewe of a year old as a sin-offering ; the latter as an expiation for
the sins committed involuntarily during the period of consecration,
the former as an embodiment of that surrender of himself, body
and soul, to the Lord, upon which every act of worship should rest.
In addition to this he was to bring a ram without blemish as a
peace-offering, together with a basket of unleavened cakes and
wafers baked, which were required, according to Lev. vii. 12, for
every praise-offering, " and their meat and drinh-offerings" i.e. the
gifts of meal, oil, and wine, which belonged, according to chap. xv. 3
sqq., to the burnt-offerings and peace-offerings. — Ver. 16. The sin-
offering and burnt-offering were carried out according to the general
instructions. — Ver. 17. The completion of the consecration vow was
concentrated in the preparation of the ram and the basket of un-
leavened bread for the peace-offering, along with the appropriate
meat-offering and drink-offering. — Ver. 18. The Nazarite had also
to shave his consecrated head, and put the hair into the altar-fire
under the peace-offering that was burning, and thus hand over and
sacrifice to the Lord the hair of his head which had been worn in
honour of Him. — Vers. 19, 20. When this had been done, the priest
took the boiled shoulder of the ram, with an unleavened cake and wafer
out of the basket, and placed these pieces in the hands of the Nazarite,
and waved them before Jehovah. They then became the portion of
the priest, in addition to the wave-breast and heave-leg which fell to
the priest in the case of every peace-offering (Lev. vii. 32-34), to set
forth the participation of the Lord in the sacrificial meal (see vol.
ii. pp. 329, 330). But the fact that, in addition to these, the boiled
shoulder was given up symbolically to the Lord through the process
of waving, together with a cake and wafer, was intended to indicate
that the table-fellowship with the Lord, shadowed forth in the sacri-
ficial meal of the peace-offering, took place here in a higher degree;
inasmuch as the Lord directed a portion of the Nazarite's meal to
Digitized by
Google
40 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
be handed over to His representatives and servants for them to eat,
that he might thus enjoy the blessedness of having fellowship with
his God, in accordance with that condition of priestly sanctity into
which the Nazarite had entered through the vow that he had made.
— Ver. 20. " After that the Nazarite may drink wine " (again), pro-
bably at the sacrificial meal, after the Lord had received His share
of the sacrifice, and his release from consecration had thus been
completed. — Ver. 21. " This is the law of the Nazarite, who vowed
his sacrificial gifts to the Lord on the ground of his consecration" i.e.
who offered his sacrifice in accordance with the state of a Nazarite
into which he had entered. For the sacrifices mentioned in vers.
14 sqq. were not the object of a special vow, but contained in the
vow of the Nazarite, and therefore already vowed (Knobel). " Be-
side what his hand grasps," i.e. what he is otherwise able to perform
(Lev. v. 11), " according to the measure of his vow, which he vowed,
so must he do according to the law of his consecration" i.e. he had to
offer the sacrifices previously mentioned on the ground of his conse-
cration vow. Beyond that he was free to vow anything else accord-
ing to his ability, to present other sacrificial gifts to the Lord for
His sanctuary and His servants, which did not necessarily belong
to the vow of the Nazarite, but were frequently added. From this
the custom afterwards grew up, that when poor persons took the
Nazarite's vow upon them, those who were better off defrayed the
expenses of the sacrifices (Acts xxi. 24 ; Josephus, Ant. xix. 6, 1 ;
Mishnah Nasir, ii. 5 sqq.).
"Vers. 22-27. The Priestly or Aaronic Blessing. — The
spiritual character of the congregation of Israel culminated in the
blessing with which the priests were to bless the people. The
directions as to this blessing, therefore, impressed the seal of per-
fection upon the whole order and organization of the people of
God, inasmuch as Israel was first truly formed into a congregation
of Jehovah by the fact that God not only bestowed His blessing
upon it, but placed the communication of this blessing in the hands
of the priests, the chosen and constant mediators of the blessings of
His grace, and imposed it upon them as one portion of their official
duty. The blessing which the priests were to impart to the people,
consisted of a triple blessing of two members each, which stood
related to each other thus: The second in each case contained a
special application of the first to the people, and the three grada-
tions unfolded the substance of the blessing step by step with ever
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VI. 22-27. 41
increasing emphasis. — The first (ver. 24), "Jehovah bless thee and
keep thee" conveyed the blessing in the most general form, merely
describing it as coming from Jehovah, and setting forth preserva-
tion from the evil of the world as His work. " The blessing of
God is the goodness of God in action, by which a supply of all good
pours down to us from His good favour as from their only foun-
tain ; then follows, secondly, the prayer that He would keep the
people, which signifies that He alone is the defender of the Church,
and that it is He who preserves it with His guardian care" (Calvin).
— The second (ver. 25), "Jehovah make His face shine upon thee,
and be gracious unto thee" defined the blessing more closely as the
manifestation of the favour and grace of God. The face of God
is the personality of God as turned towards man. Fire goes out
from Jehovah's face, and consumes the enemy and the rebellious
(Lev. x. 2, cf. xvii. 10, xx. 3 ; Ex. xiv. 24 ; Ps. xxxiv. 17), and
also a sunlight shining with love and full of life and good (Deut.
xxx. 30 ; Ps. xxvii. 1, xliii. 3, xliv. 4). If " the light of the sun
is sweet, and pleasant for the eyes to behold" (Eccl. xi. 7), "the
light of the divine countenance, the everlasting light (Ps. xxxvi. 10),
is the sum of all delight" (Baumg.). This light sends rays of
mercy into a heart in need of salvation, and makes it the recipient
of grace. — The third (ver. 26), " Jehovah lift up Sis face to thee, and
set (or give) thee peace" (good, salvation), set forth the blessing of
God as a manifestation of power, or a work of power upon man,
the end of which is peace (shalom), the sum of all the good which
God sets, prepares, or establishes for His people. ?K D^B Kfeo, to
lift up the face to any one, is equivalent to looking at him, and
does not differ from DW KE>3 or D»fc> (Gen. xliii. 29, xliv. 21). When
affirmed of God, it denotes His providential work upon man. When
God looks at a man, He saves him out of his distresses (Ps. iv. 7,
xxxiii. 18, xxxiv. 16). — In these three blessings most of the fathers
and earlier theologians saw an allusion to the mystery of the
Trinity, and rested their conclusion, (a) upon the triple repetition
of the name Jehovah ; (b) upon the ratio pradicati, that Jehovah,
by whom the blessing is desired and imparted, is the Father, Son,
and Holy Ghost ; and (c) upon the distinctorum benedictioni3 mem-
'brorutn consideratio, according to which bis trina beneficia are men-
tioned (cf. Calovii Bibl. illustr. ad h. I.). There is truth in this,
though the grounds assigned seem faulty. As the threefold repeti-
tion of a word or sentence serves to express the thought as strongly
as possible (cf. Jer. vii. 4, xxii. 29), the triple blessing expressed in
Digitized by
Google
42 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
the most unconditional manner the thought, that God would bestow
upon His congregation the whole fulness of the blessing enfolded
in His Divine Being which was manifested as Jehovah. But not
only does the name Jehovah denote God as the absolute Being,
who revealed Himself as Father, Son, and Spirit in the historical
development of His purpose of salvation for the redemption of
fallen man ; but the substance of this blessing, which He caused
to be pronounced upon His congregation, unfolded the grace of
God in the threefold way in which it is communicated to us through
the Father, Son, and Spirit. 1 — Ver. 27. This blessing was not to
remain merely a pious wish, however, but to be manifested in the
people with all the power of a blessing from God. This assurance
closes the divine command : 4< They shall put My name upon tlie
children of Israel, and I will bless them."
CLOSING EVENTS AT SINAI. — CHAP. VII.-IX. 14.
Chap. vii. Peesentation of Dedicatory Gifts <bt the
Princes of the Tribes. — Ver. 1. This presentation took place
at the time (D^) when Moses, after having completed the erection
of the tabernacle,«nointed and sanctified the dwelling and the altar,
together with their furniture (Lev. viii. 10, 11). Chronologically
considered, this ought to have been noticed after Lev. viii. 10. But
in order to avoid interrupting the connection of the Sinaitic laws,
it is introduced for the first time at this point, and placed at the
1 See the admirable elaboration of these points in Luther's exposition of the
blessing. Luther refers the first blessing to "bodily life and good." The
blessing, he says, desired for the people " that God would give them prosperity
and every good, and also ghard and preserve them." This is carried out still
further, in a manner corresponding to his exposition of the first article. The
second blessing he refers to " the spiritual nature and the soul," and observes,
" Just as the sun, when it rises and diffuses its rich glory and soft light over all
the world, merely lifts up its face upon all the world ; ... so when God gives
His word, He causes His face to shine clearly and joyously upon all minds, and
makes them joyful and light, and as it were new hearts and new men. For it
brings forgiveness of sins, and shows God as a gracious and merciful Father,
who pities and sympathizes with our grief and sorrow. The third also relates
to the spiritual nature and the soul, and is a desire for consolation and final
victory over the cross, death, the devil, and all the gates of hell, together with
the world and the evil desires of the flesh. The desire of this blessing is, that
the Lord God will lift up the light of His word upon us, and so keep it over
us, that it may shine in our hearts with strength enough to overcome all the
opposition of the devil, death, and sin, and all adversity, terror, or despair."
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VII. 2-9. 43
head of the events which inlmediately preceded the departure of
the people from Sinai, because these gifts consisted in part of
materials that were indispensably necessary for the transport of the
tabernacle during the march through the desert. Moreover, there
was only an interval of at the most forty days between the anoint-
ing of the tabernacle, which commenced after the first day of the first
month (cf. Ex. xl. 16 and Lev. viii. 10), and lasted eight days, and
the departure from Sinai, on the twentieth day of the second month
(chap. x. 11), and from this we have to. deduct six days for the
Passover, which took place before their departure (chap. ix. 1 sqq.) ;
and it was within this period that the laws and ordinances from Lev.
xi. to Num. vi. had to be published, and the dedicatory ofFerings
to be presented. Now, as the presentation itself was distributed,
according to vers. 11 sqq., over twelve or thirteen days, we may very
well assume that it did not entirely precede the publication of the
laws referred to, but was carried on in part contemporaneously with
it. The presentation of the dedicatory gifts of one tribe-prince
might possibly occupy only a few hours of the day appointed for
the purpose ; and the rest of the day, therefore, might very conve-
niently be made use of by Moses for publishing the laws. In this
case the short space of a month and a few day* would be amply
sufficient for everything that took place.
Ver3. 2-9. The presentation of six waggons and twelve oxen for
the carriage of the materials of the tabernacle is mentioned first, and
was no doubt the first thing that took place. The princes of Israel,
viz. the heads of the tribe-houses (fathers' houses), or princes of the
tribes (see chap. i. 4 sqq.), " those who stood over those that were
numbered" i.e. who were their leaders or rulers, offered as their
sacrificial gift six covered waggons and twelve oxen, one ox for
each prince, and a waggon for every two. 3* TOV, ajia^wi Xa/vm)-
viica? (LXX.), i.e. according to Euseb. Emis., two-wheeled vehicles,
though the Greek scholiasts explain "Ka/iirrjvn as signifying afiafja
irepufMinji}, fiaaiKucr) and piBwv Trepupaves 6 iarlv apfia OKenaorbv
(cf. Schleussner, Lex. in LXX. s. v.) } and Aquila, a/iai-ai aKetracnai,
i.e. plaustra tecta ( Vulg. and Rabb.). The meaning " litters," winch
Gesenius and De Wette support, can neither be defended etymo-
logically, nor based upon CSS in Isa. Ixvi. 20. — Vers. 4-6. At the
command of God, Moses received them to apply them to the pur-
poses of the tabernacle, and handed them over to the Levites, " to
every one according to the measure of his service," i.e. to the different
classes of Levites, according to the requirements of their respective
Digitized by
Google
44 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
duties. — Vers. 7-9. He gave two waggons and four oxen to the
Gershonites, and four waggons and eight oxen to the Merarites, as
the former had less weight to carry, in the coverings and curtains
of the dwelling and the hangings of the court, than the latter, who
had to take charge of the beams and pillars (chap. iv. 24 sqq., 31
sqq.). " Under the hand of Itharnar" (ver. 8) ; as in chap. iv. 28,
33. The Kohathites received no waggon, because it was their
place to attend to " the sanctuary" (the holy), i.e. the holy things,
which had to be conveyed upon their shoulders, and were provided
with poles for the purpose (chap. iv. 4 sqq.).
Vers. 10-88. Presentation of dedicatory gifts for the altar. —
Ver. 10. Every prince offered " the dedication of the altar," i.e. what
served for the dedication of the altar, equivalent to his sacrificial
gift for the consecration of the altar, " on the day" i.e. at the time,
" that they anointed it." " Day :" as in Gen. ii. 4. Moses was
directed by God to receive the gifts from the princes on separate
days, one after another; so that the presentation extended over
twelve days. The reason for this regulation was not to make a
greater display, as Knobel supposes, or to avoid cutting short the
important ceremony of consecration, but was involved in the very
nature of the gifts presented. Each prince, for example, offered,
(1) a silver dish (kearah, Ex. xxv. 29) of 130 sacred shekels weight,
i.e. about 4£ lbs. ; (2) a silver bowl (mizrak, a sacrificial bowl, not
a sacrificial can, or wine-can, as in Ex. xxvii. 3) of 70 shekels
weight, both filled with fine flour mixed with oil for a meat-offering;
(3) a golden spoon (caph, as in Ex. xxv. 29) filled with incense for
an incense-offering ; (4) a bullock, a ram, and a sheep of a year old
for a burnt-offering ; (5) a shaggy goat for a sin-offering ; (6) two
oxen, five rams, jive he-goats, andyfoe sheep of a year old for a peace-
offering. Out of these gifts the fine flour, the incense, and the
sacrificial animals were intended for sacrificing upon the altar, and
that not as a provision for a lengthened period, but for immediate
use in the way prescribed. This could not have been carried out
if more than one prince had presented his gifts, and brought them
to be sacrificed on any one day. For the limited space in the court
of the tabernacle would not have allowed of 252 animals being
received, slaughtered, and prepared for sacrificing all at once, or on
the same day ; and it would have been also impossible to burn 36
whole animals (oxen, rams, and sheep), and the fat portions of 216
animals, upon the altar. — Vers. 12-83. All the princes brought the
same gifts. The order in which the twelve princes, whose names
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VIII. 1-4. 45
have already been given at chap. i. 5-15, made their presentation,
corresponded to the order of the tribes in the camp (chap, ii.), the
tribe-prince of Judah taking the lead, and the prince of Naphtali
coming last. In the statements as to the weight of the silver kea-
roth and the golden cappoth, the word shekel is invariably omitted,
as in Gen. xx. 16, etc. — In vers. 84—86, the dedication gifts are
summed up, and the total weight given, viz. twelve silver dishes and
twelve silver bowls, weighing together 2400 shekels, and twelve
golden spoons, weighing 120 shekels in all. On the sacred shekel,
see at Ex. xxx. 13 ; and on the probable value of the shekel of gold,
at Ex. xxxviii. 24, 25. The sacrificial animals are added together
in the same way in vers. 87, 88.
Ver. 89. Whilst the tribe-princes had thus given to the altar
the consecration of a sanctuary of their God, through their sacri-
ficial gifts, Jehovah acknowledged it as His sanctuary, by causing
Moses, when he went into the tabernacle to speak to Him, and to
present his own entreaties and those of the people, to hear the voice of
Him that spake to him from between the two cherubim upon the ark
of the covenant. The suffix in taR points back to the name Jehovah,
which, though not expressly mentioned before, is contained implicite
in ohel moed, " the tent of meeting." For the holy tent became an
ohel moid first of all, from the fact that it was there that Jehovah
appeared to Moses, or met with him (*lj>fa, Ex. xxv. 22). 13^0, part.
HUhpael, to hold conversation. On the fact itself, see the explana-
tion in Ex. xxv. 20, 22. " This voice from the inmost sanctuary to
Moses, the representative of Israel, was Jehovah's reply to the joy-
fulness and readiness with which the princes of Israel responded to
Him, and made the tent, so far as they were concerned, a place of
holy meeting" (Baumg.). This was the reason for connecting the
remark in ver. 89 witb the account of the dedicatory gifts.
Chap. viii. Consecration of the Levites. — The command
of God to consecrate the Levites for their service, is introduced in
vers. 1-4 by directions issued to Aaron with regard to the lighting
of the candlestick in the dwelling of the tabernacle. Aaron was to
place the seven lamps upon the candlestick in such a manner that
they would shine V33 So"?K. These directions are not a mere
repetition, but also a more precise definition, of the general in-
structions given in Ex. xxv. 37, when the candlestick was made, to
place the seven lamps upon the candlestick in such a manner that
each should give light over against its front, i.e. shnqjd tlimw jQ
UNION
THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY.
DgfeedJa^-LO-OglC J
46 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
light upon the side opposite to the front of the candlestick (see vol.
ii. p. 173). In itself, therefore, there is nothing at all striking in
the renewal and explanation of those directions, which committed
the task of lighting the lamps to Aaron ; for this had not been
done before, as Ex. xxvii. 21 merely assigns the daily preparation
of the candlestick to Aaron and his sons ; and their being placed
in the connection in which we find them may be explained from
the signification of the seven lamps in relation to the dwelling of
God, viz. as indicating that Israel was thereby to be represented
perpetually before the Lord as a people causing its light to shine in
the darkness of this world (vol. ii. p. 174). And when Aaron is
commanded to attend to the lighting of the candlestick, so that it
may light up the dwelling, in these special instructions the entire
fulfilment of his service in the dwelling is enforced upon him as a
duty. In this respect the instructions themselves, coupled with the
statement of the fact that Aaron had fulfilled them, stand quite
appropriately between the account of what the tribe-princes had
done for the consecration of the altar service as representatives of
the congregation, and the account of the solemn inauguration of
the Levites in their service in the sanctuary. The repetition on
this occasion (ver. 4) of an allusion to the artistic character of the
candlestick, which had been made according to the pattern seen by
Moses in the mount (Ex. xxv. 31 sqq.), is quite in keeping with the
antiquated style of narrative adopted in these books.
Vers. 5-22. Consecration of tJie Levites for their service in the
sanctuary. — The choice of the Levites for service in the sanctuary,
in the place of the first-born of the people generally, has been
already noticed in chap. iii. 5 sqq., and the duties binding upon
them in chap. iv. 4 sqq. But before entering upon their duties
they were to be consecrated to the work, and then formally
handed over to the priests. This consecration is commanded in
vers. 7 sqq., and is not called OTp, like the consecration of the
priests (Ex. xxix. 1 ; Lev. viii. 11), but in?, to cleanse. It con-
sisted in sprinkling them with sin-water, shaving off the whole
of the hair from their bodies, and washing their clothes, accom-
panied by a sacrificial ceremony, by which they were presented
symbolically to the Lord as a sacrifice for His service. The first
part of this ceremony had reference to outward purification, and
represented cleansing from the defilement of sin ; hence the per-
formance of it is called "tsnnri (to cleanse from sin) in ver. 21.
" Sprinkle sin-water upon them." The words are addressed to Moses,
Digitizi
ed by Google
CHAP. VIA. 5-22. 47
who had to officiate at the inauguration of the Levites, as he had
already done at that of the priests. " Water of sin" is water having
reference to sin, designed to remove it, just as the sacrifice offered
for the expiation of sin is called ntttsn (sin) in Lev. iv. 14, etc. ;
whilst the "water of uncleanness" in chap. xix. 9, 13, signifies
water by which uncleanness was removed or wiped away. The
nature of this purifying water is not explained, and cannot be
determined with any certainty. We find directions for preparing
sprinkling water in a peculiar manner, for the purpose of cleansing
persons who were cured of leprosy, in Lev. xiv. 5 sqq., 50 sqq. ; and
also for cleansing both persons and houses that had been defiled
by a corpse, in chap. xix. 9 sqq. Neither of these, however, was
applicable to the cleansing of the Levites, as they were both of
them composed of significant ingredients, which stood in the closest
relation to the special cleansing to be effected by them, and had
evidently no adaptation to the purification of the Levites; At the
same time, the expression " sin-water" precludes our understanding
it to mean simply clean water. So that nothing remains but to
regard it as referring to the water in the laver of the sanctuary,
which was provided for the purpose of cleansing the priests for the
performance of their duties (Ex." xxx. 18 sqq.), and might therefore
be regarded by virtue of this as cleansing from sin, and be called
"sin-water" in consequence. "And they shall cause the razor to
pass over their whole body" i.e. shave off all the hair upon their
body, "and wash their clothes, and so cleanse themselves." IJfH " 1 "?J'. i !!
is to be distinguished from n?a. The latter signifies to make bald
or shave the hair entirely off, which was required of the leper when
he was cleansed (Lev. xiv. 8, 9) ; the former signifies merely cut-
ting the hair, which was part of the regular mode of adorning the
body. The Levites also were not required to bathe their bodies, as
lepers were (Lev. xiv. 8, 9), and also the priests at their consecra-
tion (Lev. viii. 6), because they were not affected with any special
uncleanness, and their duties did not require them to touch the
most holy instruments of worship. The washing of the clothes, on
the other hand, was a thing generally required as a preparation for
acts of worship (Gen. xxxv. 2 ; Ex. xix. 10), and was omitted in
the case of the consecration of the priests, simply because they re-
ceived a holy official dress. vwron for Vinen, as in 2 Chron. xxx. 18.
— Ver. 8. After this purification the Levites were to bring two
young bullocks, one with the corresponding meat-offering for a
burnt-sacrifice, the other for a sin-offering. — Ver. 9. Moses was
Digltizi
ed by Google
48 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
then to cause them to draw near before the tabernacle, i.e. to enter
the court, and to gather together the whole congregation of Israel,
viz. in the persons of their heads and representatives. — Ver. 10.
After this the Levites were to come before Jehovah, i.e. in front of
the altar ; and the children of Israel, i.e. the tribe-princes in the
name of the Israelites, were to lay their hands upon them, not
merely " as a sign that they released them from the possession of
the nation, and assigned them and handed them over to Jehovah"
(KnobeJ), but in order that by this symbolical act they might trans-
fer to the Levites the obligation resting upon the whole nation to
serve the Lord in the persons of its first-born sons, and might pre-
sent them to the Lord as representatives of the first-born of Israel,
to serve Him as living sacrifices. — Ver. 11. This transfer was to be
completed by Aaron's waving the Levites as a wave-offering before
Jehovah on behalf of the children of Israel, i.e. by his offering
them symbolically to the Lord as a sacrifice presented on the part
of the Israelites. The ceremony of waving consisted no doubt in
his conducting the Levites solemnly up to the altar, and then back
again. On the signification of the verb, see at Lev. vii. 30. The
design of the waving is given in ver. 11, viz. "that they might be to
perform the service of Jehovah" (vers. 24—26 compared with chap,
iv. 4-33). — Ver. 12. The Levites were then to close this transfer
of themselves to the Lord with a sin-offering and burnt-offering, in
which they laid their hands upon the sacrificial animals. By this
imposition of hands they made the sacrificial animals their repre-
sentatives, in which they presented their own bodies to the Lord as
a living sacrifice well-pleasing to Him (see vol. ii. pp. 279, 280).
The signification of the dedication of the Levites, as here enjoined,
is still further explained in vers. 13-19. The meaning of vers. 13
sqq. is this: According to the command already given (in vers.
6-12), thou shalt place the Levites before Aaron and his sons, and
wave them as a wave-offering before the Lord, and so separate them
from the midst of the children of Israel, that they may be Mine.
They shall then come to serve the tabernacle. So shalt thou cleanse
them and wave them. The same reason is assigned for this in vers.
16, 17, as in chap. iii. 11-13 (fc> "faa for "fa3"% cf. chap. iii. 13);
and in vers. 18 and 19, what was commanded in chap. iii. 6-9 is
described as having been carried out. On ver. 19b see chap. i. 53.
— Vers. 20-22 contain an account of the execution of the divine
command.
Vers. 23-26. The Levitical period of service is fixed here at
Digitized by
Google
% CHAP. VIII. 28-26, IX. 1-14. 49
twenty-five years of age and upwards to the fiftieth year. u This
is what concerns the Levites," i.e. what follows applies to the Levites.
" From the age of twenty-five years sliall he (the Levite) come to do
service at the work of the tabernacle; and at fifty years of age shall
he return from the service of the work, and not work any further, but
only serve his brethren at the tabernacle in keeping charge" i.e. help
them to look after the furniture of the tabernacle. " Charge"
(mishmereth), as distinguished from "work," signified the over-
sight of all the furniture of the tabernacle (see chap. iii. 8) ;
" work" (service) applied to laborious service, e.g. the taking down
and setting up of the tabernacle and cleaning it, carrying wood
and water for the sacrificial worship, slaying the animals for the
daily and festal sacrifices of the congregation, etc. — Ver. 26J. " So
shalt thou do to tlie Levites (i.e. proceed with them) in their services."
Thwa from rnoBte, attendance upon an official post. Both the
heading and final clause, by which this law relating to the Levites'
period of service is bounded, and its position immediately after the
induction of the Levites into their office, show unmistakeably that
this law was binding for all time, and was intended to apply to the
standing service of the Levites at the sanctuary ; and consequently
that it was not at variance with the instructions in chap, iv., to
muster the Levites between thirty and fifty years of age, and
organize them for the transport of the tabernacle on the journey
through the wilderness (chap. iv. 3-49). The transport of the
tabernacle required the strength of a full-grown man, and therefore
the more advanced age of thirty years ; whereas the duties con-
nected with the tabernacle when standing were of a lighter descrip-
tion, and could easily be performed from the twenty-fifth year (see
Hengstenberg , 8 Dissertations, vol. ii. pp. 321 sqq.). At a later period,
when the sanctuary was permanently established on Mount Zion,
David employed the Levites from their twentieth year (1 Chron.
xxiii. 24, 25), and expressly stated that he did so because the
Levites had no longer to carry the dwelling and its furniture ; and
this regulation continued in force from that time forward (cf.
2 Chron. xxxi. 17 ; Ezra iii. 8). But if the supposed discrepancy
between the verses before us and chap. iv. 3, 47, is removed by this
distinction, which is gathered in the most simple manner from the
context, there is no ground whatever for critics to deny that the regu-
lation before us could have proceeded from the pen of the Elohist.
Chap. ix. 1-14. The Passover at Sinai, and Instructions
PENT. — VOL. III. D
Digitized by
Google
50 THE FOUBTH BOOK OF MOSES.
fob a Supplementary Passoveb. — Vers. 1-5. On the first in-
stitution of the Passover, before the exodus from Egypt, God had
appointed the observance of this feast as an everlasting statute for
all future generations (Ex. xii. 14, 24, 25). In the first month of
the second year after the exodus, that is to say, immediately after
the erection of the tabernacle (Ex. xl. 2, 17), this command was
renewed, and the people were commanded " to keep the Passover
in its appointed season, according to all its statutes and rights ;" not
to postpone it, that is, according to an interpretation that might
possibly have been put upon Ex. xii. 24, 25, until they came to
Canaan, but to keep it there at Sinai. And Israel kept it in the
wilderness of Sinai, in exact accordance with the commands which
God had given before (Ex. xii.). There is no express command,
it is true, that the blood of the paschal lambs, instead of being
smeared upon the lintel and posts of the house-doors (or the en-
trances to the tents), was to be sprinkled upon the altar of burnt-
offering ; nor is it recorded that this was actually done ; but it
followed of itself from the altered circumstances, inasmuch as there
was no destroying angel to pass through the camp at Sinai and
smite the enemies of Israel, whilst there was an altar in existence
now upon which all the sacrificial blood was to be poured out, and
therefore the blood of the paschal sacrifice also. 1
1 If we take into consideration still further, the fact that the law had
already been issued that the blood of all the animals slain for food, whether
inside or outside the camp, was to be sprinkled upon the altar (Lev. xvii. 8-6),
there can be no doubt that the blood of the paschal lambs would also have to be
sprinkled upon the altar, notwithstanding the difficulties referred to by Kurtz,
arising from the small number of priests to perform the task, viz. Aaron,
Eleazar, and Ithamar, as Nadab and Abihu were now dead. But (1) Kurtz
estimates the number of paschal lambs much too high, viz. at 100,000 to
140,000 ; for when he reckons the whole number of the people at about two
millions, and gives one lamb upon an average to every fifteen or twenty persons,
he includes infante and sucklings among those who partook of the Passover.
But as there were only 603,550 males of twenty years old and upwards in the
twelve tribes, we cannot reckon more than about 700,000 males as participants
in the paschal meal, since the children under ten or twelve years of age would
not come into the calculation, even if those who were between eight and twelve
partook of the meal, since there would be many adults who could not eat the
Passover, because they were unclean. Now if, as Josephus affirms (de bell. jud.
vi. 9, 3), there were never less than ten, and often as many as twenty, who
joined together in the time of Christ (oi» ihaoaov dvipaw tir.a . . . ttoAAoi 5a
x»l av» etxootv d6poi^onr»i), we need not assume that there were more than
60,000 lambs required for the feast of Passover at Sinai ; because even if all
the women who were clean took part in the feast, they would confine them-
Digitizi
ed by Google
CHAP. IX. 6-14. 51
Vers. 6-14. There were certain men who were defiled by human
corpses (see Lev. xix. 28), and could not eat the Passover on the
day appointed. These men came to Moses, and asked, " Why are
we diminished (prevented) from offering the sacrificial gift of Jehovah
at its season in the midst of the children of Israel (i.e. in common
with the rest of the Israelites) I" The exclusion of persons defiled
from offering the Passover followed from the law, that only clean
persons were to participate in a sacrificial meal (Lev. vii. 21), and
that no one could offer any sacrifice in an unclean state. — Ver. 8.
Moses told them to wait (stand), and he would hear what the Lord,
of whom he would inquire, would command. — Vers. 9 sqq. Jehovah
gave these general instructions : "Every one who is defiled by a corpse
or upon a distant journey, of you and your future families, shall keep
the Passover in the second month on the fourteenth, between the two
evenings," and that in all respects according to the statute of this
feast, the three leading points of which — viz. eating the lamb with
unleavened bread and bitter herbs, leaving nothing till the next
day, and not breaking a bone (Ex. xii. 8, 10, 46) — are repeated
selves as much as possible to the quantity actually needed, and one whole sheep
of a year old would furnish flesh enough for one supper for fifteen males and
fifteen females. (2) The slaughtering of all these lambs need not hare taken
place in the narrow space afforded by the court, even if it was afterwards per-
formed in the more roomy courts of the later temple, as has been inferred from
2 Chron. xxx. 16 and xxxv. 11. Lastly, the sprinkling of the blood was no
doubt the business of the priests. But the Levites assisted them, so that they
sprinkled the blood upon the altar " out of the hand of the Levites" (2 Chron.
xxx. 16). Moreover, we are by no means in a condition to pronounce posi-
tively whether three priests were sufficient or not at Sinai, because we have no
precise information respecting the course pursued. The altar, no doubt, would
appear too small for the performance of the whole within the short time of
hardly three hours (from the ninth hour of the day to the eleventh). But if it
was possible, in the time of the Emperor Nero, to sprinkle the blood of 256,500
paschal lambs (for that number was actually counted under Cestius ; see Josephus,
I. c.) upon the altar of the temple of that time, which was six, or eight, or even
ten times larger, it must have been also possible, in Moses' time, for the blood
of 50,000 lambs to be sprinkled upon the altar of the tabernacle, which was
five cubits in length, and the same in breadth.
1 The hprh is marked as suspicious by puncta extraordinaria, probably first
of all simply on the ground that the more exact definition is not found in
ver. 13. The Rabbins suppose the marks to indicate that rechokah is not to be
taken here in its literal sense, but denotes merely distance from Jerusalem, or
from the threshold of the outer court of the temple. See Mishnah Pesach
ix. 2, with the commentaries of Bartenora and Maimonides, and the conjectures
of the Pesikta on the ten passages in the Pentateuch with punctis extraordi-
itariis, in Drusii notx uberiores ad h. v.
Digitized by
Google
52 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
here. But lest any one should pervert this permission, to celebrate
the Passover a month later in case of insuperable difficulties, which
had only been given for the purpose of enforcing the obligation to
keep the covenant meal upon every member of the nation, into an
excuse for postponing it without any necessity and merely from
indifference, on the ground that he could make it up afterwards,
the threat is held out in ver. 13, that whoever should omit to keep
the feast at the legal time, if he was neither unclean nor upon a
journey, should be cut off ; and in ver. 14 the command is repeated
with reference to foreigners, that they were also to keep the law
and ordinance with the greatest minuteness when they observed
the Passover : cf . Ex. xii. 48, 49, according to which the stranger
was required first of all to let himself be circumcised. In ver.
145, nw stands for .^nn, as in Ex. xii. 49 ; cf. Ewald, § 295, d.
1 . . . ) et . . . et, both . . . and.
SIGNS AND SIGNALS FOE THE MARCH. — CHAP. IX. 16-X. 10.
With the mustering of the people and the internal organization
of the congregation, the preparations for the march from the desert
of Sinai to the promised land of Canaan were completed ; and when
the feast of the Passover was ended, the time for leaving Sinai had
arrived. Nothing now remained to be noticed except the required
instructions respecting the guidance of the people in their journey
through the wilderness, to which the account of the actual departure
and march is appended. The account before us describes first of
all the manner in which God Himself conducted the march (chap.
ix. 15-23) ; and secondly, instructions are given respecting the
signals to be used for regulating the order of the march (chap. x.
1-10).
Chap. ix. 15-23. Signs for removing and encamping. — On
their way through the desert from the border of Egypt to Sinai,
Jehovah Himself had undertaken to guide His people by a cloud,
as the visible sign and vehicle of His gracious presence (Ex. xiii.
21, 22). This cloud had come down upon the dwelling when the
tabernacle was erected, whilst the glory of the Lord filled the holy
of holies (Ex. xl. 34-38). In ver. 15 the historian refers to this
fact, and then describes more fully what had been already briefly
alluded to in Ex. xl. 36, 37, namely, that when the cloud rose up
from the dwelling of the tabernacle it was a sign for removing, and
Digitizi
ed by Google
CHAP. IX. 15-23. 53
when it came down upon the dwelling, a sign for encamping. In
ver. 15a, " on the day of the setting up of the dwelling" Ex. xl.
34, 35, is resumed ; and in ver. 15J the appearance of the cloud
daring the night, from evening till morning, is described in accord-
ance with Ex. xl. 38. (On the fact itself, see the exposition of Ex.
xiii. 21, 22.) mjn bni6 J3Bte, « the dwelling of the tent of witness "
(? used for the genitive to avoid a double construct state : Ewald, §
292, a). In the place of ohelmold, " tent of the meeting of Jehovah
with His people," we have here " tent of witness " (or " testimony"),
i.e. of the tables with the decalogue which were laid up in the ark
of the covenant (Ex. xxv. 16), because the decalogue formed the
basis of the covenant of Jehovah with Israel, and the pledge of the
gracious presence of the Lord in the tabernacle. In the place of
" dwellings of the tent of witness," we have " dwelling of witness "
(testimony) in chap. x. 11, and " tent of witness" in chap, xviii. 2,
xvii. 22, to denote the whole dwelling, as divided into the holy place
and the holy of holies, and not the holy of holies alone. This is
unmistakeably evident from a comparison of the verse before us
with Ex. xl. 34, according to which the cloud covered not merely
one portion of the tabernacle, but the whole of the tent of meeting
(ohel moid). The rendering, " the cloud covered the dwelling at
the tent of witness," i.e. at that part of it in which the witness (or
" testimony") was kept, viz. the holy of holies, which Rosenmuller
and Knobel adopt, cannot be sustained, inasmuch as P has no such
meaning, but simply conveys the idea of motion and passage into a
place or condition (cf. Evtald, § 217, d) ; and the dwelling or taber-
nacle was not first made into the tent of witness through the cloud
which covered it. — Ver. 16. The covering of the dwelling, with the
cloud which shone by night as a fiery look, was constant, and not
merely a phenomenon which appeared when the tabernacle was
first erected, and then vanished away again. — Ver. 17. " In accord-
ance with the rising of the cloud from the tent, then afterwards the
children of Israel broke up," i.e. whenever the cloud ascended up
from the tent, they always broke up immediately afterwards ; " and
at the place where the cloud came down, there they encamped." The
1??*, or settling down of the cloud, sc. upon the tabernacle, we can
only understand in the following manner, as the tabernacle was
all taken to pieces during the march : viz. that the cloud visibly
descended from the height at which it ordinarily soared above the
ark of the covenant, as it was carried in front of the army, for a
signal that the tabernacle was to be set up there ; and when this
Digltizi
ed by Google
54 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
had been done, it settled down upon it. — Ver. 18. As Jehovah was
with His people in the cloud, the rising and falling of the cloud
was " the command of the Lord" to the Israelites to break up or
to pitch the camp. As long, therefore, as the cloud rested upon
the dwelling, i.e. remained stationary, they continued their encamp-
ment. — Vers. 19 sqq. Whether it might rest many days long (T"!£n,
to lengthen out the resting), or only a few days (Gen. xxxiv. 30),
or only from evening till morning, and then rise up again in the
morning, or for a day and a night, or for two days, or for a month,
or for days (yamim), i.e. a space of time not precisely determined
(cf. Gen. iv. 3, xl. 4), they encamped without departing: " Kept
the charge of the Lord" (vers. 19 and 23), i.e. observed what was
to be observed towards Jehovah (see Lev. viii. 35). With "iBte E*|,
" was it that," or " did it happen that," two other possible cases are
introduced. After ver. 20a, the apodosis, " they kept the charge of
the Lord" is to be repeated in thought from ver. 19. The elabora-
tion of the account (vers. 15-23), which abounds with repetitions,
is intended to bring out the importance of the fact, and to awaken
the consciousness not only of the absolute dependence of Israel
upon the guidance of Jehovah, but also of the gracious care of
their God, which was thereby displayed to the Israelites throughout
all their journeyings.
Chap. x. 1-10. The Silver Signal-Tkumpets. — Although
God Himself appointed the time for removal and encampment by
the movement of the cloud of His presence, signals were also requi-
site for ordering and conducting the march of so numerous a body,
by means of which Moses, as commander-in-chief, might make
known his commands to the different divisions of the camp. To
this end- God directed him to prepare two silver trumpets of beaten
work (mikshah, see Ex. xxv. 18), which should serve " for the
calling of the assembly, and for the breaking up of the camps,"
i.e. which were to be used for this purpose. The form of these
trumpets is not further described. No doubt they were straight,
not curved, as we may infer both from the representation of these
trumpets on the triumphal arch of Titus at Borne, and also from
the fact, that none but straight trumpets occur on the old Egyptian
monuments (see my Arch. ii. p. 187). With regard to the use of
them for calling the congregation, the following directions are given
in vers. 3, 4 : "When they shall blow with them (i.e. with both), the
whole congregation (in all its representatives) shall assemble at the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. X. 1-10. 55
door of the tabernacle ; if they blow with only one, the princes or heads
of the families of Israel shall assemble together"' — Vers. 5, 6. To
give the signal for breaking up the camp, they were to blow f^nri,
i.e. a noise or alarm. At the first blast the tribes on the east, i.e.
those who were encamped in the front of the tabernacle, were to
break np ; at the second, those- who were encamped on the south ;
and so on in the order prescribed in chap, ii., though this is not
expressly mentioned here. The alarm was to be blown. Dn'JfDD?,
with regard to their breaking up or marching. — Ver. 7. But to call
the congregation together they were to blow, not to sound an alarm.
PpB signifies blowing in short, sharp tones. JHn = njfviri VpFj, blow-
ing in a continued peal. — Vers. 8-10. These trumpets were to be
used for the holy purposes of the congregation generally, and there-
fore not only the making, but the manner of using them was pre-
scribed by God Himself. They were to be blown by the priests
alone, and " to be for an eternal ordinance to the families of Israel,"
u. to be preserved and used by them in all future times, according
to the appointment of God. The blast of these trumpets was to
call Israel to remembrance before Jehovah in time of war and on
their feast-days. — Ver. 9. u Ifye go to war in your land against the
enemy who oppresses you, and ye blow the trumpets, ye shall bring
yourselves to remembrance before Jehovah, and shall be saved (by
Him) from your enemies." nDrPD- Ki3, to come into war, or go to
war, is to be distinguished from ncrPB? Kia, to make ready for
war, go out to battle (chap. xxxi. 21, xxxii. 6). — Ver. 10. " And
on your joyous day, and your feasts and new moons, ye shall blow
the trumpets over your burnt-offerings and peace-offerings, that they
may be to you for a memorial (remembrance) before your God." —
nhetfri & is any day on which a practical expression was given
to their joy, in the form of a sacrifice. The O^Wto are the feasts
enumerated in chaps, xxviii. and xxix. and Lev. xxiii. The " be-
ginnings of the months," or new-moon days, were not, strictly
speaking, feast-days, with the exception of the seventh new moon
of the year (see at chap, xxviii. 11). On the object, viz. "for a
memorial," see Ex. xxviii. 29, and the explanation, vol. ii. p. 199.
In accordance with this divine appointment, so full of promise, we
find that in after times the trumpets were blown by the priests in
war (chap. xxxi. 6 ; 2 Chron. xiii. 12, 14, xx. 21, 22, 28) as well
as on joyful occasions, such as at the removal of the ark (1 Chron.
xv. 24, xvi. 6), at the consecration of Solomon's temple (2 Chron.
v. 12, vii. 6), the laying of the foundation of the second temple
Digitized by
Google
56 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
(Ezra iii. 10), the consecration of the walls of Jerusalem (Neh. xii.
35, 41), and other festivities (2 Chron. xxix. 27).
II.^JOURNEY FROM SINAI TO THE STEPPES OF MOAB.
Chap. x. 11-xxi.
The straight and shortest way from Sinai to Kadesh, on the southern
border of Canaan, was only a journey of eleven days (Deut. i. 2).
By this road God led His people, whom He had received into the
covenant of His grace at Sinai, and placed under the discipline of
the law, to the ultimate object of their journey through the desert ;
so that, a few months after leaving Horeb or Sinai, the Israelites
had already arrived at Kadesh, in the desert of Zin, on the southern
border of the promised land, and were able to send out men as
spies, to survey the inheritance of which they were to take pos-
session. The way from Sinai to the desert of Zin forms the first
stage in the history of the guidance of Israel through the wilder-
ness to Canaan.
FROM SINAI TO KADESH. — CHAP. X. 11-XIV. 45.
Removal of the Camp from the Desert of Sinai. — Chap. x. 11-36.
Vers. 11, 12. After all the preparations were completed for the
journey of the Israelites from Sinai to Canaan, on the 20th day of
the second month, in the second year, the cloud rose up from the
tent of witness, and the children of Israel broke up out of the desert
of Sinai, DiTyDD?, " according to their journeys" (lit. breakings up ;
see at Gen. xiii. 3 and Ex. 37), i.e. in the order prescribed in
chap. ii. 9, 16, 24, 31, and described in vers. 14 sqq. of this chapter.
" And the cloud rested in tlie desert of Paran." In these words, the
whole journey from the desert of Sinai to the desert of Paran is
given summarily, or as a heading ; and the more minute description
follows from ver. 14 to chap. xii. 16. The "desert of Paran" was
not the first station, but the third ; and the Israelites did not arrive
at it till after they had left Hazeroth (chap. xii. 16). The desert of
Sinai is mentioned as the starting-point of the journey through the
desert, in contrast with the desert of Paran, in the neighbourhood
Digitized by
Google
CHAP X. 11, 12. 57
of Kadesh, whence the spies were sent out to Canaan (chap. xiii.
2, 21), the goal and termination of their journey through the
desert. That the words, " the cloud rested in the desert of Paran"
(ver. 12J), contain a preliminary statement (like Gen. xxvii. 23,
xxxvii. 5, as compared with ver. 8, and 1 Kings vi. 9 as compared
with ver. 14, £tc), is unmistakeably apparent, from the fact that
Moses' negotiations with Hobab, respecting his accompanying the
Israelites to Canaan, as a guide who knew the road, are noticed
for the first time in vers. 29 sqq., although they took place before
the departure from Sinai, and that after this the account of the
breaking-up is resumed in ver. 33, and the journey itself described.
Hence, although Kurtz (iii. 220) rejects this explanation of ver.
12i as " forced," and regards the desert of Paran as a place of en-<
campment between Tabeerah and Kibroth-hattaavah, even he can-
not help identifying the breaking-up described in ver. 33 with that
mentioned in ver. 12 ; that is to say, regarding ver. 12 as a sum-
mary of the events which are afterwards more fully described.
The desert of Paran is the large desert plateau which is bounded
on the east by the Arabah, the deep valley running from the
southern point of the Dead Sea to the Elanitic Gulf, and stretches
westwards to the desert of Shur (Jifar ; see Gen. xvi. 7 ; Ex. xv.
22), that separates Egypt from Philistia : it reaches southwards to
Jebel et Tih, the foremost spur of the Horeb mountains, and north-
wards to the mountains of the Amorites, the southern border of
Canaan. The origin and etymology of the name are obscure. The
opinion that it was derived from IPS, to open wide, and originally
denoted the broad valley of Wady Murreh, between the Hebrew
Negeb and the desert of Tih, and was then transferred to the
whole district, has very little probability in it (Knobet). All that
can be regarded as certain is, that the El-Paran of Gen. xiv. 6 is
a proof that in the very earliest times the name was applied to the
whole of the desert of Tih down to the Elanitic Gulf, and that the
Paran of the Bible had no historical connection either with the
mfirj $apav and tribe of $apaverai mentioned bjPtol. (v. 17, i. 3),
or with the town of $apav, of which the remains are still to be
seen in the Wady Feiran at Serbal, or with the tower of Faran
Ahrun of Edrisi, the modern Hamman Faraun, on the Red Sea, to
the south of the "Wady Gharandel. By the Arabian geographers,
Isztachri, Kazwini, and others, and also by the Bedouins, it is called
et Tih, i.e. the wandering of the children of Israel, as being the
ground upon which the children of Israel wandered about in the
Digitized by
Google
58 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
wilderness for forty years (or more accurately, thirty-eight). This
desert plateau, which is thirty German miles (150 English) long
from south to north, and almost as broad, consists, according to
Arabian geographers, partly of sand and partly of firm soil, and is
intersected through almost its entire length by the Wady el Arish,
which commences at a short distance from the northern extremity
of the southern border mountains of et Tih, and runs in nearly a
straight line from south to north, only turning in a north-westerly
direction towards the Mediterranean Sea, on the north-east of the
Jebel el Helal. This wady divides the desert of Paran into a
western and an eastern half. The western half lies lower than the
eastern, and slopes off gradually, without any perceptible natural
boundary, into the flat desert of Shur (Jifar), on the shore of the
Mediterranean Sea. The eastern half (between the Arabah and
the Wady el Arish) consists throughout of a lofty mountainous
country, intersected by larger and smaller wadys, and with extensive
table-land between the loftier ranges, which slopes off somewhat in
a northerly direction, its southern edge being formed by the eastern
spurs of the Jebel et Tih. It is intersected by the Wady el
Jerafeh, which commences at the foot of the northern slope of the
mountains of Tih, and after proceeding at first in a northerly
direction, turns higher up in a north-easterly direction towards the
Arabah, but rises in its northern portion to a strong mountain
fortress, which is called, from its present inhabitants, the highlands
of the Azazimeh, and is bounded on both south and north by steep
and lofty mountain ranges. The southern boundary is formed by the
range which connects the Araif en Nokia with the Jebel el Mukrah
on the east ; the northern boundary, by the mountain barrier which
stretches along the Wady Murreh from west to east, and rises preci-
pitously from it, and of which the following description has been
given by Rowland and Williams, the first of modern travellers to
visit this district, who entered the terra incognita by proceeding
directly south from Hebron, past Arara or Aroer, and surveyed it
from the border of the Hachmah plateau, i.e. of the mountains of
the Amorites (Deut. i. 7, 20, 44), or the southernmost plateau of
the mountains of Judah (see at chap. xiv. 45) : — " A gigantic
mountain towered above us in savage grandeur, with masses of
naked rock, resembling the bastions of some Cyclopean architec-
ture, the end of which it was impossible for the eye to reach, towards
either the west or the east. It extended also a long way towards
the south ; and with its rugged, broken, and dazzling masses of
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. X 13-28. 59
chalk, which reflected the burning rays of the sun, it looked like
an unapproachable furnace, a most fearful desert, without the
slightest trace of vegetation. A broad defile, called Wady Murreh,
ran at the foot of this bulwark, towards the east ; and after a course
of several miles, on reaching the strangely formed mountain of
Moddera (Madurah), it is divided into two parts, the southern
branch still retaining the same name, and running eastwards to the
Arabah, whilst the other was called Wady Fikreh, and ran in a north-
easterly direction to the Dead Sea. This mountain barrier proved
to us beyond a doubt that we were now standing on the southern
boundary of the promised land; and we were confirmed in this
opinion by the statement of the guide, that Kadesh was only a few
hours distant from the point where we were standing" (Hitter, xiv.
p. 1084). The place of encampment in the desert of Paran is to
be sought for at the north-west corner of this lofty mountain range
(see at chap. xii. 16).
In vers. 13-28 the removal of the different camps is more fully
described, according to the order of march established in chap, ii.,
the order in which the different sections of the Levites drew out
and marched being particularly described in this place alone (cf.
vers. 17 and 21 with chap. ii. 17). First of all (lit. " at the begin-
ning") the banner of Judah drew out, with Issachar and Zebulun
(vers. 14-16 ; cf. chap: ii. 3—9). The tabernacle was then taken
down, and the Gershonites and Merarites broke up, carrying those
portions of it which were assigned to them (ver. 17; cf. chap,
iv. 24 sqq., and 31 sqq.), that they might set up the dwelling
at the place to be chosen for the next encampment, before the
Kohathites arrived with the sacred things (ver. 21). The banner
of Eeuben followed next with Simeon and Gad (vers. 18-21 ; cf.
chap. ii. 10-16), and the Kohathites joined them bearing the sacred
things (ver. 21). e^ps? (= ^Pl 1 , chap. vii. 9, and tfBhjjn vhp f
chap. iv. 4) signifies the sacred things mentioned in chap. iii. 31.
In ver. 21b the subject is the Gershonites and Merarites, who had
broken up before with the component parts of the dwelling, and set
up the dwelling, D8':nv, against their (the Kohathites') arrival, so
that they might place the holy things at once within it. — Vers.
22—28. Behind the sacred things came the banners of Ephraim,
with Manasseh and Benjamin (see ehap. ii. 18-24), and Dan with
Asher and. Naphtali (chap. ii. 25-31) ; so that the camp of Dan
was the " collector of all the camps according to their hosts" i.e.
formed that division of the army which kept the hosts together.
Digitized by
Google
60 THE FOUKTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Vers. 29-32. The conversation in which Moses persuaded Holab
the Midianite, the son of Beguel (see at Ex. ii. 16), and his brother-
in-law, to go with the Israelites, and being well acquainted with the
desert to act as their leader, preceded the departure in order of
time ; but it is placed between the setting out and the march itself,
as being subordinate to the main events. When and why Hobab
came into the camp of the Israelites, — whether he came with his
father Reguel (or Jethro) when Israel first arrived at Horeb, and
so remained behind when Jethro left (Ex. xviii. 27), or whether he
did not come till afterwards, — was left uncertain, because it was a
matter of no consequence in relation to what is narrated here. 1
The request addressed to Hobab, that he would go with them to
the place which Jehovah had promised to give them, i.e. to Canaan,
was supported by the promise that he would do good to them
(Hobab and his company), as Jehovah had spoken good concern-
ing Israel, i.e. had promised it prosperity in Canaan. And when
Hobab declined the request, and said that he should return into
his own land, i.e. to Midian at the south-east of Sinai (see at Ex.
ii. 15 and iii. 1), and to his kindred, Moses repeated the request,
"Leave us not, forasmuch as thou knowest our encamping in the
desert" i.e. knowest where we can pitch our tents ; " therefore be
to us as eyes" i.e. be our leader and guide, — and promised at the
same time to do him the good that Jehovah would do to them.
Although Jehovah led the march of the Israelites in the pillar of
cloud, not only giving the sign for them to break up and to encamp,
but showing generally the direction they were to take ; yet Hobab,
who was well acquainted with the desert, would be able to render
very important service to the Israelites, if he only pointed out, in
those places where the sign to encamp was given by the cloud, the
1 The grounds upon which Knobel affirms that the "Elohist" is not the
author of the account in vers. 29-36, and pronounces it a Jehovistic interpola-
tion, are perfectly futile. The assertion that the Elohist had already given a
full description of the departure in vers. 11-28, rests upon an oversight of the
peculiarities of the Semitic historians. The expression " they set forward" in
ver. 28 is an anticipatory remark, as Knobel himself admits in other places (e.g.
Gen. vii. 12, viii. 3 ; Ex. vii. 6, xii. 50, xvi. 34). The other argument, that
Moses' brother-in-law is not mentioned anywhere else, involves a petitio prin-
cipii, and is just as powerless a proof, as such peculiarities of style as " mount
of the Lord," " ark of the covenant of the Lord," ytSfn to do good (ver. 29), and
others of a similar kind, of which the critics have not even attempted to prove
that they are at variance with the style of the Elohist, to say nothing of their
having actually done so.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. X. 33-36. 61
springs, oases, and plots of pasture which are often buried quite out
of sight in the mountains and valleys that overspread the desert.
What Hobab ultimately decided to do, we are not told ; but " as. no
further refusal is mentioned, and the departure of Israel is related
immediately afterwards, he probably consented" (Knobel). This
is raised to a certainty by the fact that, at the commencement of
the period of the Judges, the sons of the brother-in-law of Moses
went into the desert of Judah to the south of Arad along with the
sons of Judah (Judg. i. 16), and therefore had entered Canaan
with the Israelites, and that they were still living in that neigh-
bourhood in the time of Saul (1 Sam. xv. 6, xxvii. 10, xxx. 29).
Vers. 33—36. " And they (the Israelites) departed from the mount
of Jehovah (Ex. iii. 1) three days' journey ; the ark of the covenant of
Jehovah going before them, to search out a resting-place for them. And
the cloud of Jehovah was over them by day, when they broke up from
the camp." Jehovah still did as He had already done on the way
to Sinai (Ex. xiii. 21, 22) : He went before them in the pillar of
cloud, according to His promise (Ex. xxxiii. 13), on their journey
from Sinai to Canaan ; with this simple difference, however, that
henceforth the cloud that embodied the presence of Jehovah was
connected with the ark of the covenant, as the visible throne of His
gracious presence which had been appointed by Jehovah Himself.
To this end the ark of the covenant was carried separately from
the rest of the sacred things, in front of the whole army ; so that
the cloud which went before them floated above the ark, leading
the procession, and regulating its movements and the direction it
took in such a manner that the permanent connection between the
cloud and the sanctuary might be visibly manifested even during
their march. It is true that, in the order observed in the camp and
on the march, no mention is made of the ark of the covenant going
in front of the whole army ; but this omission is no more a proof of
any discrepancy between this verse and chap. ii. 17, or of a differ-
ence of authorship, than the separation of the different divisions of
the Levites upon the march, which is also not mentioned in chap,
ii. 17, although the Gershonites and Merarites actually marched
between the banners of Judah and Reuben, and the Kohathites
with the holy things between the banners of Reuben and Ephraim
(vers. 17 and 21). 1 The words, " the cloud was above them" (the
Israelites), and so forth, can be reconciled with this supposition
1 As the critics do not deny that vers. 11-28 are written by the " Elohist"
notwithstanding this difference, they have no right to bring forward the account
Digitized by
Google
62 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
without any difficulty, whether we understand them as signifying
that the cloud, which appeared as a guiding column floating above
the ark and moved forward along with it, also extended itself along
the whole procession, and spread out as a protecting shade over the
whole army (as 0. v. Gerlach and Baumgarten suppose), or that
u above them" (upon them) is to be regarded as expressive of the
fact that it accompanied them as a protection and shade. Nor is
Ps. cv. 39, which seems, so far as the words are concerned, father to
favour the first explanation, really at variance with this view ; for
the Psalmist's intention is not so much to give a physical description
of the phenomenon, as to describe the sheltering protection of God
in poetical words as a spreading out of the cloud above the wander-
ing people of God, in the form of a protection against both heat and
rain (cf. Isa. iv. 5, 6). Moreover, vers. 336 and 34 have a poetical
character, answering to the elevated nature of their subject, and
are to be interpreted as follows according to the laws of a poetical
parallelism : The one thought that the ark of the covenant, with
the cloud soaring above it, led the way and sheltered those who
were marching, is divided into two clauses ; in ver. 336 only the
ark of the covenant is mentioned as going in front of the Israelites,
and in ver. 34 only the cloud as a shelter over them: whereas
the carrying of the ark in front of the army could only accomplish
the end proposed, viz. to search out a resting-place for them, by
Jehovah going above them in the cloud, and showing the bearers
of the ark both the way they were to take, and the place where
they were to rest. ' The ark with the tables of the law is not called
"the ark of testimony" here, according to its contents, as in Ex.
xxv. 22, xxvi. 33, 34, xxx. 6, etc., but the ark of the covenant of
Jehovah, according to its design and signification for Israel, which
was the only point, or at any rate the principal point, in considera-
tion here. The resting-place which the ark of the covenant found
at the end of three days, is not mentioned in ver. 34 ; it was not
Tabeerah, however (chap. xi. 3), but Kibroth-hattaavah (chap. xi.
34, 35 ; cf. chap, xxxiii. 16).
In vers. 35 and 36, the words which Moses was in the habit of
uttering, both when the ark removed and when it came to rest
again, are given not only as a proof of the joyous confidence of
Moses, but as an encouragement to the congregation to cherish the
same believing confidence. When breaking up, he said, " Rise up,
of the ark going first as a contradiction to chap, ii., and therefore a proof that
vers. 83 sqq. are not of Elohistic origin.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. X. 85, 36. 63
Jehovah 1 that Thine enemies may be scattered, and they tnat hate
Thee may flee before Thy face;" and when it rested, " Return,
Jehovah, to the ten thousand thousands of Israel !" Moses could
speak in this way, because he knew that Jehovah and the ark of
the covenant were inseparably connected, and saw in the ark of the
covenant, as the throne of Jehovah, a material pledge of the gra-
cious presence of the Almighty God. He said this, however, not
merely with reference to enemies who might encounter the Israel-
ites in the desert, but with a confident anticipation of the calling
of Israel, to strive for the cause of the Lord in this hostile world,
and rear His kingdom upon earth. Human power was not suffi-
cient for this ; but to accomplish this end, it was necessary that the
Almighty God should go before His people, and scatter their foes.
The prayer addressed to God to do this, is an expression of bold
believing confidence, — a prayer sure of its answer ; and to Israel it
was the word with which the congregation of God was to carry on
the conflict at all times against the powers and authorities of a
whole hostile world. It is in this sense that in Ps. lxviii. 2, the
words are held up by David before himself and his generation as a
banner of victory, " to arm the Church with confidence, and fortify
it against the violent attacks of its foes" (Calvin), na*B* is construed
with an accusative : return to the ten thousands of the hosts of
Israel, i.e. after having scattered Thine enemies, turn back again
to Thy people to dwell among them. The " thousands of Israel,"
as in chap. i. 16. 1
1 The inverted nan*, C, at the beginning and close of vers. 85, 36, which
are found, according to R. MenacJiem's de Lonzano Or Torah (I. 17), in all the
Spanish and German MSS., and are sanctioned by the Masorah, are said by the
Talmud (tract de sabbatho) to be merely signa parentheseos, qusc monerent prstter
historic seriem versum 85 et 86 ad capitis finem insert (cf. Matt. HUleri de
Arcano Kethib et Keri libri duo, pp. 158, 159). The Cabbalists, on the other
hand, according to R. Menach. 1. c, find an allusion in it to the Shechinah,
" quae velut obversa ad tergum facie sequentes Israelitas ex impenso amore respi-
ceret" (see the note in J. H. Michaelis' Bibl. hebr.). In other MSS., however,
which are supported by the Masora Erffurt, the inverted nun is found in the
words j?bC3 (ver. 35) and D'jCiuiOS DJ?n Wl_ (chap^. xi. 1) : the first, ad innu-
endum ut sic retrorsum agantur omnes hostes Israelitarum; the second, ut esset
symbolum perpetuum perversitatis populi, inter tot iUustria signa liberationis et
maximorum beneficiorum Dei acerbe quiritantium, ad declarandam ingratitudinem
et contumaciam suam (cf. J. Buxtorf, Tiberias, p. 169).
Digltizi
ed by Google
64 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
OCCURRENCES AT TABEERAH AND KIBKOTH-HATTAAVAH. —
CHAP. XI.
Vers. 1-3. After a three days' march the Israelites arrived at a
resting-place ; but the people began at once to be discontented with
their situation. 1 The people were like those who complain in the ears of
Jehovah of something bad; i.e. they behaved like persons who groan
and murmur because of some misfortune that has happened to them.
No special occasion is mentioned for the complaint. The words are
expressive, no doubt, of the general dissatisfaction and discontent
of the people at the difficulties and privations connected with the
journey through the wilderness, to which they gave utterance so
loudly, that their complaining reached the ears of Jehovah- At
this His wrath burned, inasmuch as the complaint was directed
against Him and His guidance, " so that fire of Jehovah burned
against them, and ate at the end of the camp" 3 1JQ signifies here,
not to burn a person (Job i. 16), but to burn against. " Fire of
Jehovah :" a fire sent by Jehovah, but not proceeding directly from
Him, or bursting forth from the cloud, as in Lev. x. 2. Whether
it was kindled through a flash of lightning, or in some other such
way, cannot be more exactly determined. There is not sufficient
ground for the supposition that the fire merely seized upon the
bushes about the camp and the tents of the people, but not upon
human beings (Ros., Knobel). All that is plainly taught in the
words is, that the fire did not extend over the whole camp, but
merely broke out at one end of it, and sank down again, i.e. was
extinguished very quickly, at the intercession of Moses ; so that in
this judgment the Lord merely manifested His power to destroy
the murmurers, that He might infuse into the whole nation a whole-
some dread of His holy majesty. — Ver. 3. From this judgment the
place where the fire had burned received the name of " Tabeerah,"
i.e. burning, or place of burning. Now, as this spot is distinctly
described as the end or outermost edge of the camp, this " place
1 The arguments by which Knobel undertakes to prove, that in chaps*. xL
and xii. of the original work different foreign accounts respecting the first
encampments after leaving Sinai have been -woven together by the " Jehovist,"
are founded upon misinterpretations and arbitrary assumptions and conclusions,
such as the assertion that the tabernacle stood outside the camp (chaps, xi. 25,
xii. 5) ; that Miriam entered the tabernacle (chap. xii. 4, 5) ; that the original
work had already reported the arrival of Israel in Paran in chap. x. 12 ; and
that no reference is ever made to a camping-place called Tabeerah, and others
of the same kind. For the proof, see the explanation of the verses referred to.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XI. 4-9. 65
of burning" must not be regarded, as it is by Knobel and others, as
a different station from the '* graves of lust." Tabeerah was simply
the local name given to a distant part of the whole camp, which
received soon after the name of Kibroth-Hattaavah, on account of
the greater judgment which the people brought upon themselves
through their rebellion. This explains not only the omission of the
name Tabeerah from the list of encampments in chap, xxxiii. 16,
but also the circumstance, that nothing is said about any removal
from Tabeerah to Kibroth-Hattaavah, and that the account of the
murmaring of the people, because of the want of those supplies of
food to which they had been accustomed in Egypt, is attached,
without anything further, to the preceding narrative. There is
nothing very surprising either, in the fact that the people should
have given utterance to their wish for the luxuries of Egypt, which
they had been deprived of so long, immediately after this judgment
of God, if we only understand the whole affair as taking place in
exact accordance with the words of the texts, viz. that the unbe-
lieving and discontented mass did not discern the chastising hand
of God at all in the conflagration which broke out at the end of the
camp, because it was not declared to be a punishment from God,
and was not preceded by a previous announcement ; and therefore
that they gave utterance in loud murmurings to the discontent of
their hearts respecting the want of flesh, without any regard to what
had just befallen them.
Vers. 4-9. The first impulse to this came from the mob that
had come out of Egypt along with the Israelites. " The mixed
multitude:" see at Ex. xii. 38. They felt and expressed a longing
for the better food which they had enjoyed in Egypt, and which
was not to be had in the desert, and urged on the Israelites to cry
out for flesh again, especially for the flesh and the savoury vege-
tables in which Egypt abounded. The words " they wept again"
(Stiff used adverbially, as in Gen. xxvi. 18, etc.) point back to the
former complaints of the people respecting the absence of flesh in
the desert of Sin (Ex. xvi. 2 sqq.), although there is nothing said
about their weeping there. By the flesh which they missed, we are
not to understand either the fish which they expressly mention in
the following verse (as in Lev. xi. 11), or merely oxen, sheep, and
goats ; but the word 1^3 signifies flesh generally, as being a better
kind of food than the bread-like manna. It is true they possessed
herds of cattle, but these would not have been sufficient to supply
their wants, as cattle could not be bought for slaughtering, and it
pent. — vol. ni. E
Digitized by
Google
66 THE FOUETH BOOK OF MOSES.
was necessary to spare what they had. The greedy people also
longed for other flesh, and said, " We remember the fish which we
ate in Egypt for nothing" Even if fish could not be had for nothing
in Egypt, according to the extravagant assertions of the murmurers,
it is certain that it could be procured for such nominal prices that
even the poorest of the people could eat it. The abundance of the
fish in the Nile and the neighbouring waters is attested unanimously
by both classical writers (e.g. Diod. Sic. i. 36, 52 ; Herod, ii. 93 ;
Strabo, xvii. p. 829) and modern travellers (cf . Hengstenberg, Egypt,
etc., p. 211 Eng. tr.). This also applies to the vegetables for which
the Israelites longed in the desert. The D*KB>j?, or cucumbers, which
are still called hatteh or chate in the present day, are a species differing
from the ordinary cucumbers in size and colour, and distinguished
for softness and sweet flavour, and are described by Forskal (Flor.
Aeg. p. 168), as fructus in JEgypto omnium vulgatissimus, totis
plantatus agris. D'ntsOK : water-melons, which are still called battieh
in modern Egypt, and are both cultivated in immense quantities
and sold so cheaply in the market, that the poor as well as the rich
can enjoy their refreshing flesh and cooling juice (see Sonnini in
Hengstenberg, ut sup. p. 212). W does not signify grass here, but,
according to the ancient versions, chives, from their grass-like ap-
pearance ; laudatissimus porrus in JEgypto (Plin. h. n. 19, 33).
DvX3 : onions, which flourish better in Egypt than elsewhere, and
have a mild and pleasant taste. According to Herod, ii. 125, they
were the ordinary food of the workmen at the pyramids ; and, ac-
cording to Hasselquist, Sonnini, and others, they still form almost the
only food of the poor, and are also a favourite dish with all classes,
either roasted, or boiled as a vegetable, and eaten with animal food.
Dnw : garlic, which is still called turn, torn in the East {Seetzen, iii.
p. 234), and is mentioned by Herodotus in connection with onions,
as forming a leading article of food with the Egyptian workmen.
Of all these things, which had been cheap as well as refreshing,
not one was to be had in the desert. Hence the people complained
still further, " and now our soul is dried away" i.e. faint for want
of strong and refreshing food, and wanting in fresh vital power
(cf. Ps. xxii. 16, cii. 5) : " we have nothing (53 ft?, there is nothing
in existence, equivalent to nothing to be had) except that our eye
(falls) upon this manna" i.e. we see nothing else before us but the
manna, sc. which has no juice, and supplies no vital force. Greedi-
ness longs for juicy and savoury food, and in fact, as a rule, for
change of food and stimulating flavour. " This is the perverted
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XI. 10-16. 67
nature of man, which cannot continue in the quiet enjoyment of
what is clean and unmixed, but, from its own inward discord, desires
a stimulating admixture of what is sharp and sour" (Baumgarteri).
To point "out this inward perversion on the part of the murmuring
people, Moses once more described the nature, form, and taste of
the manna, and its mode of preparation, as a pleasant food which
God sent down to His people with the dew of heaven (see at Ex.
xvi. 14, 15, and 31). But this sweet bread of heaven wanted " the
sharp and sour, which are required to give a stimulating flavour to
the food of man, on account of his sinful, restless desires, and the
incessant changes of his earthly life." In this respect the manna
resembled the spiritual food supplied by the word of God, of which
the sinful heart of man may also speedily become weary, and turn
to the more piquant productions of the spirit of the world.
Vers. 10-15. When Moses heard the people weep, " according
to their families, every one before the door of his tent" i.e. heard
complaining in all the families in front of every tent, so that the
weeping had become universal throughout the whole nation (cf.
Zech. xii. 12 sqq.), and the wrath of the Lord burned on account
of it, and the thing displeased Moses also, he brought his complaint
to the Lord. The words " Moses also was displeased," are introduced
as a circumstantial clause, to explain the matter more clearly, and
show the reason for the complaint which Moses poured out before
the Lord, and do not refer exclusively either to the murmuring of
the people or to the wrath of Jehovah, but to both together. This
follows evidently from the position in which the clause stands
between the two antecedent clauses in ver. 10 and the apodosis in
ver. 11, and still more evidently from the complaint of Moses which
follows. For "the whole attitude of Moses shows that his dis-
pleasure was excited not merely by the unrestrained rebellion of
the people against Jehovah, but also by the unrestrained wrath of
Jehovah against the nation" (Kurtz). But in what was the wrath
of Jehovah manifested ? It broke out against the people first of
all when they had been satiated with flesh (ver. 33). There is no
mention of any earlier manifestation. Hence Moses can only have
discovered a sign of the burning wrath of Jehovah in the fact that,
although the discontent of the people burst forth in loud cries, God
did not help, but withdrew with His help, and let the whole storm
of the infuriated people burst upon him. — Vers. 11 sqq. In Moses'
complaint there is an unmistakeable discontent arising from the
excessive burden of his office. " Why hast TJiou done evil to Thy
Digitized by
Google
68 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
servant f and why Jiave I not found favour in Thy sight, to lay upon
me the burden of all this people ?" The " burden of all this people"
is the expression which he uses to denote u the care of governing
the people, and providing everything for it" (C. a. Lap.). This
burden, which God imposed upon him in connection with his office,
appeared to him a bad and ungracious treatment on the part of
God. This is the language of the discontent of despair, which
differs from the murmuring of unbelief, in the fact that it is ad-
dressed to God, for the purpose of entreating help and deliverance
from Him ; whereas unbelief complains of the ways of God, but
while complaining of its troubles, does not pray to the Lord its God.
" Have I conceived all this people" Moses continues, " or have I
brought it forth, that Thou requirest me to. carry it in my bosom, as a
nursing father carries the suckling, into the promised land t" He
does not intend by these words to throw off entirely all care for the
people, but simply to plead with God that the duty of carrying and
providing for Israel rests with Him, the Creator and Father of
Israel (Ex. iv. 22 ; Isa. lxiii. 16). Moses, a weak man, was wanting
in the omnipotent power which alone could satisfy the crying of
the people for flesh. vJ? Q3), " they weep unto me," i.e. they come
weeping to ask me to relieve their distress. " I am not able to carry
this burden alone ; it is too heavy for me" — Ver. 15. " If Thou
deal thus with me, then kill me quite (^ inf. abs., expressive of the
uninterrupted process of killing ; see Ewald, § 280, b.), if I have
found favour in Thine eyes {i.e. if Thou wilt show me favour), and
let me not see my misfortune." "My misfortune :" i.e. the calamity
to which I must eventually succumb.
Vers. 16-23. There was good ground for his complaint. The
burden of the office laid upon the shoulders of Moses was really too
heavy for one man ; and even the discontent which broke out in the
complaint was nothing more than an outpouring of zeal for the
office assigned him by God, under the burden of which his strength
would eventually break down, unless he received some support. He
was not tired of the office, but would stake his life for it if God
did not relieve him in some way, as office and life were really one
in him. Jehovah therefore relieved him in the distress of which
he complained, without blaming the words of His servant, which
bordered on despair. " Gather unto Me" He said to Moses (vers.
16, 17), " seventy men of the elders of Israel, whom thou knowest as
elders and officers (shoterim, see Ex. v. 6) of the people, and bring
them unto the tabernacle, that they may place themselves there with
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XI. 24-80. 69
thee. I will come down (see at ver. 25) and speak with thee there,
and will take of the spirit which is upon thee, and will put it upon
them, that they may hear the burden of the people with thee." — Vers.
18 sqq. Jehovah would also relieve the complaining of the people,
and that in such a way that the murmurers should experience at
the same time the holiness of His judgments. The people were to
sanctify themselves for- the next day, and were then to eat flesh
(receive flesh to eat). E^P^n (as in Ex. xix. 10), to prepare them-
selves hy purifications for the revelation of the glory of God in the
miraculous gift of flesh. Jehovah would give them flesh, so that
they should eat it not one day, or two, or five, or ten, or twenty,
but a whole month long (of " days," as in Gen. xxix. 14, xli. 1),
" till it come out of your nostrils, and become loathsome unto you,"
as a punishment for having despised Jehovah in the midst of them,
in their contempt of the manna given by God, and for having
shown their regret at leaving the land of Egypt in their longing for
the provisions of that land. — Vers. 21 sqq. When Moses thereupon
expressed his amazement at the promise of God to provide flesh
for 600,000 men for a whole month long even to satiety, and said,
" Shall flocks and herds be slain for them, to suffice them? or shall all
the fish of the sea be gathered together for them, to suffice them ?" he
was answered by the words, " Is the arm of Jehovah too short (i.e.
does it not reach' far enough ; is it too weak and powerless) 1 Thou
shali see now whether My word shall come to pass unto thee or not"
Vers. 24-30. After receiving from the Lord this reply to his
complaint, Moses went out (sc. " of the tabernacle," where he had
laid his complaint before the Lord) into the camp ; and having
made known to the people the will of God, gathered together
seventy men of the elders of the people, and directed them to station
themselves around the tabernacle. " Around the tabernacle," does
not signify in this passage on all four sides, but in a semicircle
around the front of the tabernacle ; the verb is used in this sense
in chap. xxi. 4, when it is applied to the march round Edom. —
Ver. 25. Jehovah then came down in the cloud, which soared on
high above the tabernacle, and now came down to the door of it
(chap. xii. 5 ; Ex. xxxiii. 9 ; Deut. xxxi. 15). The statement in
chap. ix. 18 sqq., and Ex. xl. 37, 38, that the cloud dwelt (V?f)
above the dwelling of the tabernacle during the time of encamp-
ment, can be reconciled with this without any difficulty ; since the
only idea that we can form of this " dwelling upon it" is, that the
cloud stood still, soaring in quietness above the tabernacle, without
Digitized by
Google
70 THE FOUBTH BOOK OF MOSES.
moving to and fro like a cloud driven by the wind. There is no
such discrepancy, therefore, as Knobel finds in these statements.
When Jehovah had come down, He spoke to Moses, sc. to explain
to him and to the elders what was about to be done, and then laid
upon the seventy elders of the Spirit which was upon him. We
are not to understand this as implying, that the fulness of the Spirit
possessed by Moses was diminished in consequence ; still less to
regard it, with Calvin, as signum indignationis, or nota ignominice,
which God intended to stamp upon him. For the Spirit of God is
not something material, which is diminished by being divided, but
resembles a flame of fire, which does not decrease in intensity, but
increases rather by extension. As Theodoret observed, " Just as a
person who kindles a thousand flames from one, does not lessen the
first, whilst he communicates light to the others, so God did not
diminish the grace imparted to Moses by the fact that He com-
municated of it to the seventy." God did this to show to Moses,
as well as to the whole nation, that the Spirit which Moses had
received was perfectly sufficient for the performance of the duties
of his office, and that no supernatural increase of that Spirit was
needed, but simply a strengthening of the natural powers of Moses
by the support of men who, when endowed with the power of the
Spirit that was taken from him, would help him to bear the burden
of his office. We have no description of the way in which this
transference took place; it is therefore impossible to determine
whether it was effected by a sign which would strike the outward
senses, or passed altogether within the sphere of the Spirifs life, in
a manner which corresponded to the nature of the Spirit itself. In
any case, however, it must have been effected in such a way, that
Moses and the elders received a convincing proof of the reality of
the affair. When the Spirit descended upon the elders, " they
prophesied, and did not add ;" i.e. they did not repeat the prophe-
syings any further. ^B?J *6| is rendered correctly by the LXX.,
ical ovk eri vpoaedano ; the rendering supported by the Vulgate
and Onkelos, nee ultro cessaverunt (" and ceased not"), is incorrect.
K33nn, " to prophesy," is to be understood generally, and especially
here, not as the foretelling of future things, but as speaking in an
ecstatic and elevated state of mind, under the impulse and inspira-
tion of the Spirit of God, just like the " speaking with tongues,"
which frequently followed the gift of the Holy Ghost in the days
of the apostles. But we are not to infer from the fact, that the
prophesying was not repeated, that the Spirit therefore departed
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XI. 24-8d. 71
from them after this one extraordinary manifestation. This mira-
culous manifestation of the Spirit was intended simply to give to
the whole nation the visible proof that God had endowed them with
His Spirit, as helpers of Moses, and had given them the authority
required for the exercise of their calling. — Ver. 26. But in order
to prove to the whole congregation that the Spirit of the Lord was
working there, the Spirit came not only upon the elders assembled
round Moses, and in front of the tabernacle, but also upon two
of the persons who had been chosen, viz. Eldad and Medad, who
had remained behind in the camp, for some reason that is not
reported, so that they also prophesied. " Them that were written,"
conscripti, for " called," because the calling of the elders generally
took place in writing, from which we may see how thoroughly the
Israelites had acquired the art of writing in Egypt. — Vers. 27, 28.
This phenomenon in the camp itself produced such excitement, that
a boy (TWO) with the article like BvB? in Gen. xiv. 13) reported
the thing to Moses, whereupon Joshua requested Moses to prohibit
the two from prophesying. Joshua felt himself warranted in doing
this, because he had been Moses' servant from his youth up (see at
Ex. xvii. 9), and in this capacity he regarded the prophesying of
these men in the camp as detracting from the authority of his lord,
since they had not received this gift from Moses, at least not
through his mediation. Joshua was jealous for the honour of
Moses, just as the disciples of Jesus, in Mark ix. 38, 39, were for
the honour of their Lord ; and he was reproved by Moses, as the
latter afterwards were by Christ. — Ver. 29. Moses replied, " Art
thou jealous for me ? Would that all tlie Lord's people were prophets,
that Jehovah would put His Spirit upon them /" As a true servant
of God, who sought not his own glory, but the glory of his God,
and the spread of His kingdom, Moses rejoiced in this manifesta-
tion of the Spirit of God in the midst of the nation, and desired
that all might become partakers of this grace. — Ver. 30. Moses
returned with the elders into the camp, sc. from the tabernacle,
which stood upon an open space in the midst of the camp, at some
distance from the tents of the Levites and the rest of the tribes of
Israel, which were pitched around it, so that whoever wished to go
to it, had first of all to go out of his tent. 1
1 For the purpose of overthrowing the historical character of this marvellous
event, the critics, from Vater to Knobel, have identified the appointment of the
seventy elders to support Moses with the judicial institute established at Sinai
by the advice of Jethro (Ex. xviii.), and adduce the obvious differences
Digitized by
Google
72 THE FOTJBTH BOOK OF MOSES.
No account has been handed down of the further action of this
committee of elders. It is impossible to determine, therefore, in
what way they assisted Moses in bearing the burden of governing
the people. All that can be regarded as following unquestionably
from the purpose given here is, that they did not form a permanent
body, which continued from the time of Moses to the Captivity, and
after the Captivity was revived again in the Sanhedrim, as -Tal-
mudists, Eabbins, and many of the earlier theologians suppose (see
Selden de Synedriis, I. i. c. 14, ii. c. 4 ; Jo. Marcldi sylloge disser-
tatt. phil. iheol. ad V. T. exercit. 12, pp. 343 sqq.). On the opposite
side vid. Selandi Antiquitates, ss. ii. 7, 3 ; Carpz. apparat. pp. 573
sq., etc.
Vers. 31-34. As soon as Moses had returned with the elders
into the camp, God fulfilled His second promise. " A wind arose
from Jehovah, and brought quails (salvim, see Ex. xvi. 13) over from
the sea, and threw them over the camp about a day's journey wide
from here and there (i.e. on both sides), in the neighbourhood of the
camp, and about two cubits above the surface" The wind was a
south-east wind (Ps. lxxviii. 26), which blew from the Arabian
Gulf and brought the quails — which fly northwards in the spring
from the interior of Africa in very great numbers (see vol. ii. p.
67) — from the sea to the Israelites. w, which only occurs here
and in the Psalm of Moses (Ps. xc. 10), signifies to drive over, in
between these two entirely different institutions as arguments for the supposed
diversity of documents and legends. But what ground is there for identifying
things so totally different from one another ? The assertion of Knobel, that in
Deut. i. 9-18, Moses " evidently" refers to both events (Ex. xviii. and Num. xi.),
is unfounded and untrue. Or are the same official duties and rank assigned to
the elders who were chosen as judges in Ex. xviii., as to the seventy elders who
were called by God, and endowed with His Spirit, that they might help Moses
to govern the people who had rebelled against him and against Jehovah on
account of the want of flesh, and to restore and uphold the authority of Moses
as the divinely chosen leader of Israel, which had been shaken thereby ? Can
the judges of a land be identified without reserve with the executive of the
land ? The mere fact, that this executive court was chosen, like the judges,
from the whole body of elders, does not warrant us in identifying the two
institutions. Nor does it follow from the fact, that at Sinai seventy of the elders
of Israel ascended the mountain with Moses, Aaron, and his sons, and there saw
God (Ex. xxiv. 9 sqq.), that the seventy persons chosen here were the same
as the seventy mentioned there. The sameness of the numbers does not prove
that the persons were the same, but Bimply that the number seventy was the
most suitable, on account of its historical and symbolical significance, to form
a representation of the whole body of the people. For a further refutation of
this futile objection, see Ranke, Unterss. iib. d. Pent. II. pp. 183 sqq.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XL 81-84. 73
Arabic and Syriac to pass over, not " to cut off," as the Rabbins
suppose : the wind cut off the quails from the sea. Etoj, to throw
them scattered about (Ex. xxix. 5, xxxi. 12, xxxii. 4). The idea
is not that the wind caused the flock of quails to spread itself out
as much as two days' journey over the camp, and to fly about two
cubits above the surface of the ground ; so that, being exhausted
with their flight across the sea, they fell partly into the hands of
the Israelites and partly upon the ground, as Knobel follows the
Vulgate (volabant in aire duobus cubitis altitudine super terratri) and
many of the Rabbins in supposing : for ^TOri ?j> e>'tM does not
mean to cause to fly or spread out over the camp, but to throw
over or upon the camp. The words cannot therefore be understood
in any other way than they are in Ps. Ixxviii. 27, 28, viz. that the
wind threw them about over the camp, so that they fell upon the
ground a day's journey on either side of it, and that in such num-
bers that they lay, of course not for the whole distance mentioned,
but in places about the camp, as much as two cubits deep. It is only
in this sense of the words, that the people could possibly gather
quails the whole of that day, the whole night, and the whole of the
next day, in such quantities that he who had gathered but little
had collected ten homers. A homer, the largest measure of capacity
among the Hebrews, which contained ten ephahs, held, according
to the lower reckoning of Thenius, 10,143 Parisian inches, or about
two bushels Dresden measure. By this enormous quantity, which
so immensely surpassed the natural size of the flocks of quails, God
purposed to show the people His power, to give them flesh not for
one day or several days, but for a whole month, both to put to
shame their unbelief, and also to punish their greediness. As they
could not eat this quantity all at once, they spread them round the
camp to dry in the sun, in the same manner in which the Egyp-
tians are in the habit of drying fish (Herod, ii. 77). — Ver. 33. But
while the flesh was still between their teeth, and before it was
ground, i.e. masticated, the wrath of the Lord burned against them,
and produced among the people a very great destruction. This
catastrophe is not to be regarded as "the effect of the excessive
quantity of quails that they had eaten, on account of the quails
feeding upon things which are injurious to man, so that eating the
flesh of quails produces convulsions and giddiness (for proofs, see
Bochart, Hieroz. ii. pp. 657 sqq.)," as Knobel supposes, but as an
extraordinary judgment inflicted by God upon the greedy people,
by which a great multitude of people were suddenly swept away.
c
Digitized by
Google
74 THE FOUBTH BOOK OF MOSES.
— Ver. 34. From this judgment the place of encampment received
the name Kibroth-hattaavah, i.e. graves of greediness, because there
the people found their graves while giving vent to their greedy
desires.
Ver. 35. From the graves of greediness the people removed to
Hazeroih, and there they remained (>?>} as in Ex. xxiv. 12). The
situation of these two places of encampment is altogether unknown.
Hazeroih, it is true, has been regarded by many since Burckhardt
(Syr. p. 808) as identical with the modern Hadhra (in Robinson's
Pal. Ain el Hvdhera), eighteen hours to the north-east of Sinai,
partly because of the resemblance in the name, and partly because
there are not only low palm-trees and bushes there, but also a
spring, of which Robinson says (Pal. i. p. 223) that it is the only
spring in the neighbourhood, and yields tolerably good water,
though somewhat brackish, the whole year round. But Hadhra
does not answer to the Hebrew ivrt, to shut in, from which
Hazeroih (enclosures) is derived ; and there are springs in many
other places in the desert of et Tih with both drinkable and brack-
ish water. Moreover, the situation of this well does not point to
Hadhra, which is only two days' journey from Sinai, so that the
Israelites might at any rate have pitched their tents by this well
after their first journey of three days (chap. x. 33), whereas they
took three days to reach the graves of lust, and then marched from
thence to Hazeroth. Consequently they would only have come to
Hadhra on the supposition that they had been about to take the
road to the sea, and intended to march along the coast to the
Arabah, and so on through the Arabah to the Dead Sea (Robinson,
p. 223) ; in which case, however, they would not have arrived at
Kadesh. The conjecture that Kibroth-hattaavah is the same as
Di-Sahab (Deut. i. 1), the modern Dahab (Mersa Dahab, Minna el
Dahab), to the east of Sinai, on the Elanitic Gulf, is still more
untenable. For what end could be answered by such a circuitous
route, which, instead of bringing the Israelites nearer to the end of
their journey, would have taken them to Mecca rather than to
Canaan ? As the Israelites proceeded from Hazeroth to Kadesh
in the desert of Paran (chap. xiii. 3 and 26), they must have
marched from Sinai to Canaan by the most direct route, through
the midst of the great desert of et Tih, most probably by the desert
road which leads from the Wady es Sheikh into the Wady ez-Zura-
nuk, which breaks through the southern border mountains of et Tih,
and passes on through the Wady ez-Zalakah over el Ain to Bir-et-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XII. 1-3. 75
Themmed, and then due north past Jebel Araif to the Hebron
road. By this route they could go from Horeb to Kadesh Barnea
in eleven days (Dent. i. 2), and it is here that we are to seek for
the two stations in question. Hazeroth is probably to be found, as
Fries and Kurtz suppose, in Bir-et-Themmed, and Kibroth-hatta-
avah in the neighbourhood of the southern border mountains of
et Tih.
REBELLION OF MIRIAM AND AAEON AGAINST MOSES. — CHAP. XII.
Vers. 1-3. All the rebellions of the people hitherto had arisen
from, dissatisfaction with the privations of the desert march, and
had been directed against Jehovah rather than against Moses.
And if, in the case of the last one, at Kibroth-hattaavah, even
Moses was about to lose heart under the heavy burden of his office ;
the faithful covenant God had given the whole nation a practical
proof, in the manner in which He provided him support in the
seventy elders, that He had not only laid the burden of the whole
nation upon His servant Moses, but had also communicated to him
the power of His Spirit, which was requisite to enable him to carry
this burden. Thus not only was his heart filled with new courage
when about to despair, but his official position in relation to all the
Israelites was greatly exalted. This elevation of Moses excited
envy on the part of his brother and sister, whom God had also
richly endowed and placed so high, that Miriam was distinguished
as a prophetess above all the women of Israel, whilst Aaron had been
raised by his investiture with the high-priesthood into the spiritual
head of the whole nation. But the pride of the natural heart was
not satisfied with this. They would dispute with their brother Moses
the pre-eminence of his special calling and his exclusive position,
which they might possibly regard themselves as entitled to contest
with him not only as his brother and sister, but also as the nearest
supporters of his vocation. Miriam was the instigator of the open
rebellion, as we may see both from the fact that her name stands
before that of Aaron, and also from the use of the feminine verb
"•ST? in ver. 1. Aaron followed her, being no more able to resist
the suggestions of his sister, than he had formerly been to resist the
desire of the people for a golden idol (Ex. xxxii.). Miriam found
an occasion for the manifestation of her discontent in the Cushite
wife whom Moses had taken. This wife cannot have been Zip-
porah the Midianite : for even though Miriam might possibly
Digitized by
Google
76 THE FOUBTH BOOK OF MOSES.
have called her a Cushite, whether because the Cushite tribes
dwelt in Arabia, or in a contemptuous sense as a Moor or Hamite,
the author would certainly not have confirmed this at all events
inaccurate, if not contemptuous epithet, by adding, "for he had
taken a Cushite wife;" to say nothing of the improbability of
Miriam having made the marriage which her brother had con-
tracted when he was a fugitive in a foreign land, long before he
was called by God, the occasion of reproach so many years after-
wards. It would be quite different if, a short time before, probably
after the death of Zipporah, he had contracted a second marriage
with a Cushite woman, who either sprang from the Cushites dwell-
ing in Arabia, or from the foreigners who had come out of Egypt
along with the Israelites. This marriage would not have been wrong
in itself, as God had merely forbidden the Israelites to marry the
daughters of Canaan (Ex. xxxiv. 16), even if Moses had not con-
tracted it " with the deliberate intention of setting forth through this
marriage with a Hamite woman the fellowship between Israel and
the heathen, so far as it could exist under the law; and thus prac-
tically exemplifying in his own person that equality between the
foreigners and Israel which the law demanded in various ways"
(Baumgarten), or of " prefiguring by this example the future union
of Israel with the most remote of the heathen," as 0. v. Gerlach
and many of the fathers suppose. In the taunt of the brother
and sister, however, we meet with that carnal exaggeration of the
Israelitish nationality which forms so all-pervading a characteristic
of this nation, and is the more reprehensible the more it rests upon
the ground of nature rather than upon the spiritual calling of Israel
(Kurtz). — Ver. 2. Miriam and Aaron said, "Hath Jehovali then
spoken only by Moses, and not also by us?" Are not we — the high
priest Aaron, who brings the rights of the congregation before
Jehovah in the Urim and Thummim (Ex. xxviii. 30), and the
prophetess Miriam (Ex. xv. 20) — also organs and mediators of
divine revelation ? " They are proud of the prophetic gift, which
ought rather to have fostered modesty in them. But such is the
depravity of human nature, that they not only abuse the gifts of
God towards the brother whom, they despise, but by an ungodly
and sacrilegious, glorification extol the gifts themselves in such a
manner as to hide the Author of the gifts" (Calvin). — "And Jelw-
vah heard." This is stated for the purpose of preparing the way
for the judicial interposition of God. When God hears what is
wrong, He must proceed to stop it by punishment. Moses might
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XII. 1-3. 77
also have heard what they said, but " the man Moses was very meek
(7rpav<s, LXX., mitts, Vulg.; not 'plagued,' geplagt, as Luther renders
it), more than all men upon the earth." No one approached Moses
in meekness, because no one was raised so high by God as he was.
The higher the position which a man occupies among his fellow-
men, the harder is it for the natural man to bear attacks upon him-
self with meekness,especially if they are directed against his official
rank and honour. This remark as to the character of Moses serves
to bring out to view the position of the person attacked, and points •
out thereason why Moses not only abstained from all self-defence,
but did not even cry to God for vengeance on account of the injury
that had been done to him. Because he was the meekest of all
men, he could calmly leave this attack upon himself to the all-wise
and righteous Judge, who had both called and qualified him for his
office. " For this is the idea of the eulogium of his meekness. It
is as if Moses had said that he had swallowed the injury in silence,
inasmuch as he had imposed a law of patience upon himself because
of his meekness" (Calvin).
The self-praise on the part of Moses, which many have dis-
covered in this description of his character, and on account of
which some even of the earlier expositors regarded this verse as a
later gloss, whilst more recent critics have used it as an argument
against the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, is not an ex-
pression of vain self-display, or a glorification of his own gifts
and excellences, which he prided himself upon possessing above all
others. It is simply a statement, which was indispensable to a full
and correct interpretation of all the circumstances, and which was
made quite objectively, with reference to the character which
Moses had not given to himself but had acquired through the
grace of God, and which he never falsified from the very time of
his calling until the day of his death, either at the rebellion of the
people at Kibroth-hattaavah (chap, xi.), or at the water of strife
at Kadesh (chap. xx.). His despondency under the heavy burden
of his office in the former case (chap, xi.) speaks rather for than
against the meekness of his character; and the sin at Kadesh
(chap, xx.) consisted simply in the fact, that he suffered himself to
be brought to doubt either the omnipotence of God, or the pos-
sibility of divine help, on account of the unbelief of the people. 1
1 There is not a word in Num. xx. 10 or Ps. cvi. 82 to the effect, that
' ' his dissatisfaction broke out into evident passion " (Kurtz). And it is quite a
mistake to observe, that in the case* before us there was nothing at all to pro-
Digitized by
Google
78 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
No doubt it was only such a man as Moses who could speak of
himself in such a way, — a man who had so entirely sacrificed his
own personality to the office assigned him by the Lord, that he
was ready at any moment to stake his life for the cause and glory of
the Lord (cf. chap. xi. 15, and Ex. xxxii. 32), and of whom Calmet
observes with as much truth as force, a As he praises himself here
without pride, so he will blame himself elsewhere with humility,"
— a man of God whose character is not to be measured by the
standard of ordinary men (cf . Hengstenberg, Dissertations, vol. ii.
pp. 141 sqq.).
Vers. 4-10. Jehovah summoned the opponents of His servant
to come at once before His judgment-seat. He commanded Moses,
Aaron, and Miriam suddenly to come out of the camp (see at
chap. xi. 30) to the tabernacle. Then He Himself came down in
a pillar of cloud to the door of the tabernacle, Le. to the entrance
to the court, not to the dwelling itself, and called Aaron and
Miriam out, i.e. commanded them to come out of the court, 1 and
said to them (vers. 6 sqq.) : " If there is a propliet of Jehovah to
you (i.e. if you have one), / make Myself known to him in a vision ;
I speak to him in a dream (ia, lit. " in him," inasmuch as a revela-
tion in a dream fell within the inner sphere of the soul-life). Not
so My servant Moses : he is approved in My whole Jwuse ; mouth to
mouth I speak to him, and as an appearance, and that not in enigmas ;
and he sees the form of Jehovah. Why are ye not afraid to speak
against My servant, against Moses ? " BK'Ii = D3? 602J, the suffix
used with the noun instead of the separate pronoun in the dative,
as in Gen. xxxix. 21, Lev. xv. 3, etc. The noun Jehovah is in all
probability to be taken as a genitive, in connection with the word
voke Moses to appeal to his meekness, since it was not his meekness, that Miriam
had disputed, but only his prophetic call. If such grounds as these are inter-
polated into the words of Moses, and it is to be held that an attack upon the
prophetic calling does not involve such an attack upon the person as might
have excited anger, it is certainly impossible to maintain the Mosaic authorship
of this statement as to the character of Moses ; for the vanity of wishing to
procure the recognition of his meekness by praising it, cannot certainly be
imputed to Moses the man of God.
1 The discrepancy discovered by Knobel, in the fact that, according to the
so-called Elohist, no one but Moses, Aaron, ahd the sons of Aaron were allowed
to enter the sanctuary, whereas, according to the Jehovist, others did bo,—
e.g. Miriam here, and Joshua in Ex. xxxiii. 11, — rests entirely upon a ground-
less fancy, arising from a misinterpretation, as there is not a word about
entering the sanctuary, i.e. the dwelling itself, either in the verse before us or
in Ex. xxxiii. 11.
Digitizi
ed by Google
CHAP. XII. 4-10. 79
D3K*33 (" a prophet to you "), as it is in the LXX. and Vulg., and
not to be construed with the words which follow (" / Jeliovah will
make Myself known"). The position of Jehovah at the head of the
clause without a preceding *33K (I) would be much more remark-
able than the separation of the dependent noun from the governing
noun by the suffix, which occurs in other cases also (e.g. Lev. vi.
3, xxvi. 42, etc.) ; moreover, it would be by no means suited to
the sense, as no such emphasis is laid upon the fact that it was
Jehovah who made Himself known, as to require or even justify
such a construction. The " whole house of Jehovah " (ver. 7) is not
"primarily His dwelling, the holy tent" (Baumgarten), — for, in
' that case, the word " whole " would be quite superfluous, — 'but the
whole house of Israel, or the covenant nation regarded as a kingdom,
to the administration and government of which Moses had been
called : as a matter of fact, therefore, the whole economy of the
Old Testament, having its central point in the holy tent, which
Jehovah had caused to be built as the dwelling-place of His name.
It did not terminate, however, in the service of the sanctuary, as
we may see from the fact that God did not make the priests who
were entrusted with the duties of the sanctuary the organs of His
saving revelation, but raised up and called prophets after Moses
for that purpose. Compare the expression in Heb. iii. 6, " Whose
house we are." t?*?J with 3 does not mean to be, or become, en-
trusted with anything {Baumgarten, Knobel), but simply to be last-
ing, firm, constant, in a local or temporal sense (Deut. xxviii. 59 ; 1
Sam. ii. 35 ; 2 Sam. vii. 16, etc.) ; in a historical sense, to prove or
attest one's self (Gen. xlii. 20) ; and in an ethical sense, to be found
proof, trustworthy, true (Ps. Ixxviii. 8 ; 1 Sam. iii. 20, xxii. 14 :
see Delitzsch on Heb. iii. 2). In the participle, therefore, it signi-
fies proved, faithful, tnar6<; (LXX.). " Mouth to mouth " answers
to the "face to face" in Ex. xxxiii. 11 (cf. Deut. xxxiv. 10), i.e.
without any mediation or reserve, but with the same closeness and
freedom with which friends converse together (Ex. xxxiii. 11).
This is still further strengthened and elucidated by the words in
apposition, u in the form of seeing (appearance), and not in riddles"
i.e. visibly, and not in a dark, hidden, enigmatical way. '"^H?
is an accusative defining the mode, and signifies here not vision,
as in ver. 6, but adspectus, view, sight ; for it forms an antithesis
to n«")B3 in ver. 6. " The form (Eng. similitude) of Jehovah" was
not the essential nature of God, His unveiled glory, — for this no
mortal man can see (vid. Ex. xxxiii. 18 sqq.), — but a form which
Digitized by
Google
80 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
manifested the invisible God to the eye of man in a clearly dis-
cernible mode, and which was essentially different, not only from
the visionary sight of God in the form of a man (Ezek. i. 26 ; Dan.
vii. 9 and 13), but also from the appearances of God in the outward
world of the senses, in the person and form of the angel of Jehovah,
and stood in the same relation to these two forms of revelation, so
far as directness and clearness were concerned, as the sight of a
person in a dream to that of the actual figure of the person himself.
God talked with Moses without figure, in the clear distinctness of a
spiritual communication, whereas to the prophets He only revealed
Himself through the medium of ecstasy or dream.
Through this utterance on the part of Jehovah, Moses is placed
above all the prophets, in relation to God and also to the whole
nation; The divine revelation to the prophets is thereby restricted
to the two forms of inward intuition (vision and dream). It fol-
lows from this, that it had always a visionary character, though it
" might vary in intensity ; and therefore that it had always more or
less obscurity about it, because the clearness of self-consciousness
and the distinct perception of an external world, both receded
before the inward intuition, in a dream as well as in a vision. The
prophets were consequently simply organs, through whom Jehovah
made known His counsel and will at certain times, and in relation
to special circumstances and features in the development of His
kingdom. It was not so with Moses. Jehovah had placed him
over all His house, had called him to be the founder and organizer
of the kingdom established in Israel through his mediatorial service,
and had found him faithful in His service. With this servant
(depairav, LXX.) of His, He spake mouth to mouth, without a
figure or figurative cloak, with the distinctness of a human inter-
change of thought ; so that at any time he could inquire of God
and wait for the divine reply. Hence Moses was not a prophet of
Jehovah, like many others, not even merely the first and highest
prophet, primus inter pares, but stood above all the prophets, as the
founder of the theocracy, and mediator of the Old Covenant. Upon
this unparalleled relation of Moses to God and the theocracy, so
clearly expressed in the verses before us, the Rabbins have justly
founded their view as to the higher grade of inspiration in the
Thorah. This view is fully confirmed through the history of the
Old Testament kingdom of God, and the relation in which the
writings of the prophets stand to those of Moses. The prophets
subsequent to Moses simply continued to build upon the foundation
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XII. 11-16. 81
which Moses laid. And if Moses stood in this unparalleled relation
to the Lord, Miriam and Aaron sinned grievously against him,
when speaking as they did. Ver. 9. After this address, " the wrath
of Jeliovah burned against them, and He went" As a judge, with-
drawing from the judgment-seat when he has pronounced his sen-
tence, so Jehovah went, by the cloud in which He had come down
withdrawing from the tabernacle, and ascending up on high. And
at the same moment, Miriam, the instigator of the rebellion against
her brother Moses, was covered with leprosy, and became white as
snow.
Vers. 11—16. When Aaron saw his sister smitten in this way,
he said to Moses, u Alas ! my lord, I beseech thee, lay not this sin
upon us, for we have done foolishly ;" i.e. let us not bear its punish-
ment. "Let her (Miriam) not be as the dead thing, on whose coming
out of its mother's womb half its flesh is consumed;" i.e. like a still-
born child, which comes into the world half decomposed. His reason
for making this comparison was, that leprosy produces decomposi-
tion in the living body. — Ver. 13. Moses, with his mildness, took
compassion upon his sister, upon whom this punishment had fallen,
and cried to the Lord, " God, I beseech Thee, heal her." The
connection of the particle W with ?N is certainly unusual, but yet
it is analogous to the construction with such exclamations as , is
(Jer. iv. 31, xlv. 3) and nan (Gen. xii. 11, xvi. 2, etc.) ; since $>N in
the* vocative is to be regarded as equivalent to an exclamation ;
whereas the alteration into ?K, as proposed by J. D. Michaelis and
Knobel, does not even give a fitting sense, apart altogether from the
fact, that the repetition of N3 after the verb, with W ?K before it,
would be altogether unexampled. — Vers. 14, 15. Jehovah hearkened
to His servant's prayer, though not without inflicting deep humilia-
tion upon Miriam. " If her father had but spit in her face, would
she not be ashamed seven days?" i.e. keep herself hidden from Me
out of pure shame. She was to be shut outside the camp, to be
excluded from the congregation as a leprous person for seven days,
and then to be received in again. Thus restoration and purification
from her leprosy were promised to her after the endurance of seven
days' punishment. Leprosy was the just punishment for her sin.
In her haughty exaggeration of the worth of her own prophetic
gift, she had placed herself on a par with Moses, the divinely ap-
pointed head of the whole nation, and exalted herself above the
congregation of the Lord. For this she was afflicted with a disease
which shut her out of the number of the members of the people of
PENT. — VOL. III. F
Digitized by
Google
82 THE FOUBTH BOOK OF MOSES.
God, and thus actually excluded from the camp ; so that she could
only be received back again after she had been healed, and by a
formal purification. The latter followed as a matter of course, from
Lev. xiii. and xiv., and did not need to be specially referred to here.
— Vers. 15J, 16. The people did not proceed any farther till the
restoration of Miriam. After this they departed from Hazeroth,
and encamped in the desert of Paran, namely at Kadesh, on the
southern boundary of Canaan. This is evident from chap, xiii.,
more especially ver. 26, as compared with Deut. i. 19 sqq., where
it is stated not merely that the spies, who were sent out from this
place of encampment to Canaan, returned to the congregation at
Kadesh, but that they set out from Kadesh-Barnea for Canaan,
because there the Israelites had come to the mountains of the
Amorites, which God had promised them for an inheritance.
With regard to the situation of Kadesh, it has already been
observed at Gen. xiv. 7, that it is probably to be sought for in the
neighbourhood of the fountain of Aim, Kades, which was discovered
by Rowland, to the south of Bir Seba and Khalasa, on the heights
of Jebel Helal, i.e. at the north-west corner of the mountain land
of Azazimeh, which is more closely described at chap. x. 12 (see pp.
57, 58), where the western slopes of this highland region sink gently
down into the undulating surface of the desert, which stretches
thence to El Arish, with a breadth of about six hours' journey, and
keeps the way open between Arabia Petraea and the south of Pales-
tine. " In the northern third of this western slope, the mountains
recede so as to leave a free space for a plain of about an hour's
journey in breadth, which comes towards the east, and to which
access is obtained through one or more of the larger wadys that are
to be seen here (such as Retemat, Kusaimeh, el Ain, Muweileh)."
At the north-eastern background of this plain, which forms almost
a rectangular figure of nine miles by five, or ten by six, stretching
from west to east, large enough to receive the camp of a wandering
people, and about twelve miles to the E.S.E. of Muweileh, there
rises, like a large solitary mass, at the edge of the mountains which
run on towards the north, a bare rock, at the foot of which there is
a copious spring, falling in ornamental cascades into the bed of a
brook, which is lost in the sand about 300 or 400 yards to the west.
This place still bears the ancient name of Kudes. There can be
no doubt as to the identity of this Kudes and the biblical Kadesh.
The situation agrees with all the statements in the Bible concerning
Kadesh : for example, that Israel had then reached the border of the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIII. XIV. 83
promised land ; also that the spies who were sent out from Kadesh
returned thither by coming from Hebron to the wilderness of Paran
(chap. xiii'. 26) ; and lastly, according to the assertions of the
Bedouins, as quoted by Rowland, this Kudes was ten or eleven
days' journey from Sinai (in perfect harmony with Deut. i. 2), and
was connected by passable wadys with Mount Hor. The Israelites
proceeded, no doubt, through the wady Retemat, i.e. Rithmah (see
at chap, xxxiii. 18), into the plain of Kadesh. (On the town of
Kadesh, see at chap. xx. 16.) 1
SPIES SENT OUT. MURMUEING OF THE PEOPLE, AND THEIR
PUNISHMENT. — CHAP. XIII. AND XIV.
When they had arrived at Kadesh r in the desert of Paran (chap,
xiii. 26), Moses sent out spies by the command of God, and accord-
ing to the wishes of the people, to explore the way by which they
could enter into Canaan, and also the nature of the land, of its
cities, and of its population (chap. xiii. 1-20). The men who were
sent out passed through the land, from the south to the northern
frontier, and on their return reported that the land was no doubt
one of pre-eminent goodness, but that it was inhabited by a strong
people, who had giants among them, and were in possession of very
large fortified towns (vers. 21-29) ; whereupon Caleb declared that it
was quite possible to conquer it, whilst the others despaired of over
coming the Canaanites, and spread an evil report among the people
concerning the land (vers. 30-33). The congregation then raised
a loud lamentation, and went so far in their murmuring against
Moses and Aaron, as to speak without reserve or secrecy of depos-
ing Moses, and returning to Egypt under another leader : they even
wanted to stone Joshua and Caleb, who tried to calm the excited
multitude, and urged them to trust in the Lord. But suddenly the
glory of the Lord interposed with a special manifestation of judg-
ment (chap. xiv. 1-10). Jehovah made known to Moses His reso-
lution to destroy the rebellious nation, but suffered Himself to be
moved by the intercession of Moses so far as to promise that He
would preserve the nation, though He would exclude the murmur-
ing multitude from the promised land (vers. 11-25). He then
directed. Moses and Aaron to proclaim to the people the following
1 See Kurtz, History of the Old Covenent, vol. iii. p. 225, where the current
notion, that Kadesh was situated on the western border of the Arabah, below
the Dead Sea, by either Ain Hasb or Ain el Weibeh, is successfully refuted.
Digitizi
ed by Google
84 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
punishment for their repeated rebellion : that they should bear their
iniquity for forty years in the wilderness ; that the whole nation
that had come out of Egypt should die there, with the exception of
Caleb and Joshua ; and that only their children should enter the
promised land (vers. 26-39). The people were shocked at this
announcement, and resolved to force a way into Canaan ; but, as
Moses predicted, they were beaten by the Canaanites and Amalekites,
and driven back to Hormah (vers. 40-45). 1
These events form a grand turning-point in the history of Israel,
in which the whole of the future history of the covenant nation is
typically reflected. The constantly repeated unfaithfulness of the
nation could not destroy the faithfulness of God, or alter His pur-
poses of salvation. In wrath Jehovah remembered mercy ; through
judgment He carried out His plan of salvation, that all the world
might know that no flesh was righteous before Him, and that the un-
belief and unfaithfulness of men could not overturn the truth of God.
Chap. xiii. 1-20. Despatch of the Spies to Canaan. —
Vers. 1 sqq. The command of Jehovah, to send out men to spy out
the land of Canaan, was occasioned, according to the account given
by Moses in Deut. i. 22 sqq., by a proposal of the congregation,
which pleased Moses, so that he laid the matter before the Lord,
who then commanded him to send out for this purpose, " of every
tribe of their fathers a man, every one a ruler among them, i&. none
1 According to Knobel, the account of these events arose from two or three
documents interwoven with one another in the following manner : chap. xiii.
l-17a, 21, 25, 26, 32, and xiv. 2a, 5-7, 106, 86-38, was written by the Elo-
hist, the remainder by the Jehovist, — chap. xiii. 22-24, 27-31, xiv. 16, 11-25,
39-45, being taken from his first document, and chap. xiii. 176-20, xiv. 26-4,
8-1 0a, 26-33, 35, from his second ; whilst, lastly, chap. xiii. S3, and the com-
mencement of chap. xiv. 1, were added from his own resources, because it con-
tains contradictory statements. " According to the Elohist," says this oritic,
" the spies went through the whole land (chap. xiii. 32, xiv. 7), and penetrated
even to the north of the country (chap. xiii. 21) : they took forty days to this
(chap. xiii. 25, xiv. 34) ; they had among them Joshua, whose name was altered
at that time (chap. xiii. 16), and who behaved as bravely as Caleb (chap. xiii. 8,
xiv. 6, 38). According to the Jehovistic completion, the spies did not go
through the whole land, but only entered into it (chap. xiii. 27), merely going
into the neighbourhood of Hebron, in the south country (chap. xiii. 22, 23) ;
there they saw the gigantic Anakites (chap. xiii. 22, 28, 33), cut off the large
bunch of grapes in the valley of Eshool (chap. xiii. 23, 24), and then came
back to Moses. Caleb was the only one who showed himself courageous, and
Joshua was not with them at all (chap. xiii. 30, xiv. 24)." But these discre-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIII. t-20. 85
but men who were princes in their tribes, who held the prominent
position of princes, i.e. distinguished persons of rank ; or, as it is
stated in ver. 3, " heads of the children of Israel," i.e. not the tribe-
princes of the twelve tribes, but those men, out of the total number
of the heads of the tribes and families of Israel, who were the most
suitable for such a mission, though the selection was to be made in
such a manner that every tribe should be represented by one of its
own chiefs. That there were none of the twelve tribe-princes
among them is apparent from a comparison of their names (vers.
4-15) with the (totally different) names of the tribe-princes (chap,
i. 3 sqq., vii. 12 sqq.). Caleb and Joshua are the only spies that
are known. The order, in which the tribes are placed in the list of
the names in vers. 4-15, differs from that in chap. i. 5-15 only in
the fact that in ver. 10 Zebulun is separated from the other sons of
Leah, and in ver. 11 Manasseh is separated from Ephraim. The
expression " of the tribe of Joseph," in ver. 11, stands for " of the
children of Joseph," in chap. i. 10, xxxiv. 23. At the close of the
list it is still further stated, that Moses called Hoshea (i.e. help), the
son of Nun, Jehoshua, contracted into Joshua (i.e. Jehovah-help,
equivalent to, whose help is Jehovah). This statement does not
present any such discrepancy, when compared with Ex. xvii. 9, 13,
xxiv. 13, xxxii. 17, xxxiii. 11, and Num. xi. 28, where Joshua bears
this name as the servant of Moses at a still earlier period, as to point
to any diversity of authorship. As there is nothing of a genea-
pancies do not exist in the biblioal narrative ; on the contrary, they have been
introduced by the critic himself, by the forcible separation of passages from
their context, and by arbitrary interpolations. The words of the spies in chap.
xiii. 27, "We came into the land whither thou sentest us, and surely it floweth
with milk and honey," do not imply that they only came into the southern
portion of the land, any more than the fact that they brought a bunch of
grapes from the neighbourhood of Hebron is a proof that they did not go
beyond the valley of Eshcol. Moreover, it is not stated in chap. xiii. 30 that
Joshua was not found among the tribes. Again, the circumstance that in chap,
xiv. 11-25 and 26-85 the same thing is said twice over, — the special instructions
as to the survey of the land in chap. xiii. 176-20, which were quite unnecessary
for intelligent leaders, — the swearing of God (chap. xiv. 16, 21, 28), — the forced
explanation of the name Eshcol, in chap. xiii. 24, and other things of the same
kind, — are said to furnish further proofs of the interpolation of Jehovistic clauses
into the Elohistic narrative ; and lastly, a number of the words employed are
supposed to place this beyond all doubt. Of these proofs, however, the first rests
upon a simple misinterpretation of the passage in question, and a disregard of
the peculiarities of Hebrew history ; whilst the rest are either subjective conclu-
sions, dictated by the taste of vulgar rationalism, or inferences and assump-
tions, of which the tenability and force need first of all to be established.
Digitizi
ed by Google
86 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
logical character in any of these passages, so as to warrant us in
expecting to find the family name of Joshua in them, the name
Joshua, by which Hosea had become best known in history, could
be used proleptically in them all. On the other hand, however^ it
is not distinctly stated in the verse before us, that this was the
occasion on which Moses gave Hosea the new name of Joshua. As
the Vav consec. frequently points out merely the order of thought,
the words may be understood without hesitation in the following
sense : These are the names borne by the heads of the tribes to be
sent out as spies, as they stand in the family registers according to
their descent ; Hosea, however, was named Joshua by Moses ; which
would not by any means imply that the alteration in the, name had
not been made till then. It is very probable that Moses may have
given him the new name either before or after the defeat of the
Amalekites (Ex. xvii. 9 sqq.), or when he took him into his service,
though it has not been mentioned before ; whilst here the circum-
stances themselves required that it should be stated that Hosea, as
he was called in the list prepared and entered in the documentary
record according to the genealogical tables of the tribes, had re-
ceived from Moses the name of Joshua. In vers. 17-20 Moses
gives them the necessary instructions, defining more clearly the
motive which the congregation had assigned for sending them out,
namely, that they might search out the way into the land and to its
towns (Dent. i. 22). " Get you up there (nt) in the south country,
and go up to the mountain? Negeb, i.e. south country, lit. dryness,
aridity, from 3M, to be dry or arid (in Syr., Chald., and Samar.).
Hence the dry, parched land, in contrast to the well-watered country
(Josh. xv. 19 ; Judg. i. 15), was the name given to the southern
district of Canaan, which forms the transition from the desert to
the strictly cultivated land, and bears for the most part the character
of a steppe, in which tracts of sand and heath are intermixed with
shrubs, grass, and vegetables, whilst here and there corn is also
cultivated ; a district therefore which was better fitted for grazing
than for agriculture, though it contained a number of towns and
villages (see at Josh. xv. 21-32). " The mountain" is the moun-
tainous part of Palestine, which was inhabited by Hittites, Jebusites,
and Amorites (ver. 29), and was called the mountains of the Amo-
rites, on account of their being the strongest of the Ganaanitish
tribes (Deut. i. 7, 19 sqq.). It is not to be restricted, as Knobel
supposes, to the limits of the so-called mountains of Judah (Josh,
xv. 4.8-62), but included the mountains of Israel or Ephraim also
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIII. 21-33. 87
(Josh. xi. 21, xx. 7), and formed, according to Dent. i. 7, the back-
bone of the whole land of Canaan up to Lebanon. — Ver. 18. They
were to see the land, " what it was," i.e. what was its character, and
the people that dwelt in it, whether they were strong, i.e. courage-
ous and brave, or weak, Le. spiritless and timid, and whether they
were little or great, i.e. numerically ; (ver. 19) what the land was,
whether good or bad, sc. with regard to climate and cultivation,
and whether the towns were camps, i.e. open villages and hamlets,
or fortified places ; also (ver. 20) whether the land was fat of lean,
i.e. whether it had a fertile soil or not, and whether there were trees
in it or not. All this they were to search out courageously (pjnnn,
to show one's self courageous in any occupation), and to fetch (some)
of the fruits of the land, as it was the time of the first-ripe grapes.
In Palestine the first grapes ripen as early as August, and sometimes
even in July (vid. Robinson, ii. 100, ii. 611), whilst the vintage
takes place in September and October.
Vers. 21-33. Journey of the Spies ; their Return, and
Report. — Ver. 21. In accordance with the instructions they had
received, the men who had been sent out passed through the land,
from the desert of Zin to Rehob, in the neighbourhood of Hamath,
i.e. in its entire extent from south to north. The " Desert of Zin"
(which occurs not only here, but in chap. xx. 1, xxvii. 14, xxxiii.
36, xxxiv. 3, 4 ; Deut. xxxii. 51, and Josh. xv. 1, 3) was the name
given to the northern edge of the great desert of Paran, viz. the
broad ravine of Wady Murreh (see p. 59), which separates the
lofty and precipitous northern border of the table-land of the
Azazimeh from the southern border of the Rakhma plateau, i.e.
of the southernmost plateau of the mountains of the Amorites (or
the mountains of Judah), and runs from Jebel Madardh (Moddera)
on the east, to the plain of Kadesh, which forms part of the desert
of Zin (cf . chap, xxvii. 14, xxxiii. 36 ; Deut. xxxii. 51), on the west.
The south frontier of Canaan passed through this from the southern
end of the Dead Sea, along the Wady el Murreh to the Wady el
Arish (chap, xxxiv. 3). — " Rehob, to come (coming) to Hamath" i.e.
where you enter the province of Hamath, on the northern boundary
of Canaan, is hardly one of the two Rehobs in the tribe of Asher
(Josh. xix. 28 and 30), but most likely Beth-Rehob in the tribe of
Naphtali, which was in the neighbourhood of Dan Lais, the modern
Tell el Kadhy (Judg. xviii. 28), and which Robinson imagined that
he had identified in the ruins of the castle of Eunin or Honin, in
Digitized by
Google
88 THE FO0BTH BOOK OF MOSES.
the village of the same name, to the south-west of Tell el Kadhy^
on the range of mountains which bound the plain towards the west
above Lake Huleh (Bibl. Researches, p. 371). In support of this
conjecture, he laid the principal stress upon the fact that the direct
road to Hamath through the Wady et Teim and the Bekaa com-
mences here. The only circumstance which it is hard to reconcile
with this conjecture is, that Beth-Rehob is never mentioned in the
Old Testament, with the exception of Judg. xviii. 28, either among
the fortified towns of the Canaanites or in the wars of the Israelites
with the Syrians and Assyrians, and therefore does not appear to
have been a place of such importance as we should naturally be led
to suppose from the character of this castle, the very situation of
which points to a bold, commanding fortress (see Lynch's Expedi-
tion), and where there are still remains of its original foundations
built of large square stones, hewn and grooved, and reminding one
of the antique and ornamental edifices of Solomon's times (cf.
Bitter, Erdkunde, xv. pp. 242 sqq.). — Hamath is Epiphania on the
Orontes, now Hamah (see at Gen. x. 18).
After the general statement, that the spies went through the
whole land from the southern to the northern frontier, two facts are
mentioned in vers. 22-24, which occurred in connection with their
mission, and were of great importance to the whole congregation.
These single incidents are linked on, however, in a truly Hebrew
style, to what precedes, viz. by an imperfect with Vav consec, just
in the same manner in which, in 1 Kings vi. 9, 1.5, the detailed
account of the building of the temple is linked on to the previous
statement, that Solomon built the temple and finished it ; x so that
the true rendering would be, "now they ascended in the south
country and came to Hebron (tU£ is apparently an error in writing
for 'K3J\), and there were pjgn , W, the children of Anak," three
of whom are mentioned by name. These three, who were after-
wards expelled by Caleb, when the land was divided and the city
of Hebron was given to him for an inheritance (Josh. xv. 14;
1 A comparison of 1 Kings vi., where we cannot possibly suppose that two
accounts have beeir linked together or interwoven, is specially adapted to give
us a clear view of the 'peculiar custom adopted by the Hebrew historians, of
placing the end and ultimate result of the events they narrate as much as
possible at the head of their narrative, and then proceeding with a minute
account of the more important of the attendant circumstances, without paying
any regard to the chronological order of the different incidents, or being at all
afraid of repetitions, and so to prove how unwarrantable and false are the
conclusions of those critics who press such passages into the support of their
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIII. 2X-33. 89
Judg. i. 20), were descendants of Arbalt, the lord of Hebron, from
whom the city received its name of Kirjath-Arbah, or city of
Arbah, and who is described in Josh. xiv. 15 as " the great (i.e.
the greatest) man among the Anakim," and in Josh. xv. 13 as the
" father of Anak," i.e. the founder of the Anakite family there.
For it is evident enough that pJJW (Anak) is not the proper name
of a man in these passages, but the name of a family or tribe, from
the fact that in ver. 33, where Anak's sons are spoken of in a
general and indefinite manner, PW ya has not the article ; also from
the fact that the three Anakites who lived in Hebron are almost
always called pJJjn T^, Anak's born (vers. 22, 28), and that PJjrn "oa
(sons of Anak), in Josh. xv. 14, is still further defined by the
phrase PJJfiJ *lv) (children of Anak) ; and lastly, from the fact that
in the place of " sons of Anak," we find " sons of the Anakim " in
Deut. i. 28 and ix. 2, and the "Anakim" in Deut. ii. 10, xi. 21 ;
Josh. xiv. 12, etc. Anak is supposed to signify long-necked ; but
this does not preclude the possibility of the founder of the tribe
having borne this name. The origin of the Anakites is involved in
obscurity. In Deut. ii. 10, 11, they are classed with the Emim
and Hephaim on account of their gigantic stature, and probably
reckoned as belonging to the pre-Canaanitish inhabitants of the
land, of whom it is impossible to decide whether they were of Semitic
origin or descendants of Ham (see vol. i. p. 203). It is also doubt-
ful, whether the names found here in vers. 21, 28, and in Josh,
xv. 14, are the names of individuals, i.e. of 'chiefs of the Anakites,
or the names of Anakite tribes. The latter supposition is favoured
by the circumstance, that the same names occur even after the
capture of Hebron by Caleb, or at least fifty years after the
event referred to here. With regard to Hebron, it is still further
observed in ver. 22i, that it was built seven years before Zoan in
Egypt. Zoan — the Tanis of the Greeks and Romans, the San of
the Arabs, which is called Jani, Jane in Coptic writings— was
situated upon the eastern side of the Tanitic arm of the Nile, not
hypotheses. We have a similar passage in Josh. iv. 11 sqq., where, after re-
lating that when all the people had gone through the Jordan the priests also
passed through with the ark of the covenant (ver. H), the historian proceeds
in vers. 12, 13, to describe the crossing of the two tribes and a half ; and an-
other in Judg. xx., where, at the very commencement (ver. 85), the issue of
the whole is related, viz. the defeat of the Benjamites; and then after that
there is a minute description in vers. 86-46 of the manner in which it was
effected. This style of narrative is also common in the historical works of the
Arabs.
Digltizi
ed by Google
90 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
far from its mouth (see Ges. Thes. p. 1177), and was the residence
of Pharaoh in the time of Moses (see vol. ii. p. 27). The date of
its erection is unknown ; but Hebron was in existence as early as
Abraham's time (Gen. xiii. 18, xxiii. 2 sqq.). — Ver. 23. The spies
also came into the valley of JEshcol, where they gathered pomegran-
ates and figs, and also cut down a vine-branch with grapes upon it,
which two persons carried upon a pole, most likely on account of
its extraordinary size. Bunches of grapes are still met with in
Palestine, weighing as much as eight, ten, or twelve pounds, the
grapes themselves being as large as our smaller plums (cf. Tobler
Denkblatter, pp. Ill, 112). The grapes of Hebron are especially
celebrated. To the north of this city, on the way to Jerusalem,
you pass through a valley with vineyards on the hills on both sides,
containing the largest and finest grapes in the land, and with
pomegranates, figs, and other fruits in great profusion {Robinson,
Palestine, i. 316, compared with i. 314 and ii. 442). This valley is
supposed, and not without good ground, to be the Eshcol of this
chapter, which received its name of Eshcol (cluster of grapes), ac-
cording to ver. 24, from the bunch of grapes which was cut down
there by the spies. This statement, of course, applies to the
Israelites, and would therefore still hold good, even if the conjec-
ture were a well-founded one, that this valley received its name
originally from the Eshcol mentioned in Gen. xiv. 13, 24, as the
terebinth grove did from Mamre the brother of Eshcol.
Vers. 25 sqq. In forty days the spies returned to the camp at
Kadesh (see at chap. xvi. 6), and reported the great fertility of the
land (" itfloweth with milk and honey" see at Ex. iii. 8), pointing,
at the same time, to the fruit they had brought with them;
" nevertheless" they added ("3 DBN, " only that "), " the people be
strong that dwell in the land, and the cities are fortified, very large :
and, moreover, we saw the children of Anah there" Amalekites
dwelt in the south (see at Gen. xxxvi. 12) ; Hittites, Jebusites, and
Amorites in the mountains (see at Gen. x. 15, 16) ; and Canaan-
ites by the (Mediterranean) Sea and on the side of the Jordan, i.e.
in the Arabah or Ghor (see at Gen. xiii. 7 and x. 15—18). — Ver.
30. As these tidings respecting the towns and inhabitants of Canaan
were of a character to excite the people, Caleb calmed them before
Moses by saying, " We will go up and take it ; for we shall overcome
it." The fact that Caleb only is mentioned, though, according to
chap. xiv. 6, Joshua also stood by his side, may be explained on the
simple ground, that at first Caleb was the only one to speak and
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIV. 1-10. 91
maintain the possibility of conquering Canaan. — Ver. 31. But his
companions were of an opposite opinion, and declared that the
people in Canaan were stronger than the Israelites, and therefore
it was impossible to go up to it. — Ver. 32. Thus they spread an
evil report of the land among the Israelites, by exaggerating the
difficulties of the conquest in their unbelieving despair, and describ-
ing Canaan as a land which " ate up its inhabitants." Their mean-
ing certainly was not " that the wretched inhabitants were worn
out by the laborious task of cultivating it, or that the land was
pestilential on account of the inclemency of the weather, or that
the cultivation of the land was difficult, and attended with many
evils," as Calvin maintains. Their only wish was to lay stress upon
the difficulties and dangers connected with the conquest and main-
tenance of the land, on account of the tribes inhabiting and sur-
rounding it: the land was an apple of discord, because of its
f ruitf ulness and situation ; and as the different nations strove for its
possession, its inhabitants wasted away {Cler., Ros., 0. v. Gerlaek).
The people, they added, are ntap *&M, " men of measures" i.e. of
tall stature (cf . Isa. xlv. 14), " and there we saw the Nephilim, i.e.
primeval tyrants (see at Gen. vi. 4), Anak's sons, giants ofNephilim,
and we seemed to ourselves and to them as small as grasshoppers."
Chap. xiv. 1-10. Uproar among the People. — Vers. 1-4.
This appalling description of Canaan had so depressing an influ-
ence upon the whole congregation (cf . Deut. i. 28 : they " made
their heart melt," i.e. threw them into utter despair), that they
raised a loud cry, and wept in the night in consequence. The
whole nation murmured against Moses and Aaron their two
leaders, saying " Would that we had died in Egypt or in this wilder-
ness I Why will Jefiovah bring us into this land, to fall by the
sword, that our wives and our children should become a prey (be
made slaves by the enemy ; cf . Deut. i. 27, 28) t Let us rather
return into Egypt! We will appoint a captain, they said one to
another, and go back to Egypt." — Vers. 5-9. At this murmuring,
which was growing into open rebellion, Moses and Aaron fell upon
their faces before the whole of the assembled congregation, namely,
to pour out their distress before the Lord, and move Him to inter-
pose ; that is to say, after they had made an unsuccessful attempt,
as we may supply from Deut. i. 29-31, to cheer up the people, by
pointing them to the help they had thus far received from God.
" In such distress, nothing remained but to pour out their desires
Digltizi
ed by Google
92 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
before God ; offering their prayer in public, however, and in the
sight of all the people, in the hope of turning their minds"
(Calvin). Joshua and Caleb, who had gone with the others to
explore the land, also rent their clothes, as a sign of their deep
distress at the rebellious attitude of the people (see at Lev. x. 6), and
tried to convince them of the goodness and glory of the land they
had travelled through, and to incite them to trust in the Lord.
" If Jehovah take pleasure in us" they said, " He will bring us into
this land. Only rebel not ye against Jehovah, neither fear ye the
people of the land; for they are our food;" i.e. we can. and shall
swallow them up, or easily destroy them (cf. chap. xxii. 4, xxiv. 8 ;
Dent. vii. 16 ; Ps. xiv. 4). " Their shadow is departed from them,
and Jehovah is with us : fear them not ! " " Their shadow '' is the
shelter and protection of God (cf. Ps. xci., cxxi. 5). The shadow,
which defends from the burning heat of the sun, was a very natural
figure in the sultry East, to describe defence from injury, a refuge
from danger and destruction (Isa. xxx. 2). The protection of God
had departed from the Canaanites, because God had determined to
destroy them when the measure of their iniquity was full (Gen.
xv. 16; cf. Ex. xxxiv. 24; Lev. xviii. 25, xx. 23). But the
excited people resolved to stone them, when Jehovah interposed
with His judgment, and His glory appeared in the tabernacle to all
the Israelites ; that is to say, the majesty of God flashed out before
the eyes of the people in a light which suddenly burst forth from
the tabernacle (see at Ex. xvi. 10).
Vers. 11-25. Intercession of Moses. — Vers. 11, 12. Jehovah
resented the conduct of the people as base contempt of His deity,
and as utter mistrust of Him, notwithstanding all the signs which
He had wrought in the midst of the nation ; and declared that He
would smite the rebellious people with pestilence, and destroy them,
and make of Moses a greater and still mightier people. This was
just what He had done before, when the rebellion took place at
Sinai (Ex. xxxii. 10). But Moses, as a servant who was faithful
over the whole house of God, and therefore sought not his own
honour, but the honour of his God alone, stood in the breach on
this occasion also (Ps. cvi. 23), with a similar intercessory prayer to
that which he had presented at Horeb, except that on this occasion
he pleaded the honour of God among the heathen, and the glorious
revelation of the divine nature with which he had been favoured
at Sinai, as a motive for sparing the rebellious nation (vers. 13—19 ;
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIV. 11-25. 93
cf. Ex. xxxii. 11—13, and xxxiv. 6, 7). The first he expressed in
these words (vers. 13 sqq.) : " Not only have the Egyptians heard that
Thou hast brought out this people from among them with Thy might;
they have also told it to the inhabitants of this land. They (the
Egyptians and the other nations) have heard that Thou, Jehovali,
art in the midst of this people; that Thou, Jehovah, appearest eye
to eye, and Thy cloud stands over them, and Thou goest before them
in a pillar of cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night. Now, if
Thou shouldst slay this people as one man, the nations which have
heard the tidings of Thee would say, Because Jehovah was not able
to bring this people into the land which He sware to them, He has
slain them in the desert? In that case God would he regarded by
the heathen as powerless, and His honour would be impaired (cf.
Deut. xxxii. 27 ; Josh. vh. 9). It was for the sake of His own
honour that God, at a later time, did not allow the Israelites to
perish in exile (cf. Isa. xlviii. 9, 11, Hi. 5 ; Ezek. xxxvi. 22, 23). —
now . . . WOtPI (vers. 13, 14), et audierunt et dixerunt; \ — \*=et —
et, both — and. The inhabitants of this land (ver. i3) were not
merely the Arabians, but, according to Ex. xv. 14 sqq., the tribes
dwelling in and round Arabia, the Philistines, Edomites, Moabites,
and Canaanites, to whom the tidings had been brought of the
miracles of God in Egypt and at the Dead Sea. Wt?B>, in ver. 14,
can neither stand for WDt? '3 (dixerunt) se audivisse, nor for IK'N
WOE*, qui audierunt. They are neither of them grammatically ad-
missible, as the relative pronoun cannot be readily omitted in prose;
and neither of them would give a really suitable meaning. It is
rather a rhetorical resumption of the WOE> in ver. 13, and the sub-
ject of the verb is not only " the Egyptians" but also " the inhabit-
ants of this land" who held communication with the Egyptians, or
" the nations" who had heard the report of Jehovah (ver. 15), i.e.
all that God had hitherto done for and among the Israelites in
Egypt, and on the journey through the desert. " Eye to eye :" i.e.
Thou hast appeared to them in the closest proximity. On the
pillar of cloud and fire, see at Ex. xiii. 21, 22. "As one man"
equivalent to " with a stroke" (Judg. vi. 16).; — In vers. 17, 18, Moses
adduces a second argument, viz. the word in which God Himself
had revealed His inmost being to him at Sinai (Ex. xxxiv. 6, 7).
The words, "Let the power be great," equivalent to " show Thyself
great in power," are not to be connected with what precedes, but
with what follows ; viz. "show Thyself mighty by verifying Thy word,
' Jehov'ah, long-suffering and great in mercy J etd. ; forgive, I beseech
Digltizi
ed by Google
94 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Thee, this people according to the greatness of Thy mercy, and as
Thou hast forgiven this people from Egypt even until now." WW (ver.
19) = fly NB>3 (ver. 18).— Ver. 20. In answer to this importunate
prayer, the Lord promised forgiveness, namely, the preservation of
the nation, but not the remission of the well-merited punishment.
At the rebellion at Sinai, He had postponed the punishment " till
the day of His visitation" (Ex. xxxii. 34). And that day had now
arrived, as the people had carried their continued rebellion against
the Lord to the furthest extreme, even to an open declaration of
their intention to depose Moses, and return to Egypt under another
leader, and thus had filled up the measure of their sins. " Never-
theless" added the Lord (vers. 21, 22), " as truly as I live, and Hie
glory of Jehovah will fill the whole earth, all the men who have seen
My glory and My miracles . . . shall not see the land which I sware
unto their fathers." The clause, " all the earth," etc., forms an
apposition to " as I live." Jehovah proves Himself to be living, by
the fact that His glory fills the whole earth. But this was to take
place, not, as.Knobel, who mistakes the true connection of the dif-
ferent clauses, erroneously supposes, by the destruction of the whole
of that generation, which would be talked of by all the world, but
rather by the fact that, notwithstanding the sin and opposition of
these men, He would still carry out His work of salvation to a
glorious victory. The *3 in ver. 22 introduces the substance of the
oath, as in Isa. xlix. 18 ; 1 Sam. xiv. 39, xx. 3 ; and according to
the ordinary form of an oath, DN in ver. 23 signifies " not" — " They
have tempted Me now ten times." Ten is used as the number of
completeness and full measure; and this answered to the actual
fact, if we follow the Rabbins, and add to the murmuring {1) at
the Red Sea, Ex. xiv. 11, 12 ; (2) at Marah, Ex. xv. 23 ; (3) in
the wilderness of Sin, Ex. xvi. 2 ; (4) at Rephidim, Ex. xvii. 1 ;
(5) at Horeb, Ex. xxxii. ; (6) at Tabeerah, Num. xi. 1 ; (7) at the
graves of lust, Num. xi. 4 sqq. ; and (8) here again at Kadesh, the
twofold rebellion of certain individuals against the commandments
of God at the giving of the manna (Ex. xvi. 20 and 27). The
despisers of God should none of them see the promised land. — Ver.
24. But because there was another spirit in Caleb, — i.e. not the
unbelieving, despairing, yet proud and rebellious spirit of the great
mass of the people, but the spirit of obedience and believing trust,
so that " he followed Jehovah fully" (lit. " fulfilled to walk behind
Jehovah"), followed Him with unwavering fidelity, — God would
bring him into the land into which he had gone, and his seed-should
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIV. 26-88. 95
possess it. OlQN **?0 here, and at cbap. xxxii. 11, 12 ; Deut. i. 36 ;
Josh. xiv. 8, 9 ; 1 Kings xi. 6, is a constructio prcegnans for K?D
nmt ro?p ; cf. 2 Ohron. xxxiv. 31.) According to the context, the
reference is not to Hebron particularly, but to Canaan generally,
which God had sworn unto the fathers (ver. 23, and Deut. i. 36,
comp. with ver. 35) ; although, when the land was divided, Caleb
received Hebron for his possession, because, according to his own
statement in Josh. xiv. 6 sqq., Moses had sworn that he would
give it to him. But this is not mentioned here ; just as Joshua
also is not mentioned in this place, as he is at vers. 30 and 38, but
Caleb only, who opposed the exaggerated accounts of the other
spies at the very first, and endeavoured to quiet the excitement of
the people by declaring that they were well able to overcome the
Canaanites (chap. xiii. 30). This first revelation of God to Moses
is restricted to the main fact ; the particulars are given afterwards
in the sentence of God, as intended for communication to the
people (vers. 26-38). — Ver. 25. The divine reply to the intercession
of Moses terminated with a command to the people to turn on the
morrow, and go to the wilderness to the Red Sea, as the Amalek-
ites and Canaanites dwelt in the valley. u The Amalekites," etc. :
this clause furnishes the reason for the command which follows.
On the Amalekites, see at Gen. xxxvi. 12, and Ex. xvii. 8 sqq. The
term Canaanite is a general epithet applied to all the inhabitants
of Canaan, instead of the Amorites mentioned in Deut. i. 44, who
held the southern mountains of Canaan. " The valley" is no doubt
the broad Wady Murreh (see at chap. xiii. 21), including a portion
of the Negeb, in which the Amalekites led a nomad life, whilst the
Canaanites really dwelt upon the mountains (ver. 45), close up to
the Wady Murreh.
Vers. 26-38. Sentence upon the murmuring Congrega-
tion. — Af ter the Lord had thus declared to Moses in general terms
His resolution to punish the incorrigible people, and not suffer them
to come to Canaan, He proceeded to tell him what announcement
he was to make to the people. — Ver. 27. This announcement com-
mences in a tone of anger, with an aposiopesis, " How long this evil
congregation" (sc. " shall I forgive it," the simplest plan being to
supply Kfe>K, as Rosenmuller suggests, from ver. 18), " that they
murmur against Me V — Vers. 28-31. Jehovah swore that it should
happen to the murmurers as they had spoken. Their corpses
should fall in the desert, even all who had been numbered, from
Digitized by
Google
96 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
twenty years old and upwards : they should not see the land into
which Jehovah had lifted up His hand (see at Ex. vi. 8) to lead them,
with the sole exception of Caleb and Joshua. But their children,
who, as they said, would be a prey (ver. 3), them Jehovah would
bring, and they should learn to know the land which the others had
despised. — Vers. 32, 33. "As for you, your carcases will fall in this
wilderness. But your sons will be pasturing (t.e. will lead a restless
shepherd life) in the desert forty years, and bear your whoredom (i.e.
endure the consequences of your faithless apostasy ; see Ex. xxxiv.
16), until your corpses are finished in the desert," i.e. till you have all
passed away. — Ver. 34. u After the number of the forty days that ye
have searched the land, shall ye bear your iniquity, (reckoning) a day
for a year, and know My turning away from you," or f WW, dbalienatio,
from Kfa (chap, xxxii. 7). — Ver. 35. As surely as Jehovah had
spoken this, would He do it to that evil congregation, to those who
had allied themselves against Him ("Ufa, to bind themselves together,
to conspire ; chap. xvi. 11, xxvii. 3). There is no ground whatever
for questioning the correctness of the statement, that the spies had
travelled through Canaan for forty days, or regarding this as a so-
called round number — that is to say, as unhistorical. And if this
number is firmly established, there is also no ground for disputing
the forty years' sojourn of the people in the wilderness, although
the period during which the rebellious generation, consisting of
those who were numbered at Sinai, died out, was actually thirty-
eight years, reaching from the autumn of the second year after
their departure from Egypt to the middle of the fortieth year of
their wanderings, and terminating with the fresh numbering (chap,
xxvi.) that was undertaken after the death of Aaron, and took place
on the first of the fifth month of the fortieth year (chap. xx. 23
sqq., compared with chap, xxxiii. 38). Instead of these thirty-eight
years, the forty years of the sojourn in the desert are placed in
connection with the forty days of the spies, because the people had
frequently fallen away from God, and been punished in conse-
quence, even during the year and a half before their rejection ;
and in this respect the year and a half could be combined with the
thirty-eight years which followed into one continuous period, during
which they bore their iniquity, to set distinctly before the minds of
the disobedient people the contrast between that peaceful dwelling
in the promised land which they had forfeited, and the restless
wandering in the desert, which had been imposed upon them as a
punishment, and to impress upon them the causal connection be-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIV. 89-46. 97
tween sin and suffering. " Every year that passed, and was de-
ducted from the forty years of punishment, was a new and solemn
exhortation to repent, as it called to mind the occasion of their
rejection" (Kurtz). When Knobel observes, on the other hand,
that " it is utterly improbable that all who came out of Egypt
(that is to say, all who were twenty years old and upward when
they came out) should have fallen in the desert, with the exception
of two, and that there should have been no men found among the
Israelites when they entered Canaan who were more than sixty
years of age," the express statement, that on the second numbering
there was not a man among those that were numbered who had
been included in the numbering at Sinai, except Joshua and Caleb
(chap. xxvi. 64 sqq.), is amply sufficient to overthrow this " impro-
bability" as an unfounded fancy. Nor is this statement rendered
at all questionable by the fact, that " Aaron's son Eleazar, who
entered Canaan with Joshua" (Josh. xiv. 1, etc.), was most likely
more than twenty years old at the time of his consecration at Sinai,
as the Levites were not qualified for service till their thirtieth or
twenty-fifth year. For, in the first place, the regulation concerning
the Levites' age of service is not to be applied without reserve to
the priests also, so that we could infer from this that the sons of
Aaron must have been at least twenty-five or thirty years old when
they were consecrated ; and besides this, the priests do not enter
into the question at all, for the tribe of Levi was excepted from
the numbering in chap, i., and therefore Aaron's sons were not
included among the persons numbered, who were sentenced to die
in the wilderness. Still less does it follow from Josh. xxiv. 7 and
Judg. ii. 7, where it is stated that, after the conquest of Canaan,
there were many still alive who had been eye-witnesses of the
wonders of God in Egypt, that they must have been more than
twenty years old when they came out of Egypt ; for youths from
ten to nineteen years of age would certainly have been able to
remember such miracles as these, even after the lapse of forty or
fifty years. — Vers. 36—38. But for the purpose of giving to the
whole congregation a practical proof of the solemnity of the divine
threatening of punishment, the spies who had induced the congre-
gation to revolt, through their evil report concerning the inhabitants
of Canaan, were smitten by a " stroke before Jehovah," i.e. by a
sudden death, which proceeded in a visible manner from Jehovah
Himself, whilst Joshua and Caleb remained alive.
Vers. 39-45 (cf. Deut. i. 41-44). The announcement of the
PENT. — VOL. III. O
Digitized by
Google
98 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
sentence plunged the people into deep mourning. But instead of
bending penitentially under the, judgment of God, they resolved to
atone for their error, by preparing the next morning to go to the
top of the mountain and press forward into Canaan. And they
would not even suffer themselves to be dissuaded from their enter-
prise by the entreaties of Moses, who denounced it as a transgres-
sion of the word of God which could not succeed, and predicted
their overthrow before their enemies, but went presumptuously
(nih£ ^BJP) up without the ark of the covenant and without Moses,
who did not depart out of the midst of the camp, and were smitten
by the Amalekites and Oanaanites, who drove them back as far as
Hormah. Whereas at first they had refused to enter upon the con-
flict with the Oanaanites, through their unbelief in the might of
the promise of God, now, through unbelief in the severity of the
judgment of God, they resolved to engage in this conflict by their
own power, and without the help of God, and to cancel the old sin
of unbelieving despair through the new sin of presumptuous self-
confidence, — an attempt which could never succeed, but was sure to
plunge deeper and deeper into misery. Where " the top (or height)
of the mountain" to which the Israelites advanced was, cannot be pre-
cisely determined, as we have no minute information concerning the
nature of the ground in the neighbourhood of Kadesh. No doubt
the allusion is to some plateau on the northern border of the valley
mentioned in ver. 25, viz. the Wady Murreh, which formed the
southernmost spur of the mountains of the Amorites, from which
the Oanaanites and Amalekites came against them, and drove them
back. In Deut. i. 44, Moses mentions the Amorites instead of the
Amalekites and Oanaanites, using the name in a broader sense for
all the Oanaanites, and contenting himself with naming the leading
foes with whom the Amalekites who wandered about in the Negeb
had allied themselves, as Bedouins thirsting for booty. These tribes
came down (ver. 45) from the height of the mountain to the lower
plateau or saddle, which the Israelites had ascended, and smote them
and wr&>_ (from nna, with the reduplication of the second radical
anticipated in the first : see Ewald, § 193, c), " discomfited them,
as far as Hormah," or as Moses expresses it in Deut. i. 44, They
u chased you, as bees do" (which pursue with great ferocity any one
who attacks or disturbs them), "and destroyed you in Seir, even unto
Hormah." There is not sufficient ground for altering " in Seir"
into " from Seir," as the LXX., Syriac, and Vulgate have done.
But "i , ?t?3 might signify " into Seir, as far as Hormah." As the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XV.-XIX. 99
Edomites had extended their territory at that time across the Ara-
bah towards the west, and taken possession of a portion of the
mountainous country which hounded the desert of Paran towards
the north (see at chap, xxxiv. 3), the Israelites, when driven back
by them, might easily be chased into the territory of the Edomites.
Hormah (i.e. the ban-place) is used here proleptically (see at chap.
xxi. 3).
OCCURRENCES DURING THE THIRTY-SEVEN TEABS OP WANDERING
IN THE WILDERNESS. — CHAP. XV.-XIX.
After the unhappy issue of the attempt to penetrate into Canaan,
in opposition to the will of God and the advice of Moses, the Israel-
ites remained " many days" in Kadesh, as the Lord did not hearken
to their lamentations concerning the defeat which they had suffered
at the hands of the Canaanites and Amalekites. Then they turned,
and took their journey, as the Lord had commanded (chap. xiv. 25),
into the wilderness, in the direction towards the Red Sea (Deut. i.
45, ii. 1) ; and in the first month of the fortieth year they came
again into the desert of Zin, to Eadesh (chap. xx. 1). All that we
know respecting this journeying from Kadesh into the wilderness
in the direction towards the Eed Sea, and up to the time of their
return to the desert of Zin, is limited to a number of names of
places of encampment given in the list of journeying stages in
chap, xxxiii. 19—30, out of which, as the situation of the majority
of them is altogether unknown, or at all events has not yet been
determined, no connected account of the journeys of Israel during
this interval of thirty-seven years can possibly be drawn. The
most important event related in connection with this period is the
rebellion of the company of Korah against Moses and Aaron, and
the re-establishment of the Aaronic priesthood and confirmation of
their rights, which this occasioned (chaps, xvi.-xviii.). This rebellion
probably occurred in the first portion of the period in question. In
addition to this there are only a few laws recorded, which were
issued during this long time of punishment, and furnished a prac-
tical proof of the continuance of the covenant which the Lord had
made with the nation of Israel at Sinai. There was nothing more
to record in connection- with these thirty-seven years, which formed
the second stage in the guidance of Israel through the desert. For,
as Baumgarten has well observed, " the fighting men of Israel had
fallen under the judgment of Jehovah, and the sacred history,
Digitized by
Google
100 THE FOUBTH BOOK OF MOSES. t
therefore, was no longer concerned with them ; whilst the youth,
in whom the life and hope of Israel were preserved, had as yet no
history at all." Consequently we have no reason to complain, as
Ewald does (Gesch. ii. pp. 241, 242), that "the great interval of
forty years remains a perfect void ;" and still less occasion to dispose
of the gap, as this scholar has done, by supposing that the last
historian left out a great deal from the history of the forty years'
wanderings. The supposed "void" was completely filled up by
the gradual dying out of the generation which had been rejected
by God. * " .
Various Laws of Sacrifice. Punishment of a Sabbath-breaker.
Command to wear Tassels upon the Clothes. — Chap. xv_
Vers. 1-31. Regulations concerning Sacrifices. — Vers.
1—16. For the purpose of reviving the hopes of the new generation
that was growing up, and directing their minds to the promised
land, during the mournful and barren time when judgment was
being executed upon the race that had been condemned, Jehovah
communicated various laws through Moses concerning the presen-
tation of sacrifices in the land that He would give them (vers. 1 and
2), whereby the former laws of sacrifice were supplemented and
completed. The first of these laws had reference to the connection
between meat-offerings and drink-offerings on the one hand, and
burnt-offerings and slain-offerings on the other. — Vers. 3 sqq. In
the land of Canaan, every burnt and slain-offering, whether prepared
in fulfilment of a vow, or spontaneously, or on feast-days (cf. Lev.
vii. 16, xxii. 18, and xxiii. 38), was to be associated with a meat-
offering of fine flour mixed with oil, and a drink-offering of wine, —
the quantity to he regulated according to the kind of animal that
was slain in sacrifice. (See Lev. xxiii. 18, where this connection
is already mentioned in the case of the festal sacrifices.) For a
lamb (BO|, i.e. either sheep or goat, cf. ver. 11), they were to take
the tenth of an ephah of fine flour, mixed with the quarter of a hin
of oil and the quarter of a hin of wine, as a drink-offering. In ver.
5, the construction changes from the third to the second person.
•"ijW, to prepare, as in Ex. xxix. 38. — Vers. 6, 7. For a ram, they
were to take two tenths of fine flour, with the third of a hin of oil
and the third of a hin of wine. — Vers. 8 sqq. For an ox, three
tenths of fine flour, with half a hin of oil and half a hin of wine.
The yip? (3d person) in ver. 9, between nfctyn in ver. 8, and STipR
in ver. 10, is certainly striking and unusual, but not,so offensive, as
Digitized by
Google
CH4P. XV. 1-81. 101
to render it necessary to alter It into 3*ij?rj1. — Vers. 11, 12. The
quantities mentioned were to be offered with every ox, or ram, or
lamb, of either sheep or goat, and therefore the number of the
-appointed quantities of meat and drink-offerings was to correspond
to the number of sacrificial animals. — Vers. 13-16. These rules
were to apply not only to the sacrifices of those that were born in
Israel, but also to those of the strangers living among them. By
" these things," in ver. 13, we are to understand the meat and drink-
offerings already appointed, — Ver. 15. " As for the assembly, there
shall be one law for the Israelite and the stranger, . . . an eternal
ordinance . . . before Jehovah." ?n|JJ}, which is construed absolutely,
refers to the assembling of the nation before Jehovah, or to the
congregation viewed in its attitude with regard to God.
A second law (vers. 17-21) appoints, on the ground of the
general regulations in Ex. xxii. 28 and xxiii. 19, the presentation
of a heave-offering from the bread which they would eat in the
land of Canaan, viz. a first-fruit of groat-meal (nb^g JVEW) baked
as cake ( n ?n). Arisoth, which is only used in connection with the
gift of first-fruits, in Ezek. xliv. 30, Neh. x. 38, and the passage
before us, signifies most probably groats, or meal coarsely bruised,
like the talmudical fcnif, contusum, mola, far, and indeed far hordei.
This cake of the groats of first-fruits they were to offer " as a heave-
offering of the threshing-floor" i.e. as a heave-offering of the bruised
corn, in the same manner as this (therefore, in addition to it, and
along with it) ; and that " according to your generations " (see Ex.
xii. 14), that is to say, for all time, to consecrate a gift of first-
fruits to the Lord, not only of the grains of corn, but also of the
bread made from the corn, and " to cause a blessing to rest upon his
house" (Ezek. xliv. 30). Like all the gifts of first-fruits, this cake
also fell to the portion of the priests (see Ezek. and Neh. ut sup.).
To these there are added, in vers. 22, 31, laws relating to sin-
offerings, the first of which, in vers. 22-26, is distinguished from
the case referred to in Lev. iv. 13-21, by the fact that the sin is
not described here, as it is there, as " doing one of the command-
ments of Jehovah which ought not to be done," but as " not doing
all that Jehovah had spoken through Moses." Consequently, the
allusion here is not to sins of commission, but to sins of omission,
not following the law of God, " even (as is afterwards explained
in ver. 23) all that the Lord hath commanded you by the hand of
Moses from the day that the Lord hath commanded, and thencefor-
ward according to your generations" i.e. since the first beginning of
Digitized by
Google
102 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
the giving of the law, and during the whole of the time following
(KnobeT). These words apparently point to a complete falling away
of the congregation from the whole of the law. Only the further
stipulation in ver. 24, " if it occur away from the eyes of the congrega-
tion through error"" (in oversight), cannot be easily reconciled with
this, as it seems hardly conceivable that an apostasy from the entire
law should have remained hidden from the congregation. This " not
doing all the commandments of Jehovah," of which the congrega-
tion is supposed to incur the guilt without perceiving it, might
consist either in the fact that, in particular instances, whether from
oversight or negligence, the whole congregation omitted to fulfil the
commandments of God, i.e. certain precepts of the law, sc. in the
fact that they neglected the true and proper fulfilment of the whole
law, either, as Outram supposes, " by retaining to a certain extent
the national rites, and following the worship of the true God, and
yet at the same time acting unconsciously in opposition to the law,
through having been led astray by some common errors ; " or by
allowing the evil example of godless rulers to seduce them to
neglect their religious duties, or to adopt and join in certain
customs and usages of the heathen, which appeared to be recon-
cilable with the law of Jehovah, though they really led to contempt
and neglect of the commandments of the Lord. 1 But as a disregard
or neglect of the commandments of God had to be expiated, a
burnt-offering was to be added to the sin-offering, that the separa-
tion of the congregation from the Lord, which had arisen from the
sin of omission, might be entirely removed. The apodosis com-
mences with nvn in ver. 24, but is interrupted by ''VD DN, arid resumed
again with &W, u it shall be, if . . . . the whole congregation shall
prepare," etc. The burnt-offering, being the principal sacrifice, is
mentioned as usual before the sin-offering, although, when pre-
sented, it followed the latter, on account of its being necessary that
1 Maimonides (see Outram, ex veterum sententia) understands this law as
relating to extraneous worship ; and Outram himself refers to the times of the
wicked kings, " when the people neglected their hereditary rites, and, forgetting
the sacred laws, fell by a common Bin into the observance of the religious rites
of other nations." Undoubtedly, we have historical ground in 2 Chron. xxix.
21 sqq., and Ezra viii. 35, for this interpretation of our law, but further allusions
are not excluded in consequence. We cannot agree with Baumgarten, there-
fore, in restricting the difference between Lev. iv. 13 sqq. and the passage
before us to the fact, that the former supposes the transgression of one par-
ticular commandment on the part of the whole congregation, whilst the latter
(vers. 22, 23) refers to a continued lawless condition on the part of Israel.
Digitizi
ed by Google
CHAP. XV. 82-36. 103
the sin should be expiated before the congregation could sanctify
its life and efforts afresh to the Lord in the burnt-offering. " One
Md of the goats : " see Lev. iv. 23. BBEfeo (as in Lev. v. 10, ix.
16, etc.) refers to the right established in vers. 8, 9, concerning the
combination of the meat and drink-offering with the burnt-offer-
ing. The sin-offering was to be treated according to the rule laid
down in Lev. iv. 14 sqq. — Ver. 26. This law was to apply not only
to the children of Israel, but also to the stranger among them, "for
(sc it has happened) to the whole nation in mistake" As the sin
extended to the whole nation, in which the foreigners were also in-
cluded, the atonement was also to apply to the whole. — Vers. 27—31.
In the same way, again, there was one law for the native and the
stranger, in relation to sins of omission on the part of single indivi-
duals. The law laid down in Lev. v. 6 (cf. Lev. iv. 27 sqq.) for
the Israelites, is repeated here in vers. 27, 28, and in ver. 28 it is
raised into general validity for foreigners also. In ver. 29, rntNn
is written absolutely for rntw. — Vers. 30, 31. But it was only sins
committed by mistake (see at Lev. iv. 2) that could be expiated
by sin-offerings. Whoever, on the other hand, whether a native or
a foreigner, committed a sin " with a high hand" — i.e. so that he
raised his hand,, as it were, against Jehovah, or acted in open re-
bellion against Him, — blasphemed God, and was to be cut off (see
Gen. xvii. 14) ; for he had despised the word of Jehovah, and
broken His commandment, and was to atone for it with his life.
i*a ruty, " its crime upon it ; " i.e. it shall come upon such a soul in
the punishment which it shall endure.
Vers. 32-36. The history of the Sabbath-beeaker is no
doubt inserted here as a practical illustration of sinning " with a
high hand." It shows, too; at the same time, how the nation, as a
whole, was impressed with the inviolable sanctity of the Lord's day.
From the words with which it is introduced, " and the children of
Israel were in the wilderness," all that can be gathered is, that the
occurrence took place at the time when Israel was condemned to
wander about in the wilderness for forty years. They found a man
gathering sticks in the desert on the Sabbath, and brought him as
an open transgressor of the law of the Sabbath before Moses and
Aaron and the whole congregation, i.e. the college of elders, as the
judicial authorities of the congregation (Ex. xviii. 25 sqq.). They
kept him in custody, like the blasphemer in Lev. xxiv. 12, because
it had not yet been determined what was to be done to him. It
Digitized by
Google
104 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
is true that it had already been laid down in Ex. xxxi. 14, 15, and
xxxv. 2, that any breach of the law of the Sabbath should be
punished by death and extermination, but the mode had not yet
been prescribed. This was done now, and Jehovah commanded
stoning (see Lev. xx. 2), which was executed upon the criminal
without delay.
Vers. 37-41 (cf. Deut. xxii. 12). The command to wear
TASSELS ON THE EDGE OP THE UPPER GABMENT appears to have
been occasioned by the incident just described. The Israelites
were to wear nx*¥, tassels, on the wings of their upper garments,
or, according to Deut. xxii. 12, at the four corners of the upper
garment. 11D3, the covering in which a man wraps himself, syno-
nymous with "03, was the upper garment, consisting of a four-cor-
nered cloth or piece of stuff, which was thrown over the body-coat
(see my Bibl. Archdol. ii. pp. 36, 37), and is not to be referred, as
Schultz supposes, to the bed-coverings also, although this garment
was actually used as a counterpane by the poor (see Ex. xxii. 25,
26). " And upon the tassel of the wing they shall put a string of
hyacinth-blue" namely, to fasten the tassel to the edge of the gar-
ment. WX (Jem., from X^, the glittering, the bloom or flower)
signifies something flowery or bloom-like, and is used in Ezek. viii. 3
for a lock of hair ; here it is applied to a tassel, as being made of
twisted threads : LXX. Kpdo-ireSa ; Matt, xxiii. 5, " borders." The
size of .these tassels is not prescribed. The Pharisees liked to make
them large, to exhibit openly their punctilious fulfilment of the law.
For the Rabbinical directions how to make them, see Carpzov.
appdrat. pp. 197 sqq. ; and Bodenschatz, kirchtiche' Verfassung der
heutigen Juden, iv. pp. 11 sqq. — Ver. 39. "And it shall be to you for a
tassel," i.e. the fastening of the tassel with the dark blue thread to the
corners of your garments shall be to you a tassel, "that ye, when ye
see it, may remember all the commandments of Jehovah, and do them ;
and ye sliall not stray after your hearts and your eyes, after which ye
go a whoring." The zizith on the sky-blue thread was to serve as
a memorial sign to the Israelites, to remind them of the command-
ments of God, that they might have them constantly before their
eyes and follow them, and not direct their heart and eyes to the
things of this world, which turn away from the word of God, and
lead astray to idolatry (cf. Prov. iv. 25, 26). Another reason for
these instructions, as is afterwards added in ver. 40, was to remind
Israel of all the commandments of the Lord, that they might do
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVX 1-8. 105
them and be holy to their God, and sanctify their daily life to Him
who had brought them out of Egypt, to be their God, i.e. to show
Himself as God to them.
Rebellion of Korah's Company. — Chap, xvi.-xvii. 5.
The sedition of Korah and his company, with the renewed
sanction of the Aaronic priesthood on the part of God which it
occasioned, is the only important occurrence recorded in connection
with the thirty-seven years' wandering in the wilderness. The
time and place are not recorded. The fact that the departure from
Kadesh is not mentioned in chap, xiv., whilst, according to Deut.
i. 46, Israel remained there many days, is not sufficient to warrant
the conclusion that it took place in Kadesh. The departure from
Kadesh is not mentioned even after the rebellion of Korah ; and
yet we read, in chap. xx. 1, that the whole congregation came again
into the desert of Zin to Kadesh at the beginning of the fortieth
year, and therefore must previously have gone away. All that can
be laid down as probable is, that it occurred in one of the earliest
of the thirty-seven years of punishment, though we have no firm
ground even for this conjecture.
Vers. 1—3. The authors of the rebellion were Korah the Levite,
a descendant of the Kohathite Izhar, who was a brother of Amram,
an ancestor (not the father) of Aaron and Moses (see at Ex. vi. 18),
and three Reubenites, viz. Dathan and Abiram, sons of Eliab, of
the Reubenitisb family of Pallu (chap. xxvi. 8, 9), and On, the son
of Peleth, a Eeubenite, not mentioned again. The last of these
(On) is not referred to again in the further course of this event,
either because he played altogether a subordinate part in the affair,
or because he had drawn back before the conspiracy came to a
head. The persons named took (ni?'), i.e. gained over to their plan,
or persuaded to join them, 250 distinguished men of the other
tribes, and rose up with them against Moses and Aaron. On the
construction IDlpJI . . . nj?»l (vers. 1 and 2), Gesenius correctly
observes in his Thesaurus (p. 760), "There is an anakolouthon
rather than an ellipsis, and not merely a copyist's error, in these
words, 'and Korah, . . . and Dailian and Abiram, took and rose up
against Moses with 250 mera,' for they took 250 men, and rose up
with them against Moses," etc. He also points to the analogous
construction in 2 Sam. xviii. 18. Consequently there is no neces-
sity either to force a meaning upon nj??, which is altogether foreign
to it, or to attempt an emendation of the text. " They rose up
Digitized by
Google
106 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
before Moses :" fhis does not mean, " they stood up in front of his
tent," as Knobel explains it, for the purpose of bringing ver. 2 into
contradiction with ver. 3, but they created an uproar before his
eyes ; and with this the expression in ver. 3, " and they gathered
themselves togetlier against Moses and Aaron" may be very simply
and easily combined. The 250 men of the children of Israel who
joined the rebels no doubt belonged to the other tribes, as is in-
directly implied in the statement in chap, xxvii. 3, that Zelophehad
the Manassite was not in the company of Korah. These men were
"princes of the congregation," Le. heads of the tribes, or of large
divisions of the tribes, " called men of the congregation" i.e. mem-
bers of the council of the nation which administered the affairs of
the congregation (cf. i. 16), "men of name" (Dt? ^EON, see Gen. vi.
4). The leader was Korah ; and the rebels are called in conse-
quence "Korah's company" (vers. 5, 6, chap. xxvi. 9, xxvii. 3).
He laid claim to the high-priesthood, or at least to an equality with
Aaron (ver. 17). Among his associates were the Reubenites,
Dathan and Abiram, who, no doubt, were unable to get over the
fact that the birthright had been taken away from their ancestor,
and with it the headship of the house of Israel (i.e. of the whole
nation). Apparently their present intention was to seize upon the
government of the nation under a self-elected high priest, and to
force Moses and Aaron out of the post assigned to them by God, —
that is to say, to overthrow the constitution which God had given
to His people. — Ver. 3. Mf" 3 "!, " enough for you ! " (3"i, as in Gen.
xlv. 28), they said to Moses and Aaron, i.e. " let the past suffice
you" (Knobel) ; ye have held the priesthood and the government
quite long enough. It must now come to an end ; "for the whole
congregation, all of them (i.e. all the members of the nation), are
holy, and Jehovah is in the midst of them. Wherefore lift ye your-
selves above the congregation of Jehovah V The distinction between
■"HP and ?nj? is the following : >"np signifies conventus, the congrega-
tion according to its natural organization ; ?np signifies convocatio,
the congregation according to its divine calling and theocratic
purpose. The use of the two words in the same verse upsets the
theory that rfjp) ffl?. belongs to the style of the original work, and
ftiPP ?nj? to that of the Jehovist. The rebels appeal to the calling
of all Israel to be the holy nation of Jehovah (Ex. xix. 5, 6), and
infer from this the equal right of all to hold the priesthood, " leav-
ing entirely out of sight, as blind selfishness is accustomed to do,
the transition of the universal priesthood into the special mediatorial
Digitized by
Google
CHAP XVL 4-17. 107
office and priesthood of Moses and Aaron, which had their founda-
tion in fact" (Baumgarten) ; or altogether overlooking the fact that
God Himself had chosen Moses and Aaron, and appointed them as
mediators between Himself and the congregation, to educate the
sinful nation into a holy nation, and train it to the fulfilment of its
proper vocation. The rebels, on the contrary, thought that they
were holy already, because God had called them to be a holy nation,
and in their carnal self-righteousness forgot the condition attached
to their calling, "If ye will obey My voice indeed, and keep My
covenant" (Ex. xix. 5).
Vers. 4-17. When Moses heard these words of the rebels, he
fell upon his face, to complain of the matter to the Lord, as in
chap. xiv. 5. He then said to Korah and his company, " To-mor-
row Jehovah will show who is His and holy, and will let him come
near to Him, and he whom He chooseth will draw near to Him."
The meaning of w "HPN is evident from ia "iny "lEW. He is Je-
hovah's, whom He chooses, so that He belongs to Him with his
whole life. The reference is to the priestly rank, to which God had
chosen Aaron and his sons out of the whole nation, and sanctified
them by a special consecration (Ex. xxviii. 1, xxix. 1 ; Lev. viii. 12,
30), and by which they became the persons " standing near to Him"
(Lev. x. 3), and were qualified to appear before Him in the sanc-
tuary, and present to Him the sacrifices of the nation. — Ver. 6. To
leave the decision of this to the Lord, Korah and his company, who
laid claim to this prerogative, were to take censers, and bring lighted
incense before Jehovah. He whom the Lord should choose was to
be the sanctified one. This was to satisfy them. With the ex-
pression MTaT in ver. 7, Moses gives the rebels back their own
words in ver. 3. The divine decision was connected with the offer-
ing of incense, because this was the holiest function of the priestly
service, which brought the priest into the immediate presence of
God, and in connection with which Jehovah had already shown to
the whole congregation how He sanctified Himself, by a penal
judgment on those who took this office upon themselves without a
divine call (Lev. x. 1—3). Vers. 8 sqq. He then set before them
the wickedness of their enterprise, to lead them to search them-
selves, and avert the judgment which threatened them. In doing
this, he made a distinction between Korah the Levite, and Dathan
and Abiram the Reubenites, according to the difference in the
motives which prompted their rebellion, and the claims which they
asserted. He first of all (vers. 8-11) reminded Korah the Levite
Digitized by
Google
108 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
of the way in which God had distinguished his trihe, by separating
the Levites from the rest of the congregation, to attend to the ser-
vice of the sanctuary (chap. iii. 5 sqq., viii. 6 sqq.), and asked him,
" Is this too little for you ? The God of Israel (this epithet is used
emphatically for Jehovah) has brought thee near to Himself, and all
thy brethren the sons of Levi with thee, and ye strive after the priest-
hood also. Therefore . . . thou and thy company, who have leagued
themselves against Jehovah : ... and Aaron, what is he, that ye murmur
against him ?" These last words, as an expression of wrath, are
elliptical, or rather an aposiopesis, and are to be filled up in the
following manner : " Therefore, ... as Jehovah has distinguished
you in this manner, . . . what do ye want ? Ye rebel against Je-
hovah ! why do ye murmur against Aaron ? He has not seized upon
the priesthood of his own accord, but Jehovah has called him tq it,
and he is only a feeble servant of God" (cf. Ex. xvi. 7). Moses
then (vers. 12-14) sent for Dathan and Abiram, who, as is tacitly
assumed, had gone back to their tents during the warning given to
Korah. But they replied, " We shall not come up" iyl>, to go up,
is used either with reference to the tabernacle, as being in a spiritual
sense the culminating point of the entire camp, or with reference
to appearance before Moses, the head and ruler of the nation.
" Is it too little that thou hast brought us out of a land flowing with
milk and honey (they apply this expression in bitter irony to Egypt),
to kill us in the wilderness (deliver us up to death), that thou wilt be
always playing the lord over us ?" The idea of continuance, which
is implied in the inf. abs., TW^?* from "V&, to exalt one's self as
ruler (Ges. § 131, 36), is here still further intensified by D|. " More-
over, thou hast not brought us into a land flowing with milk and
honey, or given us fields and vineyards for an inheritance (i.e. thou
hast not kept thy promise, . Ex. iv. 30 compared with chap, iii; 7
sqq.). Wilt thou put out the eyes of these people V i.e. wilt thou
blind them as to thy doings and designs ? — Ver. 15. Moses was so
disturbed by these scornful reproaches, that he entreated the Lord,
with an asertion of his own unselfishness, not to have respect to their
gift, i.e. not to accept the sacrifice which they should bring (cf.
Gen. iv. 4). " I have not taken one ass from them, nor done harm to
one of them" i.e. 1 have not treated them as a ruler, who demands
tribute of his subjects, and oppresses them (cf. 1 Sam. xii. 3). —
Vers. 16, 17. In conclusion, he summoned Korah and his associates
once more, to present themselves the following day before Jehovah
with censers and incense.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVI. 18-35. 109
Vers. 18-35. The next day the rebels presented themselves with
censers before the tabernacle, along with Moses and Aaron ; and
the whole congregation also assembled there at the instigation of
Korah. The Lord then interposed in judgment. Appearing in
His glory to the whole congregation (just as in chap. xiv. 10), He
said to Moses and Aaron, " Separate yourselves from this congrega-
tion ; I will destroy them in a moment." By assembling in front of
the tabernacle, the whole congregation had made common cause
with the rebels. God threatened them, therefore, with sudden de-
struction. But the two men of God, who were so despised by the
rebellious faction, fell on their faces, interceding with God, and
praying, " God, Thou God of the spirits of all flesh ! this one man
(i.e. Korah, the author of the conspiracy) hath sinned, and wilt Thou
be wrathful with all the congregation ?" i.e. let Thine anger fall upon
the whole congregation. The Creator and Preserver of all beings,
who has given and still gives life and breath to all flesh, is God of.
the spirits of all flesh. As the author, of the spirit of life in all
perishable flesh, God cannot destroy His own creatures in wrath ;
this would be opposed to His own paternal love and mercy. In
this epithet, as applied to God, therefore, Moses appeals " to the
universal blessing of creation. It is of little consequence whether
these words are to be understood as relating to all the animal king-
dom, or to the human race alone ; because Moses simply prayed,
that as God was the creator and architect of the world, He would
not destroy the men whom He had created, but rather have mercy
upon the works of His own hands" (Calvin). The intercession
of the prophet Isaiah, in Isa. lxiv. 8, is similar to this, though
that is founded upoil the special relation in which God stood to
Israel. — Vers. 23 sqq. Jehovah then instructed Moses, that the
congregation was to remove away (fvV, to get up and away) from
about the dwelling-place of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram ; and, as
we may supply from the context, the congregation fell back from
Korah's tent, whilst Dathan and Abiram, possibly at the very first
appearance of the divine glory, drew back into their tents. Moses
therefore betook himself to the tents of Dathan and Abiram, with
the elders following him, and there also commanded the congrega-
tion to depart from the tents of these wicked men, and not touch
anything they possessed, that they might not be swept away in all
their sins. — Ver. 21. The congregation obeyed ; but Dathan and
.Abiram came and placed themselves in front of the tents, along
-with their wives and children, to see what Moses would do. Moses
Digitized by
Google
110 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
then announced the sentence : " By this shall ye know that Jehovah
hath sent me to do all these works, that not out of my own heart (t\e.
that I do not act of my own accord). If these men die like all men
(i.e. if these wicked men die a natural death like other men), and
the oversight of all men take place over them (i.e. if the same provi-
dence watches over them as over all other men, and preserves them
from sudden death), Jehovah hath not sent me. But if Jehovah create
a creation (•MfQ toa, i.e. work an extraordinary miracle), and the
earth open its mouth and swallow them up, with all that belongs to them,
so that they go down alive into hell, ye shall perceive that tltese men have
despised Jehovah." — Vers. 31—33. And immediately the earth clave
asunder, and swallowed them up, with their families and all their
possessions, and closed above them, so that they perished without a
trace from the congregation. Wjk refers to the three ringleaders.
" Their houses ;" i.e. their families, not their tents, as in chap, xviii.
31, Ex. xii. 3. " All the men belonging to Korah" were his servants ;
for, according to chap. xxvi. 11, his sons did not perish with him,
but perpetuated his family (chap. xxvi. 58), to which the celebrated
Korahite singers of David's time belonged (1 Chron. vi. 18-22, ix.
19). — Ver. 34. This fearful destruction of the ringleaders, through
which Jehovah glorified Moses afresh as His servant in a miraculous
way, filled all the Israelites round about with such terror, that they
fled ">p>, " at their noise" i.e. at the commotion with which the
wicked men went down into the abyss which opened beneath their
feet, lest, as they said, tlie earth should swallow tJiem up also. —
Ver. 35. The other 250 rebels, who were probably still in front of
the tabernacle, were then destroyed by fire which proceeded from
Jehovah, as Nadab and Abihu had been before (Lev. x. 2).
Vers. 36—40 (or xvii. 1-5). After the destruction of the sinners,
the Xiord commanded that Eleazar should take up the censers
" from between the burning," i.e. from the midst of the men that had
been burned, and scatter the fire (the burning coals in the pans)
far away, that it might not be used any more. " For they (the
censers) are holy" that is to say, they had become holy through
being brought before Jehovah (ver. 39) ; and therefore, when the
men who brought them were slain, they fell as banned articles to
the Lord (Lev. xxvii. 28). " The censers of these sinners against
their souls" (i.e. the men who have forfeited their lives through
their jrin : cf. Prov. xx. 2, Hab. ii. 10), " let them make into broad
plates for a covering to the altar" (of burnt-offering). Through this
application of them they became a sign, or, according to ver. 39,
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVI. 41-60. Ill
a memorial to all who drew near to the sanctuary, which was to
remind them continually of this judgment of God, and warn the
congregation of grasping at the priestly prerogatives. The words,
H^ 1 ? ^1» in ver. 40, introduce the predicate in the form of an apo-
dosis to the subject, which is written absolutely, and consists of an
entire sentence, njn with 3 signifies, " to experience the same fate
as" another.
Punishment of the murmuring Congregation, and Confirmation of the
High-priesthood of Aaron. — Chap. xvi. 41-xvii. 13 (or chap,
xvii. 6-28).
Vers. 41-50. Punishment of the murmuring Congrega-
tion. — The judgment upon the company of Korah had filled the
people round about with terror and dismay, but it had produced no
change of heart in the congregation that had risen up against its
leaders. The next morning the whole congregation began to mur-
mur against Moses and Aaron, and to charge them with having
slain the people of Jehovah. They referred to Korah and his
company, but especially to the 250 chiefs of renown, whom they
regarded as the kernel of the nation, and called " the people of
Jehovah." They would have made Moses and Aaron responsible
for their death, because in their opinion it was they who had brought
the judgment upon their leaders ; whereas it was through the in-
tercession of Moses (chap. xvi. 22) that the whole congregation
was saved from the destruction which threatened it. To such an
extent does the folly of the proud heart of man proceed, and the
obduracy of a race already exposed to the judgment of God. —
Ver. 7. When the congregation assembled together, Moses and
Aaron turned to the tabernacle, and saw how the cloud covered it,
and the glory of the Lord appeared. As the cloud rested continu-
ally above the tabernacle during the time of encampment (chap.
ix. 18 sqq. ; Ex. xl. 38), we must suppose that at this time the cloud
covered it in a fuller and much more conspicuous sense, just as it
had done when the tabernacle was first erected (chap. ix. 15 ; Ex. xl.
34), and that at the same time the glory of God burst forth from
the dark cloud in a miraculous splendour.- — Vers. 8 sqq. There-
upon they both went into the court of (*3B ?K, as in Lev. ix. 5) the
tabernacle, and God commanded them to rise up (it^n, Niphal
of. DD"J = Dn ; see Ges. § 65, Anm. 5) out of this congregation,
which He would immediately destroy. But they fell upon their
faces in prayer, as in chap. xvi. 21, 22. This time, however, they
Digitized by
Google
112 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
could not avert the bursting forth of the wrathful judgment, as they
had done the day before (chap. xvi. 22). The plague had already
commenced, when Moses told Aaron to take the censer quickly into
the midst of the congregation, with coals and incense 0? n , imper.
Hiph.), to make expiation for it with an incense-offering. And when
this was done, and Aaron placed himself between the dead and the
living, the plague, which had already destroyed 14,700 men, was
stayed. The plague consisted apparently of a sudden death, as in
the case of a pestilence raging with extreme violence, though we
cannot regard it as an actual pestilence.
The means resorted to by Moses to stay the plague showed afresh
how the faithful servant of God bore the rescue of his people upon
his heart. All the motives which he had hitherto pleaded, in his
repeated intercession that this evil congregation might be spared,
were now exhausted. He could not stake his life for the nation,
as at Horeb (Ex. xxxii. 32), for the nation had rejected him. He
could no longer appeal to the honour of Jehovah among the heathen,
seeing that the Lord, even when sentencing the rebellious race to
fall in the desert, had assured him that the whole earth should be
filled with His glory (chap. xiv. 20 sqq.). Still less could he pray
to God that He would not be wrathful with all for the sake of one
or a few sinnersj as in chap. xvi. 22, seeing that the whole congre-
gation had taken part with the rebels. In this condition of things
there was but one way left of averting the threatened destruction
of the whole nation, namely, to adopt the means which the Lord
Himself had given to His congregation, in the high-priestly office,
to wipe away their sins, and recover the divine grace which they
had forfeited through sin, — viz. the offering of incense which em-
bodied the high-priestly prayer, and the strength and operation of
which were not dependent upon the sincerity and earnestness of
subjective faith, but had a firm and immovable foundation in the
objective force of the divine appointment. This was the means
adopted by the faithful servant of the Lord, and the judgment of
wrath was averted in its course ; the plague was averted. — The
effectual operation of the incense-offering of the high priest also
served to furnish the people with a practical proof of the power and
operation of the true and divinely appointed priesthood. " The
priesthood which the company of Korah had so wickedly usurped,
had brought down death and destruction upon himself, through his
offering of incense ; but the divinely appointed priesthood of Aaron
averted death and destruction from the whole congregation when
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVII. 1-18. 113
incense was offered by him, and stayed the well-merited judgment,
which had broken forth upon it" (Kurtz)'.
Chap. xvii. 1-13 (or chap. xvii. 16-28). Conpibmation op
the High-pbiesthood op Aaron. — Whilst the Lord had thus
given a practical proof to the people, that Aaron was the high
priest appointed by Him fqr His congregation, by allowing the
high-priestly incense offered by Aaron to expiate His wrath, and by
removing the plague ; He also gave them a still further confirma-
tion of His priesthood, by a miracle which was well adapted to put
to silence all the murmuring of the congregation. — Vers. 16-20.
He commanded Moses to take twelve rods of the tribe-princes
of Israel, one for the fathers' house of each of their tribes, and
to write upon each the name of the tribe ; but upon that of the
tribe of Levi he was to write Aaron's name, because each rod was
to stand for the head of their fathers' houses, i.e. for the existing
head of the tribe ; and in the case of Levi, the tribe-head was Aaron.
As only twelve rods were taken for all the tribes of Israel, and
Levi was included among them, Ephraim and Manasseh must
have been reckoned as the one tribe of Joseph, as in Deut. xxvii.
12. These rods were to be laid by Moses in the tabernacle before
the testimony, or ark of the covenant (Ex. xxv. 21, xxix. 42).
And there the rod of the man whom Jehovah chose, i.e. entrusted
with the priesthood (see chap. xvi. 5), would put forth shoots, to
quiet the murmuring of the people. *!?#, Hiph., to cause to sink, to
bring to rest, construed with 7W5 in a pregnant signification, to
quiet in such a way that it will not rise again. — Vers. 6-9. Moses
carried out this command. And when he went into the tabernacle
the following morning, behold Aaron's rod of the house of Levi
had sprouted, and put forth shoots, and had borne blossoms and
matured almonds. And Moses brought all the rods out of the
sanctuary, and gave every man his own; the rest, as we may
gather from the context, being all unchanged, so that the whole
nation could satisfy itself that God had chosen Aaron. Thus was
the word fulfilled which Moses had spoken at the commencement
of the rebellion of the company of Korah (chap. xvi. 5), and that
in a way which could not fail to accredit him before the whole
congregation as sent of God.
So far as the occurrence itself is concerned, there can hardly
be any need to remark, that the natural interpretation which has
lately been attempted by Ewald, viz. that Moses had laid several
PENT. — VOL. III. H
Digitized by
Google
114 THE FOUBTH BOOK OF MOSES.
almond rods in the holy place, which had just been freshly cut
off, that he might see the next day which of them would flower
the best during the night, is directly at variance with the words of
the text, and also with the fact, that a rod even freshly cut off,
when laid in a dry place, would not bear ripe fruit in a single
night. The miracle which God wrought here as the Creator of
nature, was at the same time a significant symbol of the nature and
meaning of the priesthood. The choice of the rods had also a bear-
ing upon the object in question. A man's rod was the sign of his
position as ruler in the house and congregation ; with a prince the
rod becomes a sceptre, the insignia of rule (Gen. xlix. 10). As a
severed branch, the rod could not put forth shoots and blossom in
a natural way. But God could impart new vital powers even to
the dry rod. And so Aaron had naturally no pre-eminence above
the heads of the other tribes. But the priesthood was founded not
upon natural qualifications and gifts, but upon the power of the
Spirit, which God communicates according to the choice of His
wisdom, and which He had imparted to Aaron through his consecra-
tion with holy anointing oil. It was this which the Lord intended
to show to the people, by causing Aaron's rod to put forth branches,
blossom, and fruit, through a miracle of His omnipotence ; whereas
the rods of the other heads of the tribes remained as barren as
before. In this way, therefore, it was not without deep signifi-
cance that Aaron's rod not only put forth shoots, by which the
divine election might be recognised, but bore even blossom and ripe
fruit. This showed that Aaron was not only qualified for his call-
ing, but administered his office in the full power of the Spirit, and
bore the fruit expected of him. The almond rod was especially
adapted to exhibit this, as an almond-tree flowers and bears fruit
the earliest of all the trees, and has received its name of IgE',
" awake," from this very fact (cf. Jer. i. 11).
God then commanded (vers. 10, 11) that Aaron's rod should be
taken back into the sanctuary, and preserved before the testimony,
"for a sign for ilie rebellious, that thouputtest an end to their murmur-
ing, and they die not." The preservation of the rod before the ark
of the covenant, in the immediate presence of the Lord, was a pledge
to Aaron of the continuance of his election, and the permanent
duration of his priesthood ; though we have no need to assume, that
through a perpetual miracle the staff continued green and blossom-
ing. In this way the staff became a sign to the rebellious, which
could not fail to stop their murmuring. — Vers. 12, 13. This miracle
Digitized by
Google
. CHAP. XVUI. 1-7. 115
awakened a salutary terror in all the people, so that they cried out
to Moses in mortal anguish, "Behold, we die, we perish, we all
perish ! Every one who comes near to the dwelling of Jehovah dies ;
are we all to die?" Even if this fear of death was no fruit of
faith, it was fitted for all that to prevent any fresh outbreaks of
rebellion on the part of the rejected generation.
Service and Revenues of the Priests and Levites. — Chap, xviii.
The practical confirmation of the priesthood of Aaron and his
family, on the part of God, is very appropriately followed by the
legal, regulations concerning the official duties of the priests and
Levites (vers. 1-7), and the revenues to be assigned them for their
services (vers. 8-32), as the laws hitherto given upon this subject,
although they contain many isolated stipulations, have not laid
down any complete and comprehensive arrangement. The instruc-
tions relating to this subject were addressed by Jehovah directly to
Aaron (see vers. 1 and 8), up to the law, that out of the tenths
Vhich the Levites were to collect from the people, they were to
pay a tenth again to the priests ; and this was addressed to Moses
(ver. 25), as the head of all Israel.
Vers. 1-7. The Official Duties and Eights of the Pbiests
AND Levites. — Ver. 1. To impress upon the minds of the priests
and Levites the holiness and responsibility of their office, the service
of Aaron, of his sons, and of his father's house, i.e. of the family of
the Kohathites, is described as " bearing the iniquity of the sanctu-
ary," and the service which was peculiar to the Aaronides, as " bear-
ing the iniquity of their priesthood." " To bear the iniquity of the
sanctuary " signifies not only " to have to make expiation for all
that offended against the laws of the priests and the holy things, i.e.
the desecration of these" (Knobelj, but " iniquity or transgression
at the sanctuary," i.e. the defilement of it by the sin of those who
drew near to the sanctuary ; not only of the priests and Levites, but
of the whole people who defiled the sanctuary in the midst of them
with its holy vessels, not only by their sins (Lev. xvi. 6), but even
by their holy gifts (Ex. xxviii. 38), and thus brought guilt upon
the whole congregation, which the priests were to bear, i.e. to take
upon themselves and expunge, by virtue of the holiness and sancti-
fying power communicated to their office (see at Ex. xxviii. 38).
The "iniquity of the priesthood," however, not only embraced
every offence against the priesthood, every neglect of the most
Digitized by
Google
116 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
scrupulous and conscientious fulfilment of duty in connection with
their office, but extended to all the sin which attached to the
official acts of the priests, on account of the sinfulness of their
nature. It was to wipe out these sins and defilements, that the
annual expiation of the holy things on the day of atonement had
been appointed (Lev. xvi. 16 sqq.). The father's house of Aaron,
i.e. the Levitical family of Kohath, was also to join in bearing the
iniquity of the sanctuary, because the oversight of the holy vessels
of the sanctuary devolved upon it (chap. iv. 4 sqq.). — Vers. 2-4.
Aaron was also to bring his (other) brethren («c. to the sanctuary),
viz. the tribe of Levi, that is to say, the Gershonites and Merarites,
that they might attach themselves to him and serve him, both him
(nntfl) and his sons, before the tent of testimony, and discharge the
duties that were binding upon them, according to chap. iv. 24 sqq.,
SI sqq. (cf* chap. iii. 6, 7, viii. 26). Only they were not to come
near to the holy vessels and the altar, for that would bring death
both upon them and the priests (see at chap. iv. 15). On ver. 4,
cf. chap. i. 53 and iii. 7. — Vers. 5-7. The charge of the sanctuary
(i.e. the dwelling) and the altar (of burnt-offering) devolved upon
Aaron and his sons, that the wrath of God might not come again
upon the children of Israel (see chap. viii. 19), — namely, through
such illegal acts as Nadab and Abihu (Lev. x. 2), and the com-
pany of Korah (chap. xvi. 35), had committed. To this end God
had handed over the Levites to them as a gift, to be their assistants
(see at chap. iii. 9 and viii. 16, 19). But Aaron and his sons were
to attend to the priesthood " with regard to everything of the altar
and within the- vail" (i.e. of the most holy place, see Lev. xvi. 12).
The allusion is to all the priestly duties from the altar of burnt-
offering to the most holy place, including the holy place which lay
between. This office, which brought them into the closest fellow-
ship with the Lord, was a favour accorded to them by the grace of
God. This is expressed in the words, " as a service of gift (a ser-
vice with which I present you) I give you the priesthood? The
last words in ver. 7 are the same as in chap. i. 51 ; and " stranger"
(zar), as in Lev. xxii. 10.
Vers. 8-20. The Revenues oe the Priests. — These are
summed up in ver. 8 in these words, " I give thee the keeping of My
heave-offerings in all holy gifts for a portion, as an eternal statute"
The notion of rnOE'D, keeping, as in Ex. xii. 6, xvi. 23, 32, is defined
in the second parallel clause as nnifo, a portion (see at Lev. vii. 35).
Digitized by
Google
chap. xvm. 8-20. 117
The priests were to keep all the heave-offerings, as the portion
which belonged to them, out of the sacrificial gifts that the children
of Israel offered to the Lord, TlbVlPi, heave-offerings (see at Ex.
xxv. 2, and Lev. ii. 9), is used here in the broadest sense, as in-
cluding all the holy gifts (kodashim, see Lev. xxi. 22) which the
Israelites lifted off from their possessions and presented to the Lord
(as in chap. v. 9). Among these, for example, were> first of all,
the most holy gifts in the meat-offerings, sin-offerings, and trespass-
offerings (vers. 9, 10 ; see at Lev. ii. 3). The burnt>offerings are
not mentioned, because the whole of the flesh of these was burned
upon the altar, and the skin alone fell to the portion of the priest
(Lev. viL 8). " From the fire" sc. of the altar. Bte, fire, is
equivalent to n#K, firing (see Lev. i. 9).. These gifts they were to
eat, as most holy, in a most holy place, i.e. in the court of the
tabernacle (see Lev. vi. 9, 19, vii. 6), which is called " most holy"
here, to lay a stronger emphasis upon the precept. In the second
place, these gifts included also " the holy gifts ;" viz. (a) (ver. 11)
the heave-offering of their gifts in all wave-offerings (tenuphoth),
i.e. the wave-breast and heave-leg of the peace-offerings, and what-
ever else was waved in connection with the sacrifices (see at Lev.
vii. 33) : these might be eaten by both the male and female
members of the priestly families, provided they were legally clean
(Lev. xxii. 3 sqq.) ; (b) (ver. 12) the gifts of first-fruits : " all the
fat (i.e. the best, as in Gen. xlv. 18) of oil, new wine, and corn"
viz. DJVtSW, « the first of them," the D^«3, " the first-grown fruits"
of the land, and that of all the fruit of the ground (Deut. xxvi.
2, 10 ; Prov. iii. 9 ; Ezek. xliv. 30), corn, wine, oil, honey, and
tree-fruit (Deut. viii. 8, compared with Lev. xix. 23, 24), which
were offered, according to 2 Chron. xxxi. 5, Neh. x. 36, 38, Tob. i.
6, as first-fruits every year (see Mishnah, BUckwr, i. 3, 10, where the
first-fruits are specified according to the productions mentioned in
Deut. viii. 8 ; the law prescribed nothing in relation to the quantity
of the different first-fruits, but left this entirely to the offerer him-
self) ; (c) (ver. 14) everything placed under a ban (see at Lev.
xxvii. 28) ; and (d) (vers. 15-18) the first-born of man and beast.
The first-born of men and of unclean beasts were redeemed accord-
ing to chap. iii. 47, Ex. xiii. 12, 13, and Lev. xxvii. 6, 27 ; but
such as were fit for sacrifice were actually offered, the blood being
swung against the altar, and the fat portions burned upon it, whilst
the whole of the flesh fell to the portion of the priests.- So far as
the redemption of human beings was concerned (ver. 16), they were
Digitized by
Google
118 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
" to redeem from the monthly child" i.e. the first-born child as soon
as it was a month old. — Ver. 19. " All the holy heave-offerings" are
not the thank-offerings (Knobel), but, as in ver. 8, all the holy gifts
enumerated in vers. 9-18. Jehovah gives these to the priests as an
eternal claim. u An eternal covenant of salt is this before Jehovah"
for Aaron and his descendants. A u covenant of salt ;" equivalent
to an indissoluble covenant, or inviolable contract (see at Lev. ii.
13). — Ver. 20. For this reason, Aaron was to receive no inheritance
in the land among the children of Israel. Aaron, as the head of
the priests, represents the whole priesthood ; and with regard to the
possession, the whole tribe of Levi is placed, in ver. 23, on an
equality with the priests. The Levites were to receive no portion
of the land as an inheritance in Canaan (cf. chap. xxvi. 62 ; Deut.
xii. 12, xiv. 27 ; Josh. xiv. 3). Jehovah was the portion and
inheritance, not only of Aaron and his sons, but of the whole tribe
of Levi (cf. Deut. x. 9, xviii. 2 ; Josh. xiii. 33) ; or, as it is expressed
in Josh, xviii. 7, " the priesthood of Jehovah was their inheritance,"
though not in the sense that Knobel supposes, viz. " the priesthood
with its revenues," which would make the expression " Jehovah, the
God of Israel" (Josh. xiii. 33), to be metonymical for " sacrificial
gifts, first-fruits, and tenths." The possession of the priests and
Levites did not consist in the revenues assigned to them by God,
but in the possession of Jehovah, the God of Israel. In the same
sense in which the tribe of Levi was the peculiar possession of
Jehovah out of the whole of the people of possession, was Jehovah
also the peculiar possession of Levi ; and just as the other tribes
were to live upon what was afforded by the land assigned them as
a possession, Levi was to live upon what Jehovah bestowed upon it.
And inasmuch as not only the whole land of the twelve tribes, with
which Jehovah had enfeoffed them, but the whole earth, belonged
to Jehovah (Ex. xix. 5), He was necessarily to be regarded as the
greatest possession of all, beyond which nothing greater is conceiv-
able, and in comparison with which every other possession is to be
regarded as nothing. Hence it was evidently the greatest privilege
and highest honour to have Him for a portion and possession
(Bdhr, Symbolik, ii. p. 44). " For truly," as Masius writes (Com.
on Josh.), "he who possesses God possesses all things; and the
worship {cultus) of Him is infinitely fuller of delight, and far more
productive, than the cultivation (cultus) of any soil."
Vers. 21-24. Kevenues of the Levites. — For («£n, instead
D g t zed by Vor OOQ 1C
CHAP. XVIII. 25-82. 119
of, for) their service at the tabernacle God assigns them u every
tenth in Israel as an inheritance." On the tenth, see at Lev. xxvii.
30-33. The institution and description of their service in vers. 22
and 23 is the same as that in chap. i. 53 and viii. 19. " Lest they
bear sin :" see at Lev. xix. 17.
Vers. 25-32. Appropriation of the Tithe. — Vers. 26 sqq. When
the Levites took (received) from the people the tithe assigned them
by Jehovah, they were to lift off from it a heave-offering for
Jehovah, a tithe of the tithe for Aaron the priest (i.e. for the
priesthood ; see at ver. 20). u Your heave-offering shall be reckoned
to you as the corn of the threshing-floor, and the fulness (see Ex. xxii.
28) of the wine-press," i.e. according to ver. 30, as the revenue of
the threshing-floor and •wine-press ; that is to say, as corn and wine
■which they had reaped themselves. — Ver. 29. The whole of this
heave-offering of Jehovah, i.e. the tithe of the tithe, they were to
lift off from all their gifts, from all the tithes of the people which
they received ; " of all the fat of it" i.e. of all the best of the heave-
offering they received, they were to lift off Svfaj>Q~r\tt, " Us holy" i.e.
the holy part, which was to be dedicated to Jehovah. — Ver. 30.
They might eat it (the tithe they had received, after taking off the
priests' tithe) in any place with their families, as it was the reward
for their service at the tabernacle. — Ver. 32. They would load no
sin upon themselves by so doing (see Lev. xix. 17), if they only
lifted off the best as tithe (for the priest), and did not desecrate
the holy gifts, sc. by eating in all kinds of places, which was not
allowed, according to ver. 10, with regard to the most holy gifts.
These regulations concerning the revenues of the priests and
Levites were in perfect accordance with the true idea of the Israel-
itish kingdom of God. Whereas in heathen states, where there was
an hereditary priestly caste, that caste was generally a rich one, and
held a firm possession in the soil (in Egypt, for example ; see at Gen.
xlvii. 22), the Levites received no hereditary landed property in the
land of Israel, but only towns to dwell in among the other tribes,
with pasturage for their cattle (chap, xxxv.), because Jehovah, the
God of Israel, would be their inheritance. In this way their earthly
existence was based upon the spiritual ground and soil of faith, in
accordance with the calling assigned them, to be the guardians and
promoters of the commandments, statutes, and rights of Jehovah ;
and their authority and influence among the people were bound up
with their unreserved surrender of themselves to the Lord, and their
firm reliance upon the possession of their God. Now, whilst this
Digitized by
Google
120 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
position was to be a constant incitement to the Levites to surrender
themselves entirely to the Lord and His service, it was also to be-
come to the whole nation a constant admonition, inasmuch as it was
a prerogative conferred upon them by the Lord, to seek the highest
of all good in the possession of the Lord, as its portion and inherit-
ance. — The revenue itself, however, which the Lord assigned to
the Levites and priests, as His servants, consisting of the tenths and
first-fruits, as well as certain portions of the different sacrificial gifts
that were offered to Him, 'appears to have been a very considerable
one, especially if we adopt the computation of J. D. Micliaelis (Mos.
Eecht. i. § 52) with reference to the tithes. u A tribe," he says,
" which had only 22,000 males in it (23,000 afterwards), and there-
fore could hardly have numbered more than 12,000 grown-up men,
received the tithes of 600,000 Israelites ; consequently one single
Levite, without the slightest necessity for sowing, and without any
of the expenses of agriculture, reaped or received from the produce
of the flocks and herds as much as five of the other Israelites." But
this leaves out of sight the fact that tithes are never paid so exactly
as this, and that no doubt there was as little conscientiousness in the
matter then as there is at the present day, when those who are en-
titled to receive a tenth often receive even less .than a twentieth.
Moreover, the revenue of the tribe, which the Lord had chosen as
His own peculiar possession, was not intended to be a miserable and
beggarly one ; but it was hardly equal, at any time, to the revenues
which the priestly castes of other nations derived from their endow-
ments. Again, the Levites had to give up the tenth of all the tithes
they received to the priests ; and the priests were to offer to Jehovah
upon the altar a portion of the first-fruits, heave-offerings, and wave-
offerings that were assigned to them. Consequently, as the whole
nation was to make a practical acknowledgment, in the presentation
of the tithe and first-fruits, that it had received its hereditary pro-
perty as a fief from the Lord its God, so the Levites, by their pay-
ment of the tenth to the priests, and the priests, by presenting a
portion of their revenues upon the altar, were to make a practical
confession that they had received all their revenues from the Lord
their God, and owed Him praise and adoration in return (see Bdkr,
Symbolik, ii. pp. 43 sqq.).
The Law concerning Purification from the Uncleanness of Death. —
Chap. xix.
In order that a consciousness of the continuance of the covenant
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIX. 2 10. 121
relation might be kept alive during the dying out of the race that
had fallen under the judgment of God, after the severe stroke with
which the Lord had visited the whole nation in consequence of the
rebellion of the company of Korah, He gave the law concerning
purification from the uncleanness of death, in which first of all the
preparation of a sprinkling water is commanded for the removal of
this uncleanness (vers. l-10a) ; and then, secondly, the use of this
purifying water enjoined as an eternal statute (vers. 106-22). The
thought that death, and the putrefaction of death, as being the
embodiment of sin, defiled and excluded from fellowship with the
holy God, was a view of the fall and its consequences which had
been handed down from the primeval age (see vol. ii. p. 357), and
which was not only shared by the Israelites with many of the nations
of antiquity, 1 but presupposed by the laws given on Sinai as a truth
well known in Israel ; and at the same time confirmed, both in the
prohibition of the priests from defiling themselves with the dead, ex-
cept in the case of their nearest blood-relations (Lev> xxi. 1-6, 10-
12), and in the command, that every one who was defiled by a corpse
should be removed out of the camp (chap. v. 2-4). Now, so long
as the mortality within the congregation did not exceed the natural
limits, the traditional modes of purification would be quite sufficient.
But.when it prevailed to a hitherto unheard-of extent, in conse-
quence of the sentence pronounced by God, the defilements would
necessarily be so crowded together, that the whole congregation
would be in danger of being infected with the defilement of death,
and of forfeiting its vocation to be the holy nation of Jehovah,
unless God provided it with the means of cleansing itself from this
uncleanness, without losing the fellowship of His covenant of grace.
The law which follows furnished the means. In ver. 2 this law is
called rnfoin T\$n } a " statute of instruction" or law-statute. This
combination of the two words commonly used for law and statute,
which is only met with again in chap. xxxi. 21, and there, as
here, in connection with a rule relating to purification from the
uncleanness of death, is probably intended to give emphasis to the
design of the law about to be given, to point it out as one of great
importance, but not as decretum absque ulla ratione, a decree with-
out any reason, as the Rabbins suppose.
Vers. 2- 10a. Preparation of the Purifying Water. — As water is
the ordinary means by which all kinds of uncleanness are removed,
1 Vid. Btihr, SymboWc, ii. pp. 466 uqq. ; Sommer, bibl. Abhdll. pp. 271 sqq. ;
Knobel on this chapter, and Leyrer in Herzog's Cyclopaedia.
Digitized by
Google
122 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
it was also to be employed in the removal of the uncleanness of
death. But as this uncleanness was the strongest of all religious
defilements, fresh water alone was not sufficient to remove it ; and
consequently a certain kind of sprinkling-water was appointed, which
was strengthened by the ashes of a sin-offering, and thus formed
into a holy alkali. The main point in the law which follows, there-
fore, was the preparation of the ashes, and these had to be obtained
by the sacrifice of a red heifer. 1 — Vers. 2 sqq. The sons of Israel
were to bring to Moses a red heifer, entirely without blemish:, and
to give it to Eleazar the priest, that he might have it slaughtered in
his presence outside the camp, rns is not a cow generally, but a
young cow, a heifer, &£/M»Xt? (IiXX.), juvenca, between the calf
and the full-grown cow. <l&™:, of a red colour, is not to be con-
nected with no H DFi in the sense of " quite red," as the Rabbins in-
terpret it ; but fi^on, integra, is to be taken by itself, and the words
which follow, " wherein is no blemish" to be regarded as defining
it still more precisely (see Lev. xxii. 19, 20). The slaying of this
heifer is called nsBPi, a sin-offering, in vers. 9 and 17. To remind
the congregation that death was the wages of sin, the antidote to
the defilement of death was to be taken from a sin-offering. But
as the object was not to remove and wipe away sin as such, but
simply to cleanse the congregation from the uncleanness which
proceeded from death, the curse of sin, it was .necessary that the
sin-offering should be modified in a peculiar manner to accord with
this special design. The sacrificial animal was not to be a bullock,
as in the case of the ordinary sin-offerings of the congregation (Lev.
iv. 14), but a female, because the female sex is the bearer of life
(Gen. iii. 20), a 'TIB, i.e. lit. the fruit-bringing ; and of a red colour,
not because the blood-red colour points to sin (as Hengstenberg fol-
lows the Babbins and earlier theologians in supposing), but as the
colour of the most " intensive life," which has its seat in the blood,
and shows itself in the red colour of the face (the cheeks and lips) ;
and one " upon which no yoke had ever come," i.e. whose vital
energy had not yet been crippled by labour under the yoke. Lastly,
1 On this sacrifice, which is so rich in symbolical allusions, but the details of
which are so difficult to explain, compare the rabbinical statutes in the talmudical
tractate Para (Mishnah, v. Surenh. vi. pp. 269 sqq.) ; Maimonides de vacca ru/a;
and Lundius jild. Heiligth. pp. 680 sqq. Among modern treatises on this sub-
ject, are Bohr's Symbolik, ii. pp. 493 sqq. ; Hengstenberg, Egypt and the Books of
Moses, pp. 173 sqq. ; Leyrer in Herzog's Cycl. ; Kurtz in the Theol. Studien und
Kritiken, 1846, pp. 629 sqq. (also Sacrificial Worship of the Old Testament,
pp. 422 sqq., Eng. transl., Tr.) ; and my ArchSologie, i. p. 58.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIX. 2-10. 123
like all the sacrificial animals, it was to be uninjured, and free from
faults, inasmuch as the idea of representation, which lay at the foun-
dation of all the sacrifices, but more especially of the sin-offerings,
demanded natural sinlessness and original purity, quite as. much as
imputed sin and transferred uncleanness. Whilst the last-mentioned
prerequisite showed that the victim was well fitted for bearing sin,
the other attributes indicated the fulness of life and power in their
highest forms, and qualified it to form a powerful antidote to death.
As thus appointed to furnish a reagent against death and mortal
corruption, the sacrificial animal was to possess throughout, viz. in
colour, in sex, and in the character of its body, the fulness of life in
its greatest freshness and vigour. — Ver. 3. The sacrifice itself was
to be superintended by Eleazar the priest, the eldest son of the high
priest, and his presumptive successor in office ; because Aaron, or the
high priest, whose duty it was to present the sin-offerings for the
congregation (Lev. iv. 16), could not, according to his official posi-
tion, which required him to avoid all uncleanness of death (Lev.
xxi. 11, 12), perform such an act as this, which stood in the closest
relation to death and the uncleanness of death, and for that very
reason had to be performed outside the camp. The subject, to
" bring her forth" and " slay her" is indefinite ; since it was not the
duty of the priest to slay the sacrificial animal, but of the offerer
himself, or in the case before us, of the congregation, which would
appoint one of its own number for the purpose. All that the priest
had to do was to sprinkle the blood ; at the same time the slaying
was to take place YOB?, before him, i.e. before his eyes. Eleazar was
to sprinkle some of the blood seven times " towards the opposite,"
i.e. towards the front of the tabernacle (seven times, as in Lev. iv.
17). Through this sprinkling of the blood the slaying became a
sacrifice, being brought thereby into relation to Jehovah and the
sanctuary ; whilst the life, which was sacrificed for the sin of the
congregation, was given up to the Lord, and offered up in the only
way in which a sacrifice, prepared like this, outside the sanctuary,
could possibly be offered.
After this (vers. 5, 6), they were to burn the cow, with the skin,
flesh, blood, and dung, before his (Eleazar's) eyes, and he was to
throw cedar-wood, hyssop, and scarlet wool into the fire. The
burning of the sacrificial animal outside the camp took place in
the case of every sin-offering for the whole congregation, for the
reasons expounded in vol. ii. p. 307. But in the case before us, the
whole of the sacrificial act had to be performed outside the camp,
Digitized by
Google
124 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.'
ue. eutside the sphere of the theocracy ; because the design of this
sin-offering was not that the congregation might thereby be received
through the expiation of its sin into the fellowship of the God and
Lord who was present at the altar and in the sanctuary, but simply
that an antidote to the infection of death might be provided for the
congregation, which had become infected through fellowship with
death ; and consequently, the victim was to represent, not the living
congregation as still associated with the God who was present in His
earthly kingdom, but those members of the congregation who had
fallen victims to temporal death as the wages of sin, and, as such,
were separated from the earthly theocracy (see my Archaeology, i.
p. 283). In this sacrifice, the blood, which was generally poured
out at the foot of the altar, was burned along with the rest, and the
ashes to be obtained were impregnated with the substance thereof.
But in order still further to increase the strength of these ashes,
which were already well fitted to serve as a powerful antidote to
the corruption of death, as being the incorruptible residuum of the
sin-offering which had not been destroyed by the fire, cedar-wood
was thrown into the fire, as the symbol of the incorruptible continu-
ance of life ; and hyssop, as the symbol of purification from the cor-
ruption of death ; and scarlet wool, the deep red of which shadowed
forth the strongest vital energy (see at Lev. xiv. 6), — so that the
ashes might be regarded " as the quintessence of all that purified
and strengthened life, refined and sublimated by the fire " (Leyrer).
— Vers. 7-10a, etc. The persons who took part in this — viz. the
priest, the man who attended to the burning, and the clean man
who gathered the ashes together, and deposited them in a clean
place for subsequent use — became unclean till the evening in con-
sequence; not from the fact that they had "officiated for unclean
persons, and, in a certain sense, had participated in their unclean-
ness {Knobel), but through the uncleanness of sin and death, which
had passed over to the sin-offering ; just as the man who led into
the wilderness the goat which had been rendered unclean through
the imposition of sin, became himself unclean in consequence (Lev.
xvi. 26). Even the sprinkling water prepared from the ashes
defiled every one who touched it (ver. 21). But when the ashes
were regarded in relation to their appointment as the means of
purification, they were to be treated as clean. Not only were they
to be collected together by a clean man ; but they were to be kept
for use in a clean place, just as the ashe3 of the sacrifices that were
taken away from the altar were to be carried to a clean place out-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIX. 10-22. 125
side the camp (Lev. vi. 4). These defilements, like every other
which only lasted till the evening, were to be removed by washing
(see vol. ii. pp. 373-4). The ashes thus collected were to serve
the congregation n^3 ^pp, i.e. literally as water of uncleanness ; in
other words, as water by which uncleanness was to be removed.
" Water of uncleanness " is analogous to " water of sin " in chap,
viii. 7.
Vers. 106-22. Use of the Water of Purification. — The words in
ver. 106, " And it shall he to the children of Israel, and to the
stranger in the midst of them, for an everlasting statute" relate to the
preparation and application of the sprinkling water, and connect
the foregoing instructions with those which follow. — Vers. 11-13
contain the general rules for the use of the water ; vers. 14-22 a
more detailed description of the execution of those rules. — Vers. 11
sqq. Whoever touched a. corpse, " with regard to all the souls of
men," i.e. the corpse of a person, of whatever age or sex, was un-
clean for seven days, and on the third and seventh day he was. to
cleanse himself ("BWin, as in chap. viii. 21) with the water (is re-
fers, so far as the sense is concerned, to the water of purification).
If he neglected this cleansing, he did not become clean, and he
defiled the dwelling of Jehovah (see at Lev. xv. 31). Such a
man was to be cut off from Israel (vid. at Gen. xvii. 14). — Vers.
14-16. Special instructions concerning the defilement. If a man
died in a tent, every one who entered it, or who was there at the
time, became unclean for seven days. So also did every "open
vessel upon which there was not a covering, a string," i.e. that had
not a covering fastened by a string, to prevent the smell of the
corpse from penetrating it. TflS, a string, is in apposition to TOY,
a band, or binding (see Ges. § 113 ; Ewald, § 287, «.). Tin's also
applied to any one in the open field, who touched a man who had
either been slain by the sword or had died a natural death, or even
a bone (skeleton), or a grave. — Vers. 17-19. Ceremony of purifica-
tion. They were to take for the unclean person some of the dust
of the burning of the cow, i.e. some of the ashes obtained by burn-
ing the cow, and put living, i.e. fresh water (see Lev. xiv. 5), upon
it in a vessel. A clean man was then to take a bunch of hyssop
(see Ex. xii. 22), on account of its inherent purifying power, and
dip it in the water, on the third and seventh day after the defile-
ment had taken place, and to sprinkle the tent, with the vessels and
persons in it, as well as every one who had touched a corpse, whether
a person slain, or one who had died a natural death, or a grave ; after
Digitized by
Google
126 THE FOURTH BOOK OF HOSES.
which the persons were to wash their clothes and bathe, that they
might be clean in the evening. As the uncleanness in question is
held np as the highest grade of uncleanness, by its duration being
fixed at seven days, i.e. an entire week, so the appointment of a
double purification with the sprinkling water shows the force of
the uncleanness to be removed ; whilst the selection of the third
and seventh days was simply determined by the significance of the
numbers themselves. In ver. 20, the threat of punishment for the
neglect of purification is repeated from ver. 13, for the purpose of
making it most emphatic. — Vers. 21, 22. This also was to be an
everlasting statute, that he who sprinkled the water of purification,
or even touched it (see at vers. 7 sqq.), and he who was touched
by a person defiled (by a corpse), and also the person who touched
him, should be unclean till the evening, — a rule which also applied
to other forms of uncleanness.
Israel's last journey from kadesh to the heights of
pisoah in the fields op moab. chap. xx. and xxi.
In the first month of the fortieth year, the whole congregation
of Israel assembled again at Kadesh, in the desert of Zin, to com-
mence the march to Canaan. In Kadesh, Miriam died (chap. xx.
1), and the people murmured against Moses and Aaron on account
of the want of water. The Lord relieved this want, by pouring
water from the rock ; but Moses sinned on this occasion, so that he
was not allowed to enter Canaan (vers. 2-13). From Kadesh,
Moses sent messengers to the king of Edom, to ask permission for
the Israelites to pass peaceably through his land ; but this was
refused by the king of Edom (vers. 14-21). In the meantime, the
Israelites marched from Kadesh to Mount Hor, on the borders of
the land of Edom; and there Aaron died, and Eleazar was in-
vested with the high-priesthood in his stead (vers. 22-29). On
this march they were attacked by the Canaanitish king of Arad;
but they gained a complete victory, and laid his cities under the
ban (chap. xix. 1-3). As the king of Edom opposed their passing
through his land, they were compelled to go from Mount Hor to
the Bed Sea, and round the land of Edom. On the way the mur-
muring people were bitten by poisonous serpents ; but the penitent
among them were healed of the bite of the serpent, by looking at
the brazen serpent which Moses set up at the command of God
(vers. 4-9). After going round the Moabitish mountains, they
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XX.-XXI. 8. 127
turned to the north, and went along the eastern side of the Edom-
itish and Moahitish territory, as far as the Anion, on the border
of the Amoritish kingdom of Sihon, with the intention of going
through to the Jordan, and so entering Canaan (vers. 10-20).
But as Sihon would not allow the Israelites to pass through his
land, and made a hostile demonstration against them, they smote
him and conquered his land, and also the northern Amoritish king-
dom of Og, king of Bashan (vers. 21-35), and forced their way
through the Amoritish territory to the heights of Pisgah, for the
purpose of going forward thence into the steppes of Moab by the
Jordan (chap. xxii. 1). These marches formed the third stage in
the guidance of Israel through the desert to Canaan.
Death of Miriam. Water out of the Bock. Refusal of a Passage
through Edom. Aaron's Death. Conquest over the King of
Arad. — Chap, xx.— xxi. 3.
The events mentioned in the heading, which took place either
in Kadesh or on the march thence to the mountain of Hor, are
grouped together in chap. xx. 1-xxi. 3, rather in a classified order
than in one that is strictly chronological. The death of Miriam
took place during the time when the people were collected at Kadesh-
Barnea in the desert of Zin (ver. 21). But when the whole nation
assembled together in this desert there was a deficiency of water,
which caused the people to murmur against Moses, until God re-
lieved the want by a miracle (vers. 2-13). It was from Kadesh
that messengers were sent to the king of Edom (vers. 14 sqq.) ;
but instead of waiting at Kadesh till the messengers returned,
Moses appears to have proceeded with the people in the meantime
into the Arabah. When and where the messengers returned to
Moses, we are not informed. So much is certain, however, that the
Edomites did not come with an army against the Israelites (vers.
20, 21), until they approached their land with the intention of
passing through. For it was in the Arabah, at Mount Hor, that
Israel first turned to go round the land of Edom (chap. xxi. 4).
The attack of the Canaanites of Arad (chap. xxi. 1-3), who at-
tempted to prevent the Israelites from advancing into the desert of
Zin, occurred .in the interval between the departure from Kadesh
and the arrival in the Arabah at Mount Hor. ; so that if a chrono-
logical arrangement were adopted, this event would be placed in
chap. xx. 22, between the first and second clauses of this verse.
The words " and came to Mount Hor" (ver. 226) are anticipatory,
Digltizi
ed by Google
128 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
and introduce the most important event of all that period, viz. the
death of Aaron at Mount Hor (vers. 23-29) .*
Ver. 1. Assembling op the Congregation at Kadesh. —
In the first month the children of Israel came into the desert of
Zin, i.e. in the fortieth year of their wanderings, at the commence-
ment of which " the whole congregation" assembled together once
more in the very same place where the sentence had been passed
thirty-seven years and a half before, that they should remain in the
desert for forty years, until the rebellious generation had died out.
The year is not mentioned in ver. 1, but, according to chap. xiv.
32 sqq., it can only be the year with which the forty years of the
sentence that they should die out in the wilderness came to an end,
that is to say, the fortieth year of their wandering. This is put
1 Even Fries (pp. 53, 54) has admitted that the account in Num. xxi. 1,
xxxiii. 40, is to be regarded as a rehearsal of an event which took place before
the arrival of the Israelites at Mount Hor, and that the conflict with the king
of Arad must have occurred immediately upon the advance of Israel into the
desert of Zin ; and he correctly observes, that the sacred writer has arranged
what stood in practical connection with the sin of Moses and Aaron, and the
refusal of Edom, in the closest juxtaposition to those events : whereas, after he
had once commenced his account of the tragical occurrences in chap, xx., there
was no place throughout the whole of that chapter for mentioning the conflict
with Arad ; and consequently this battle could only find a place in the second
line, after the record of the most memorable events which occurred between
the death of Miriam and that of Aaron, and to which it was subordinate in
actual significance. On the other hand, Fries objects to the arrangement we
have adopted above, and supposes that Israel did not go straight from Kadesh
through the Wady Murreh into the Arabah, and to the border of the (actual)
land of Edom, and then turn back to the Red Sea ; but that after the failure of
the negotiations with the king of Edom, Moses turned at once from the desert
of Zin and plain of Kadesh, and went back in a south-westerly direction to the
Hebron road ; and having followed this road to Jebel Araif , the south-western
corner-pillar of the western Edom, turned at right angles and went by the side
of Jebel Mukrah to the Arabah, where he was compelled to alter his course
again through meeting with Mount Eor, the border-pillar of Edom at that
point, and to go southwards to the Red Sea (pp. 88-9). But although this
combination steers clear of the difficulty connected with our assumption, — viz.
that when Israel advanced into the Arabah to encamp at Mount Hor, they had
actually trodden upon the Edomitish territory in that part of the Arabah which
connected the mountain land of Azazimeh, of which the Edomites had taken
forcible possession, with their hereditary country, the mountains of Seir, — we
cannot regard this view as in harmony with the biblical account. For, apart from
the improbability of Moses going a second time to Mount Hor on the border of
Edom, after he had been compelled to desist from his advance through the
desert of Zin (Wady MurreK), and take a circuitous route, or rather make a
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XX. 2-18. 129
beyond all doubt by what follows. For the whole congregation
proceeds from Kadesh in the desert of Zin to Mount Hor, where
Aaron died, and that, according to chap, xxxiii. 38, in the fifth
month of the fortieth year after the exodus from Egypt. Miriam
died during the time that the people were staying (3B*) in Kadesh,
and there she was buried.
Vers. 2-13. Sin op Moses and Aaron at the Water op
Steipe at Kadesh. — In the arid desert the congregation was in
want of water, and the people quarrelled with Moses in consequence.
In connection with the first stay in Kadesh there is nothing said
about any deficiency of water. But as the name Kadesh embraces
a large district of the desert of Zin, and is not confined to one par-
ticular spot, there might easily be a want of water in this place or
retrograde movement, on the western aide of the Edomitish territory of the
land of Azazimeh, only to be driven back a second time, the account of the
contest with the king of Arad is hard to reconcile with this combination. In
that case the king of Arad must have attacked or overtaken the Israelites when
they were collected together in the desert of Zin at Kadesh. But this does not
tally with the words of chap. xxi. 1, " When the Canaanite heard that Israel
came (was approaching) by the way of the spies ; " for if Moses turned round
in Kadesh to go down the Hebron road as far as Jebel Araif , in consequence of
the refusal of Edom, the Israelites did not take the way of the spies at all, for
their way went northwards from Kadesh to Canaan. The supposition of Fries
(p. 54), that the words in chap. xxi. 1, " came by the way of the spies," are a
permutation of those in chap. xx. 1, " came into the desert of Zin," and that
the two perfectly coincide as to time, is forced ; as the Israelites are described
in chap. xx. 1 not only as coming into the desert of Zin in general, but as
assembling together there at Kadesh.
Modern critics (Knobel and others) have also mutilated these chapters, and
left only chap. xx. 1 (in part), 2, 6, 22-29, xxi. 10, 11, xxii. 1, as parte of the
original work, whilst all the rest is described as a Jehovistic addition, partly
from ancient sources and partly from the invention of the Jehovist himself.
But the supposed contradiction — viz. that whilst the original work describes the
Israelites as going through northern Edom, and going round th# Moabitish
territory in the more restricted sense, the Jehovist represents them as going
round the land of Edom upon the west, south, and east (chap. xx. 21, xxi. 4),
and also as going round the land of the Arnon in a still larger circle, and past
other places as well (chap. xxi. 12, 16, 18)— rests upon a false interpretation of
the passages in question. The other arguments adduced — viz. the fact that the
Jehovist gives great prominence to the hatred of the Edomites (chap. xx. 18,
20) and interweaves poetical sentences (chap. xxi. 14, 15, 17, 18, 27, 28), the
miraculous rod in Moses' hand (chap. xx. 8), and the etymology (chap. xxi. 3)
are all just arguing in a circle, since the supposition that all these things are
foreign to the original work, is not a fact demonstrated, but a simple peiitio
principii.
PENT* — VOL. III. I
Digitized by
Google
130 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
the other. In their faithless discontent, the people wished that they
had died when their brethren died before Jehovah. The allusion
is not to Korah's company,' as Knobel supposes, and the word V\i,
" to expire," would be altogether inapplicable to their destruction ;
but the reference is to those who bad died one by one during the
thirty-seven years. " Why" they murmured once more against
Moses and Aaron, " have ye brought the congregation of God into
this desert, to perish there with their cattle ? Why have ye brought
it out of Egypt into this evil land, where there is no seed, no fig-trees
and pomegranates, no vines, and no water to drink V — Ver. 6. Moses
and Aaron then turned to the tabernacle, to ask for the help of
the Lord; and the glory of the Lord immediately appeared (see at
chap. xvii. 7 and xiv. 10). — Vers. 7, 8. The Lord relieved the want
of water. Moses was to take tb/3 staff, and with Aaron to gather
together the congregation, and speak to the rock before their eyes,
when it would give forth water for the congregation and their cattle
to drink. — Vers. 9-11. Moses then took the rod "from before
Jehovah," — i.e. the rod with which he had performed miracles in
Egypt (Ex. xvii. 5), and which was laid up in the sanctuary, not
Aaron's rod which blossomed (chap. xvii. 25), — and collected the
congregation together before the rock, and said to them, " Hear, ye
rebels, shall we fetch you water out of this rock V He then smote
the rock twice with his rod, whereupon much water came out, so
that the congregation and their cattle had water to drink. — Ver.
12. The Lord then said to both of them, both Moses and Aaron,
" Because ye have not trusted firmly in Me, to sanctify Me before the
eyes of the children of Israel, therefore ye shall not bring this congre-
gation into the land which I have given them." The want of belief
or firm confidence in the Lord, through which both of them had
sinned, was not actual unbelief or distrust in the omnipotence and
grace of God, as if God could not relieve the want of water or
extend His help to the murmuring people ; for the Lord had
promised His help to Moses, and Moses did what the Lord had
commanded him. It was simply the want of full believing confi-
dence, a momentary wavering of that immovable assurance, which
the two heads of the nation ought to have shown to the congre-
gation, but did not show. Moses did even more than God had
commanded him. Instead of speaking to the rock with the rod of
God in his hand, as God directed him, he spoke to the congregation,
and in these inconsiderate words, " Shall we fetch you water out of
the rockl" words which, if they did not express any doubt in the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XX. 2-13. 131
help of the Lord, were certainly fitted to strengthen the people in
their unbelief, and are therefore described in Ps. cvi. 33 as prating
(speaking unadvisedly) with the lips (cf. Lev. v. 4). He then
struck the rock twice with the rod, " as if it depended upon human
exertion, and not upon the power of God alone," or as if the promise
of God " would not have been fulfilled without all the smiting on
his part" (Knobel). In the ill-will expressed in these words the
weakness of faith was manifested, by which the faithful servant of
God, worn out with the numerous temptations, allowed himself to
be overcome, so that he stumbled, and did not sanctify the Lord
before the eyes of the people, as he ought to have done. Aaron
also wavered along with Moses, inasmuch as he did nothing to
prevent Moses' fall. But their sin became a grievous one, from the
fact that they acted unworthily of their office. God punished them,
therefore, by withdrawing their office from them befdre they had
finished the work entrusted to them. They were not to conduct
the congregation into the promised land, and therefore were not to
enter in themselves (ef. chap, xxvii. 12-14 ; Deut. xxxii. 48 sqq.).
The rock, from which water issued, is distinguished by the article
P?Bn, not as being already known, or mentioned before, but simply
as a particular rock in that neighbourhood ; though the situation is
not described, so as to render it possible to search for it now. 1 —
Ver. 13. The account closes with the words, " This is the water of
strife, about which the children of Israel strove with Jehovah, and He
sanctified Himself on them." This does not imply that the scene of
1 Moses Nachmanides has given a correct interpretation of the words, " Speak
to the rock before their eyes " (ver. 8) : viz. " to the first rock in front of them,
and standing in their sight." The fable attributed to the Rabbins, viz. that the
rock of RepUdim followed the Israelites all about in the desert, and supplied
them with water, cannot be proved from the talmudical and rabbinical passages
given by Buxtorf (historia Petrx in deserto) in his exercitatt. c. v., but is simply
founded upon a literal interpretation of certain rabbinical statements, concerning
the identity of the well at Rephidhn with that at Eadesh, which were evidently
intended to be figurative, as Abarbanel expressly affirms (Buxtorf, I. c. pp. 422
seq.). " Their true meaning," he says, " was, that those waters which flowed
out in Horeb were the gift of God granted to the Israelites, and continued all
through the desert, just like the manna. For wherever they went, fountains of
living waters were opened to them as the occasion required. And for this
reason, the rock in Eadesh was the same rock as that in Horeb. Still less
ground is there for supposing that the Apostle Paul alluded to any such rabbi-
nical fable when he said, " They drank of that spiritual rock that followed them "
(1 Cor. x. 4), and gave it a spiritual interpretation in the words, " and that
rock was Christ."
Digitized by
Google
132 THE FOURTH BOOK OF HOSES.
this occurrence received the name of "strife-water," but simply
that the water which God brought out of the rock for the Israelites
received that name. But God sanctified Himself on them, by the
fact that, on the one hand, He put their unbelief to shame by the
miraculous gift of water, and on the other hand punished Moses
and Aaron for the weakness of their faith. 1
Vers. 14-21. Message op the Israelites to the King op
Edom. — As Israel was about to start from Kadesh upon its march
to Canaan, but wished to enter it from the east across the Jordan,
and not from the south, where the steep and lofty mountain ranges
presented obstacles which would have been difficult to overcome, if
not quite insuperable, Moses sent messengers from Kadesh to the
king of Edom, to solicit from the kindred nation a friendly and
unimpeded passage through their land. He reminded the king of
the relationship of Israel, of their being brought down to Egypt, of
the oppression they had endured there, and their deliverance out of
the land, and promised him that they would not pass through fields
and vineyards, nor drink the water of their wells, but keep to the
king's way, without turning to the right hand or the left, and thus
would do no injury whatever to the land (vers. 14-16). a By the
"angel" who led Israel out of Egypt we are naturally to under-
stand not the pillar of cloud and fire (Knobet), but the angel of the
Lord, the visible revealer of the invisible God, whom the messengers
1 The assumption of neological critics, that this occurrence is. identical with
the similar one at Rephidim (Ex. xvii.), and that this is only another saga
based upon the same event, has no firm ground whatever. The want of water
in the arid desert is a fact so constantly attested by travellers, that it would be
a matter of great surprise if Israel had only experienced this want, and quarrelled
with its God and its leaders, once in the course of forty years. As early as Ex.
xv. 22 sqq. the people murmured because of the want of drinkable water, and
the bitter water was turned into sweet ; and immediately after the event before
us, it gave utterance to the complaint again, " We have no bread and no water"
(chap. xxi. 4, 5). But if the want remained the same, the relief of that want
would necessarily be repeated in the same or a similar manner. Moreover, the
occurrences at Rephidim (or Massah-Meribah) and at Kadesh are altogether
different from each other. In Rephidim, God gave the people water out of the
rock, and the murmuring of the people was stayed. In Kadesh, God no doubt
relieved the distress in the same way ; but the mediators of His mercy, Moses
and Aaron, sinned at the time, so that God sanctified Himself upon them by a
judgment, because they had not sanctified Him before the congregation. (See
Hengstenberg, Dissertations, vol. ii.)
a We learn from Judg. xi. 17, that Israel sent messengers from Kadesh to
the king of Moab also, and with a similar commission, and that he also refused
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XX. 14-21. 133
describe indefinitely as " an angel," when addressing the Edomites.
Kadesh is represented in ver. 16 as a city on the border of the
Edomitish territory. The reference is to Kadesh-Barnea (chap,
xxxii. 8, xxxiv. 4 ; Deut. i. 2, 19, ii. 14, ix. 23 ; Josh. x. 41, xiv. 6,
7, xv. 3). This city was no donbt situated quite in the neighbour-
hood of Ain Kudes, the well of Kadesh, discovered by Rowland.
This well was called En-Mishpat, the fountain of judgment, in
Abraham's time (Gen. xiv. 7) ; and the name Kadesh occurs first of
all on the first arrival of the Israelites in that region, in the account
of the events which took place there, as being the central point of
the place of encampment, the " desert of Paran," or a desert of
Zin" (cf. chap. xiii. 26 with ver. 21, and chap. xii. 16). And even
on the second arrival of the congregation in that locality, it is not
mentioned till after the desert of Zin (chap. xx. 1) ; whilst the
full name Kadesh-Barnea is used by Moses for the first time in
chap, xxxii. 8, when reminding the people of those mournful occur-
rences in Kadesh in chap. xiii. and xiv. The conjecture is therefore
a very natural one, that the place in question received the name
of Kadesh first of all from that tragical occurrence (chap, xiv.), or
possibly from the murmuring of the congregation on account of
the want of water, which led Moses and Aaron to sin, so that the
Lord sanctified (E^P!) Himself upon them by a judgment, because
theyhad not sanctified Him before the children of Israel (vers. 12
and 13) ; that Barnea was the older or original name of the town,
which was situated in the neighbourhood of the u water of strife,"
and that this name was afterwards united with Kadesh, and formed
into a composite noun. If this conjecture is a correct one, the
name Kadesh is used proleptically, not only in Gen. xiv. 7, as a
more precise definition of En-Mishpat, but also in Gen. xvi. 14, xx.
1 ; and Num. xiii. 26, and xx. 1 ; and there is no lack of analogies
for this. It is in this too that we are probably to seek for an
explanation of the fact, that in the list of stations in chap, xxxiii.
the name Kadesh does not occur in connection with the first arrival
of the congregation in the desert of Zin, but only in connection
with their second arrival (ver. 36), and that the place of encamp-
ment on their first arrival is called Rithmah, and not Barnea, because
to grant the request for an unimpeded passage through his land. This message
is passed over in silence here, because the refusal of the Moabites had no influence
upon the further progress of the Israelites. " For if they could not pass through
Edom, the permission of the Moabites would not help them at all. It was only
eventualiter that they sought this permission." — Hengstenberg, Diss.
Digitized by
Google
134 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
the headquarters of the camp were in the Wady Eetematli, not at
the town of Barnea, which was farther on in the desert of Zin.
The expression " town of the end of thy territory " is not to be under-
stood as signifying that the town belonged to the Edomites, bnt
simply affirms that it was situated on the border of the Edomitish
territory. The supposition that Barnea was an Edomitish town is
opposed by the circumstance that, in chap, xxxiv. 4, and Josh xv. 3,
it is reckoned as part of the land of Canaan ; that in Josh. x. 41 it
is mentioned as the southernmost town, where Joshua smote the
Canaanites and conquered their land ; and lastly, that in Josh. xv.
23 it is probably classed among the towns allotted to the tribe of
Judah, from which it seems to follow that it must have belonged
to the Amorites. u The end of the territory" of the king of Edom
is to be distinguished from " the territory of the land of Edom" in
ver. 23. The land of Edom extended westwards only as far as the
Arabah, the low-lying plain, which runs from the southern point
of the Dead Sea to the head of the Elanitic Gulf. At that time,
however, the Edomites had spread out beyond the Arabah, and
taken possession of a portion of the desert of Paran belonging to
the peninsula of Sinai, which was bounded on the north by the
desert of Zin (see at chap, xxxiv. 3). By their not drinking of the
water of the wells (ver. 17), we are to understand, according to ver.
19, their not making use of the wells of the Edomites either by
violence or without compensation. The " king's way" is the public
high road, which was probably made at the cost of the state, and
kept up for the king and his armies to travel upon, and is synony-
mous with the " sultan-road " (Derb es Sultan) or " emperor road,"
as the open, broad, old military roads are still called in the East (cf .
Robinson, Pal. ii. 340; Seetzen, i. pp. 61, 132, ii. pp. 336, etc.).
This military road led, no doubt, as Leake has conjectured
(Burckhardt, Syr. pp. 21, 22), through the broad WadyeJ Ghuweir,
which not only forms a direct and easy passage to the level
country through the very steep mountains that fall down into the
Arabah, but also a convenient road through the land of Edom
(Robinson, ii. pp. 552, 583, 610), and is celebrated for its splendid
meadows, which are traceable to its many springs (Burckhardt, pp.
688, 689) ; for the broad Wady Murreh runs from the northern
border of the mountain-land of Azazimeh, not only as far as the
mountain of Moddera (Madurah), where it is divided, but in its
southern half as far as the Arabah (see p. 59). This is very
likely the " great route through broad wadys," which the Bedouins
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XX. 22-29. 135
who accompanied Rowland assured him " was very good, and led
direct to Mount Hor, but with which no European traveller was
acquainted " (Ritter's Erdk. xiv. p. 1088). It probably opens into
the Arabah at the Wady el Weibeh, opposite to the Wady Ghuweir.
— Vers. 18, 19. The Edomites refused the visit of the Israelites in a
most unbrotherly manner, and threatened to come out against them
with the sword, without paying the least attention to the repeated
assurance of the Israelitish messengers, that they would only march
upon the high road, and would pay for water for themselves and
their cattle. WJK pi, lit. " it is nothing at all ; / will go through
with my feet:" i.e. we want no great thing ; we will only make use
of the high road. — Ver. 20. To give emphasis to his refusal, Edom
went against Israel " with much people and with a strong hand" sc.
when they approached its borders. This statement, as well as the
one in ver. 21, that Israel turned away before Edom, anticipates
the historical order ; for, as a matter of course, the -Edomites can-
not have come at once with an army on the track of the messengers,
for the purpose of blocking up the road through the Wady Murreh,
which runs along the border of its territory to the west of the
Arabah.
Vers. 22-29. Death op Aaron at Mount Hob. — The
Israelites left Kadesh, and passed along the road just mentioned
. to Mount Hor. This mountain, which was situated, according to
chap, xxxiii. 37, on the border of the land of Edom, is placed by
Josephus (Ant. iv. 4, 7) in the neighbourhood of Pelra ; so also by
Eusebius and Jerome : u Or mons, in quo mortuus est Aaron, juxta
civitatem Petram." According to modern travellers, it is Mount
Harun, on the north-western side of Wady Musa (Petra), which
is described by Robinson (vol. ii. p. 508) as " a cone irregularly
truncated, having" three ragged points or peaks, of which that upon
the north-east is the highest, and has upon it the Muhammedan
Wely, or tomb of Aaron," from which the mountain has received
its name " Harun" i.e. Aaron (vid. Burckhardt, Syr. pp. 715, 716 ;
v. Schubert, Reise, ii. pp. 419 sqq. ; Ritter, Erdhunde, xiv. pp. 1127
sqq.). There can be no doubt as to the general correctness of this
tradition; 1 for even if the Mohammedan tradition concerning
Aaron's grave is not well accredited, the situation of this mountain
1 There is no force -whatever in the arguments by which Knobel has en-
deavoured to prove that it is incorrect. The Jirst objection, viz. that the
Hebrews reached Mount Hor from Kadesh in a single march, has no foundation
Digitized by
Google
136 THE FOURTH BOOK OF HOSES.
is in perfect harmony with the statement in ver. 23 and chap,
xxxiii. 37, viz. that the Israelites had then reached the border of
the land of Edom. The place where the people 1 encamped is
called Mosera in Deut. x. 6, and Moseroth in the list of stations in
chap, xxxiii. 30, and is at all events to be sought for in the Arabah,
in the neighbourhood of Mount Hor, though it is altogether un-
known to us. The camp of 600,000 men, with their wives, chil-
dren, and flocks, would certainly require a space miles wide, and
might therefore easily stretch from the mouths of the Wady el
Weibeh and Wady Ghuweir, in the Arabah, to the neighbourhood
of Mount Harun. The place of encampment is called after this
mountain, Hor, both here and in chap, xxxiii. 37 sqq., because it
was there that Aaron died and was buried. The Lord foretold his
death to Moses, and directed him to take off Aaron's priestly robes,
and put them upon Eleazar his son, as Aaron was not to enter the
promised land, because they (Aaron and Moses) had opposed the
command of Jehovah at the water of strife (see at ver. 12).
"Gathered to his people," like the patriarchs (Gen. xxv. 8, 17,
xxxv. 29, xlix. 33). — Vers. 27, 28. Moses executed this command,
and Aaron died upon the top of the mountain, according to chap,
xxxiii. 37, 38, on the first day of the fifth month, in the fortieth
year after the exodus from Egypt, at the age of 123 years (which
agrees with Ex. vii. 7), and was mourned by all Israel for thirty
days.
in the biblical text, and cannot be inferred from tbe circumstance that there
is no place of encampment mentioned between Eadesh and Mount Hor ; for, on
the one hand, we may clearly see, not only from chap. xxi. 10, but even from
Ex. xvii. 1, as compared with Num. xxxiii. 41 sqq. and 12 sqq., that only
those places of encampment are mentioned in the historical account where
events occurred that were worthy of narrating ; and, on the other hand, it is
evident from chap. x. 33, that the Israelites sometimes continued marching for
several days before they formed an encampment again. The second objection —
viz. that if Hor was near Petra, it is impossible to see how the advance of the
Hebrews from Kadesh to Hor could be regarded by the king of Arad, who lived
more than thirty hours' journey to the north, as coming (chap, xxxiii. 40), not
to mention " coming by the way of the spies " (chap. xxi. 1), and how this
king could come into conflict with the Hebrews when posted at Petra — rests
upon the erroneous assumption, that the attack of the king of Arad did not
take place till after the death of Aaron, because it is not mentioned till after-
wards. Lastly, the third objection — viz. that a march from Kadesh in a south-
westerly direction to Wady Musa, and then northwards past Zalmona to
Phunoh (chap, xxxiii. 41), is much too adventurous — is overthrown by chap.
xxi. 4, where the Israelites are said to have gone from Mount Hor by the way of
the Red Sea. (See the notes on chap. xxi. 10.)
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXL 1-8. 137
Chap. xxi. 1-3. Victoey of Israel over the Canaanitish
King op Arad. — When this Canaanitish king, who dwelt in the
Negeb, i.e. the south of Palestine (yid. chap. xiii. 17), heard that
Israel was coming the way of the spies, he made war upon the
Israelites, and took some of them prisoners. Arad is mentioned
both here and in the parallel passage, chap, xxxiii. 40, and also by
the side of Hormah, in Josh. xii. 14, as the seat of a Canaanitish
king (cf. Judg. i. 16, 17). According to Eusebius and Jerome in
the Onomast., it was twenty Roman miles to the south of Hebron,
and has been preserved in the rains of Tell Arad, which v. Schubert
(ii. pp. 457 sqq.) and Robinson (ii. pp. 473, 620, and 624) saw in
the distance ; and, according to Roth in Petermanris geographische
Mittheilungen (1858, p. 269), it was situated to the south-east of
Eurmul (Carmel), in an undulating plain, without trees or shrubs,
with isolated hills and ranges of hills in all directions, among which
was Tell Arad. The meaning of D^nKn Trrn is uncertain. The
LXX., Saad., and others, take the word Atharim as the proper
name of a place not mentioned again ; but the Chaldee, Samar.,
and Syr. render it with much greater probability as an appellative
noun formed from "Wi with x prosthet., and synonymous with D*"!^?,
the spies (chap. xiv. 6). The way of the spies was the way through
the desert of Zin, which the Israelitish spies had previously taken
to Canaan (chap. xiii. 21). The territory of the king of Arad
extended to the southern frontier of Canaan, to the desert of Zin,
through which the Israelites went from Kadesh to Mount Hor.
The Canaanites attacked them when upon their march, and made
some of them prisoners. — Vers. 2, 3. The Israelites then vowed to .
the Lord, that if He would give this people into their hands, they
would " ban " their cities ; and the Lord hearkened to the request,
and delivered up the Canaanites, so that they put them and their
cities under the ban. (On the ban, see at Lev. xxvii.,28.) " And
they called the place Hormah" i.e. banning, ban-place. " The place "
can only mean the spot where the Canaanites were defeated by
the Israelites. If the town of Zephath, or the capital of Arad, had
been specially intended, it would no doubt have been also men-
tioned, as in Judg. i. 17. As it was not the intention of Moses to
press into Canaan from the south, across the steep and difficult
mountains, for the purpose of effecting its conquest, the Israelites
could very well content themselves for the present with the defeat
inflicted upon the Canaanites, and defer the complete execution of
their vow until the time when they had gained a firm footing in
Digitizi
ed by Google
138 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Canaan. The banning of the Canaanites of Arad and its cities
necessarily presupposed the immediate conquest of the whole terri-
tory, and the laying of all its cities in ashes. And so, again, the
introduction of a king of Hormah, i.e. Zephath, among the kings
defeated by Joshua (Josh. xii. 14), is no proof that Zephatli was
conquered and called Hormah in the time of Moses, Zephath may
be called Hormah proleptically both there and in Josh. xix. 4, as
being the southernmost border town of the kingdom of Arad, in
consequence of the ban suspended by Moses over the territory of
the king of Arad, and may not have received this name till after its
conquest by the Judseans and Simeonites. At the same time, it is
quite conceivable that Zephath may have been captured in the time
of Joshua, along with the other towns of the south, and called
Hormah at that time, but that the Israelites could not hold it then ;
and therefore, after the departure of the Israelitish army, the old
name was restored by the Canaanites, or rather only retained, until
the city was retaken and permanently held by the Israelites after
Joshua's death (Judg. i. 16, 17), and received the new name once
for all. The allusion to Hormah here, and in chap. xiv. 45, does
not warrant the opinion in any case, that it was subsequently to
the death of Moses and the conquest of Canaan under Joshua that
the war with the Canaanites of Arad and their overthrow occurred.
March round the land of Edom and Moab. Conquest of Sihon and
Og, kings of the Amorites. — Chap. xxi. 4-35.
Vers. ^4-9. March of Israel through the Arabah.
Plague op Serpents, and Brazen Serpent. — Ver. 4. As the
Edomites refused a passage through their land when the Israelites
left Mount Hor, they were obliged to take the way to the Red Sea,
in order to go round the land of Edom, that is to say, to go down
the Arabah to the head of the Elanitic Gulf. — Vers. 5, 6. As they
went along this road the people became impatient (" the soul of
the people was much discouraged," see Ex. vi. 9), and they began
once more to murmur against God and Moses, because they had
neither bread nor water (cf. chap. xx. 4 sqq.), and were tired of
the loose, i.e. poor, food of manna (?2-'i? from ??i?). The low-lying
plain of the Arabah, which runs between steep mountain walls from
the Dead Sea to the Red Sea, would be most likely to furnish the
Israelites with very little food, except the manna which God gave
them ; for although it is not altogether destitute of vegetation,
especially at the mouths of the wadys and winter torrents from
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXI. 4-9. 139
the hills, yet on the whole it is a horrible desert, with a loose sandy
soil, and drifts of granite and other stones, where terrible sand-
storms sometimes arise from the neighbourhood of the Red Sea
(see v. Schubert, R. ii. pp. 396 sqq., and Ritter, Erdk. »v. pp. 1013
sqq.) ; and the want of food might very frequently be accompanied
by the absence of drinkable water. The people rebelled in conse-
quence, and were punished by the Lord with fiery serpents, the
bite of which caused many to die. O'ST^ D't^ro, lit. burning snakes,
so called from their burning, i.e. inflammatory bite, which filled
with heat and poison, just as many of the snakes were called by the
Greeks, e.g. the Si^ras, irprqtrrfjpes, and Kavamvet (Dioscor. vii. 13 :
Aelian. not. anim. vi. 51), not from the skin of these snakes with
fiery red spots, which are frequently found in the Arabah, and
are very poisonous. 1 — Ver. 7. This punishment brought the people
to reflection. They confessed their sin to Moses, and entreated
him to deliver them from the plague through his intercession with
the Lord. And the Lord helped them ; in such a way, however,
that the reception of help was made to depend upon the faith of
the people. — Vers. 8, 9. At the command of God, Moses made a
brazen serpent, and put it upon a standard. 2 Whoever then of the
persons bitten by the poisonous serpents looked at the brazen ser-
pent with faith in the promise of God, lived, i.e. recovered from
the serpent's bite. The serpent was to be made of brass or copper,
because the colour of this metal, when the sun was shining upon it,
was most like the appearance of the fiery serpents ; and thus the
symbol would be more like the thing itself.
Even in the book of Wisdom (chap. xvi. 6, 7), the brazen ser-
pent is called " a symbol of salvation ; for he that turned himself
toward it was not saved by the thing that he saw, but by Thee,
1 This is the account given by v. Schubert, R. ii. p. 406 : " In the afternoon
they brought us a very mottled snake of a large size, marked with fiery red
spots and wavy stripes, which belonged to the most poisonous species, as the
formation of its teeth clearly showed. According to the assertion of the Be-
douins, these snakes, which they greatly dreaded, were very common in that
neighbourhood."
2 For the different views held by early writers concerning the brazen ser-
pent, see Buxtorf, Msturia serp. aen., in his Exercitt. pp. 458 sqq. ; Deyling,
observatt. ss. ii. obs. 15, pp. 156 sqq. ; Vitriiiga, observ. ss. 1, pp. 403 sqq. ; Jo.
March, Scripturarias Exercitt. exerc. 8, pp. 465 sqq. ; lluth, Serpens exaltatus
non contritoris sed conterendi imago, Erl. 1758 ; Gott/r. Menken on the brazen
serpent; Sack, Apologetik, 2 Ausg. pp. 855 sqq. Hofmann, Weissagung u.
Erfullung, ii. pp. 142, 143 ; Kurtz, History of the Old Covenant, iii. 345 sqq. ;
and the commentators on John iii. 14 and 15.
Digltizi
ed by Google
140 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
that art the Saviour of all." It was not merely intended, however,
as Ewald supposes (Gesch. ii. p. 228), as a "sign that just as this
serpent hung suspended in the air, bound and rendered harmless
by the command of Jehovah, so every one who looked at this with
faith in the redeeming power of Jehovah, was secured against the
evil, — a figurative sign, therefore, like that of St George and the
Dragon among ourselves ;" for, according to this, there would be no
internal causal link between the fiery serpents and the brazen image
of a serpent. It was rather intended as a figurative representation
of the poisonous serpents, rendered harmless by the mercy of God.
For God did not cause a real serpent to be taken, but the image of
a serpent, in which the fiery serpent was stiffened, as it were, into
dead brass, as a sign that the deadly poison of the fiery serpents
was overcome in this brazen serpent. This is not to be regarded
as a symbol of the divine healing power ; nor is the selection of
such a symbol to be deduced and explained, as it is by Winer,
Kurtz, Knobel, and others, from the symbolical view that was
common to all the heathen religions of antiquity, that the serpent
was a beneficent and health-bringing power, which led to its being
exalted into a symbol of the healing power, and a representation of
the gods of healing. This heathen view is not only foreign to the
Old Testament, and without any foundation in the fact that, in the
time of Hezekiah, the people paid a superstitious worship to the
brazen serpent erected by Moses (2 Kings xviii. 4) ; but it is irre-
concilably opposed to the biblical view of the serpent, as the repre-
sentative of evil, which was founded upon Gen. iii. 15, and is only
traceable to the magical art of serpent-charming, which the Old
Testament abhorred as an idolatrous abomination. To this we may
add, that the thought which lies at the foundation of this explana-
tion, viz. that poison is to be cured by poison, has no support in
Hos. xiii. 4, but is altogether foreign to the Scriptures. God
punishes sin, it is true, by sin ; but He neither cures sin by sin, nor
death by death. On the contrary, to conquer sin it was necessary
that the Redeemer should be without sin ; and to take away its
power from death, it was requisite that Christ, the Prince of life,
who had life in Himself, should rise again from death and the
grave (John v. 26, xi. 25 ; Acts iii. 15 ; 2 Tim. i. 10).
The brazen serpent became a symbol of salvation on the three
grounds which Luther pointed out. In the first place, the serpent
which Moses was to make by the command of God was to be of
brass or copper, that is to say, of a reddish colour, and (although
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXI. 10-20. 141
•without poison) altogether like the persons who were red and burn-
ing with heat because of the bite of the fiery serpents. In the
second place, the brazen serpent was to be set up upon a pole for a
sign. And in the third place, those} who desired to recover from
the fiery serpent's bite and live, were to look at the brazen serpent
upon the pole, otherwise they could not recover or live (Luther's
Sermon on John iii. 1-15). It was in these three points, as Luther
has also clearly shown, that the typical character of this symbol
lay, to which Christ referred in His conversation with Nicodemus
(John iii. 14). The brazen serpent had the form of a real serpent,
but was " without poison, and altogether harmless." So God sent
His Son in the form of sinful flesh, and yet without sin (Bom.
viii. 3 ; 2 Cor. v. 21 ; 1 Pet. ii. 22-24).— 2. In the lifting up of
the serpent as a standard. This was a Beiry/iari^eiv iv trappnaui,
a Opiafiftevetv (a " showing openly," or " triumphing"), a triumphal
exhibition of the poisonous serpents as put to death in the brazen
image, just as the lifting up of Christ upon the cross was a public
triumph over the evil principalities and powers below the sky (Col.
ii. 14, 15). — 3. In the cure effected through looking at the image
of the serpent. Just as the Israelites had to turn their eyes to the
brazen serpent in believing obedience to the word of the Lord, in
order to be Cured of the bite of the poisonous serpents, so must we
look with faith at the Son of man lifted up upon the cross, if we
would be delivered from the bite of the old serpent, from sin, death,
the devil, and hell. " Christ is the antitype of the serpent, inas-
much as He took upon Himself the most pernicious of all pernicious
potencies, viz. sin, and made a vicarious atonement for it" (Heng-
stenberg on John iii. 14). The brazen image of the serpent was
taken by the Israelites to Canaan, and preserved till the time of
Hezekiah, who had it broken in pieces, because the idolatrous
people bad presented incense-offerings to this holy relic (2 Kings
xviii. 4).
Vers. 10-20. March of Israel round Edom and Moab,
to the Heights of Pisgah in the Field of Moab (cf . chap,
xxxiii. 41-47). — Ver. 10. From the camp in the Arabah, which is
not more particularly described, where the murmuring people were
punished by fiery serpents, Israel removed to Oboth. According to
the list of stations in chap, xxxiii. 41 sqq., they went from Hor to
Zalirnonah, the situation of which has not been determined ; for C. v.
Returner's conjecture (der Zug der Israeliten, p. 45), that it was the
Digitized by
Google
142 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
same place as the modern Maan, has no firm basis In the fact that
Maan is a station of the Syrian pilgrim caravans. From Zahnonah
they went to Phunon, and only then to Oboth. The name Phunon
is no doubt the same as Phinon, a tribe-seat of the Edomitish Phy-
larch (Gen. xxxvi. 41) ; and according to Jerome (Onom. s. v. Fenon),
it was " a little village in the desert, where copper was dug up by
condemned criminals (see at Gen. xxxvi. 41), between Petra and
Zoar." This statement suits very well, provided we imagine the
situation of Phunon to have been not in a straight line between Petra
and Zoar, but more to the east, between the mountains on the edge
of the desert. For the Israelites unquestionably went from the
southern end of the Arabah to the eastern side of Idumaea, through
the Wady el Ithm (Getum), which opens into the Arabah from the
east, a few hours to the north of Akaba and the ancient Ezion-geber.
They had then gone round the mountains of Edom, and begun to
" turn to the north" (Deut. ii. 3), so that they now proceeded
farther northwards, on the eastern side of the mountains of Edom,
"through the territory of the sons of Esau," no doubt by the same
road which is taken in the present day by the caravans which go
from Gaza to Maan, through the Ghor. u This runs upon a grassy
ridge, forming the western border of the coast of Arabia, and the
eastern border of the cultivated land, which stretches from the land
of Edom to the sources of the Jordan, on the eastern side of the
Ghor" (y. Raumer, Zug, p. 45). On the western side of their moun-
tains the Edomites had refused permission to the Israelites to pass
through their land (chap. xx. 18 sqq.), as the mountains of Seir
terminate towards the Ghor (the Arabah) in steep and lofty preci-
pices, and there are only two or three narrow wadys which intersect
them from west to east ; and of these the Wady Ghuweir is the only
one which is practicable for an army, and even this could be held
so securely by a moderate army, that no enemy could force its way
into the heart of the country (see Leake in Burckhardt, pp. 21, 22 ;
and Robinson, ii. p. 583). It was different on the eastern side,
where the mountains slope off into a wide extent of table-land,
which is only slightly elevated above the desert of Arabia. Here,
on the weaker side of their frontier, the Edomites lost the heart to
make any attack upon the Israelites, who would now have been able
to requite their hostilities. But the Lord had commanded Israel
not to make war upon the sons of Esau ; but when passing through
their territory, to purchase food and water from them for money
(Deut. ii. 4-6). The Edomites submitted to the necessity, and
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXI. 11. 143
endeavoured to take advantage of it, by selling provisions, " in the
same way in which, at the present day, the caravan from Mecca is
supplied with provisions by the inhabitants of the mountains along
the pilgrim road" {Leake in Burckhardt, p. 24). The situation of
Oboth cannot be determined.
Ver. 11. The next encampment was " Ije-Abarim in the desert,
which lies before Moab towards the sun-rising," i.e. on the eastern
border of Moabitis (chap, xxxiii. 44). As the Wady el Alisy, which
runs into the Dead Sea, in a deep and narrow rocky bed, from the
south-east, and is called el Kerdhy in its lower part {Burckhardt,
Syr. pp. 673-4), separates Idumaea from Moabitis; Ije-Abarim
{i.e. ruins of the crossings over) must be sought for on the border
of Moab to the north of this wady, but is hardly to be found, as
Knobel supposes, on the range of hills called el Tarfuye, which is
known by the name of Orokaraye, still farther to the south, and
terminates on the south-west of Kerek, whilst towards the north it
is continued in the range of hills called el Ghoweithe and the moun-
tain range of el Zoble; even supposing that the term Abarim, " the
passages or sides," is to be understood as referring to these ranges
of hills and mountains which skirt the land of the Amorites and
Moabites, and form the enclosing sides. For the boundary line
between the hills of el-Tarfuye and those of el-Ghoweithe is so near
to the Arnon, that there is not the necessary space between it and
the Arnon for the encampment at the brook Zared (ver. 12). Ije-
Abarim or Jim cannot have been far from the northern shore of
the el Ahsy, and was probably in the neighbourhood of Kalaat el
Hassa (Ahsa), the source of the Ahsy, and a station for the pilgrim
caravans {Burckhardt, p. 1035). As the Moabites were also not to
be attacked by the Israelites (Deut. ii. 9 sqq.), they passed along
the eastern border of Moabitis as far as the brook Zared (ver. 12).
This can hardly have been the Wady el-Ahsy {Robinson, ii. p. 555 ;
Ewald, Gesch. ii. p. 259 ; Bitter, Erdk. xv. p. 689) ; for that must
already have been crossed when they came to the border of Moab
(ver. 11). Nor can it well have been " the brook Zaide, which runs
from the south-east, passes between the mountain ranges of Gho-
weithe and Tarfuye, and enters the Arnon, of which it forms the
leading source," — the view adopted by Knobel, on the very ques-
tionable ground that the name is a corruption of Zared. In all
probability it was the Wady Kerek, in the upper part of its course,
not far from Katrane, on the pilgrim road {v. Baumer, Zug, p. 47 ;
Kurtz, and others). — Ver. 13. The next encampment was " beyond
Digitized by
Google
144 TEE FOURTH BOOK OF HOSES.
(i.e. by the side of) the Anton, which is in tJie desert, and that cometh
out of the territory of the Amorites." The Arnon, i.e. the present
Wady Mojeb, is formed by the union of the Seyl (i.e. brook or river)
Saide, which comes from the south-east, not far from Katrane, on the
pilgrim road, and the Lejum from the north-east, which receives the
small rivers el Mehhreys and Balua, the latter flowing from the pil-
grim station Kalaat Balua, and then continues its course to the Dead
Sea, through a deep and narrow valley, shut in by very steep and
lofty cliffs, and covered with blocks of stone, that have been brought
down from the loftier ground (Burckhardt, pp. 633 sqq.J, so that there
are only a few places where it is passable; and consequently a wan-
dering people like the Israelites could not have crossed the Mojeb
itself to force an entrance into the territory of the hostile Amorites. 1
For the Arnon formed the boundary between Moab and the country
of the Amorites. The spot where Israel encamped on the Arnon
must be sought for in the upper part of its course, where it is still
flowing " in the desert ;" not at Wady Zaide, however, although
Burckhardt calls this the main source of the Mojeb, but at the Balua,
which flows into the Lejum. In all probability these streams, or
which the Lejum came from the north, already bore the name of
Arnon ; as we may gather from the expression, " that cometh out
of the coasts of the Amorites." The place of Israel's encampment,
" beyond the Arnon in the desert" is to be sought for, therefore, in
the neighbourhood of Kalaat Balua, and on the south side of the
Arnon (Balua). This is evident enough from Deut. ii. 24, 26 sqq.,
where the Israelites are represented as entering the territory of the
Amoritish king Sihon, when they crossed the Arnon, having first
of all sent a deputation, with a peaceable request for permission to
pass through his land (cf. vers. 21 sqq.). Although this took place,
according to Deut. ii. 26, " out of the wilderness of Kedemoth," an
Amoritish town, it by no means follows that the Israelites had
already crossed the Arnon and entered the territory of the Amorites,
but only that they were standing on the border of it, and in the
desert which took its name from Kedemoth, and ran up to this,
the most easterly town, as the name seems to imply, of the country
of the Amorites. After the conquest of the country, Kedemoth was
1 It is utterly inconceivable that a whole people, travelling with all their
possessions as well as with their flocks, should have been exposed without neces-
sity to the dangers and enormous difficulties that would attend the crossing of
so dreadfully wild and so deep a valley, and that merely for the purpose of
forcing an entrance into an enemy's country. — Ritier, Erdk. xv. p. 1207.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXI. 14, 16. 145
allotted to the Reubenites (Josh. xiii. 18), and made Into a Levitical
city (Josh. xxi. 37 ; 1 Chron. vi. 64).
The Israelites now received instructions from the Lord, to cross
the river Arnon, and make war upon the Amoritish king Sihon of
Heshbon, and take possession of his land, with the assurance that
the Lord had given Sihon into the hand of Israel, and would fill
all nations before them with fear, and trembling (Deut. ii. 24, 25).
This summons, with its attendant promises, not only filled the
Israelites with courage and strength to enter upon the conflict with
the mightiest of all the tribes of the Canaanites, but inspired poets
in the midst of them to commemorate in odes the wars of Jehovah,
and His victories over His foes. A few verses are given here out
of one of these odes (vers. 14 sqq.), not for the purpose of verifying
the geographical statement, that the Arnon touches the border of
Moabitis, or that the Israelites had only arrived at the border of the
Moabite and Amorite territory, but as an evidence that there, on the
borders of Moab, the Israelites had been inspired through the divine
promises with the firm assurance that they should be able to conquer
the land of the Amorites which lay before them. — Vers. 14, 15.
" Therefore? sc. because the Lord had thus given king Sihon, with
all his land, into the hand of Israel, " it is written in the book of the
wars of the Lord : Vaheb (Jehovah takes) in storm, and the brooks of
Arnon and the valley of the brooks, which turns to the dwelling of Ar,
and leans upon the border of Moab" The book of the wars of Jehovah
is neither an Amoritish book of the conflicts of Baal, in which the
warlike feats performed by Sihon and other Amoritish heroes with
the help of Baal were celebrated in verse, as G. Unruh fabulously
asserts in his Zug der Isr. aus JEg, nach Canaan (p. 130), nor a work
" dating from the time of Jehoshaphat, containing the early history
of the Israelites, from the Hebrew patriarchs till past the time of
Joshua, with the law interwoven," which is the character that
Knobel's critical fancy would stamp upon it, but a collection of odes
of the time of Moses himself, in celebration of the glorious acts of
the Lord to and for the Israelites ; and " the quotation bears the
same relation to the history itself, as the verses of Korner would
bear to the writings of any historian of the wars of freedom, who
had himself taken part in these wars, and introduced the verses
into his own historical work" (Hengstenberg)} The strophe selected
x " That such a book should arise in the last days of Moses, when the youthful
generation began for the first time to regard and manifest itself, both vigorously
and generally, as the army of Jehovah, is so far from being a surprising fact,
PENT. — VOL. III. K
Digitized by
Google
146 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
from the ode has neither subject nor verb in it, as the ode was well
known to the contemporaries, and what had to be supplied could
easily be gathered from the title, u Wars of Jehovah." Vaheb is no
doubt the proper name of an Amoritish fortress ; and HMDa, « in
storm," is to be explained according to Nah. i. 3, " The Lord, in
the storm is His way." " Advancing in storm, He took Vaheb and
the brooks of Arnon," i.e. the different wadys> valleys cut by brooks,
which open into the Arnon. Dvnsn 1&&, m. pouring of the brooks,
from "IBto, effusio, the pouring, then the place where brooks pour
down, the slope of mountains or hills, for which the term >T2&&
is generally used in the plural, particularly to denote the slopes of
the mountains of Pisgah (Deut. iii. 17, iv. 49 ; Josh. xii. 3, xiii. 20),
and the hilly region of Palestine) which formed the transition from
the mountains to the plain (Josh. x. 40 and xii. 8). n ??'» the
dwelling, used poetically for the dwelling-place, as in 2 Sam. xxiii. 7
and Obad. 3. ">? (Ar), the antiquated form for "Vy, a city, is the
same as Ar Moab in ver. 28 and Isa. xv. 1, " the city of Moab, on
the border of the Arnon, which is at the end of the (Moabitish)
territory" (chap. xxii. 36). It was called Areopolis by the Greeks,
and was near to Aroer (Deut. ii. 36 and Josh. xiii. 9), probably
standing at the confluence of the Lejum and Mojeb, in the " fine
green pasture land, in the midst of Which there is a hill with some
rains," and not far away the ruin of a small castle, with a heap of
broken columns (Burckhardt, Syr. p. 636). This Ar is not to be
identified with the modern Rabba, in the midst of the land of the
Moabites, six hours to the south of Lejum, to which the name
Areopolis was transferred in the patristic age> probably after the
destruction of Ar, the ancient Areopolis, by an earthquake, of which
Jerome gives an account in connection with his own childhood (see
his Com. on Isa. xv.), possibly the earthquake which occurred in
the year a.d. 342, and by which many cities of the East were de-
stroyed, and among others Nicomedia (cf. Hengstenberg, Balaam,
pp. 525-528 ; Hitter, Erdkunde, xv. pp. 1(212 sqq. ; and v. Raumer,
Palastina) pp. 270, 271, Ed. 4).
that we can scarcely imagine a more mutable time for the commencement of
such a work" (Baumgarten). And if this is the case, the allusion to this collection
of odes cannot be adduced as an argument against the Mosaic authorship of the
Pentateuch, since Moses certainly did not write out the history of the journey
from Kadesh to the Arboth Moab until after the two kings of the Amorites had
been defeated, and the land to the east of the Jordan conquered, or till the
Israelites had encamped in the steppes of Moab, opposite to Jericho.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXI. 16-20. 147
Vers. 16-18. They proceeded thence to Beer (a well), a place
of encampment which received its name from the fact that here
God gave the people water, not as hefore hy a miraculous supply
from a rock, but by commanding wells to be dug. This is evident
from the ode with which the congregation commemorated this
divine gift of grace. " Then Israel sang this song : Spring up,
well I Sing ye to it ! Well which princes dug, which the nobles
of the people hollowed out, witft. the sceptre, with their staves." fW,
as in Ex. xv. 21 and xxxii. 18. Pi?™?, ruler's staff, cf. Gen. xlix.
10. Beer, probably the same as Beer Elim (Isa. xv. 8), on the
north-east of Moab, was in the desert ; for the Israelites proceeded
thence "from the desert to Mattanah" (ver. 18), thence to Nahaliel,
and thence to Bamoth. According to Eusebius (cf. Reland, Pal.
ill. p. 495), Mattanah (MadBavifi) was by the valley of the Arnon,
twelve Roman miles to the east (or more properly south-east or
south) of Medabah, and is probably to be seen in Tedun, a place
now lying in ruins, near the source of the Lejum {Burckhardt,
pp. 635, 636 ; Hengstenberg, Balaam, p. 530 ; Knobel, and others).
The name of Nahaliel is still retained in the form Encheileh. This
is the name given to the Lejum, after it has been joined by
the Balua, until its junction with the Saide (Burckhardt, p. 635).
Consequently the Israelites went from Beer in the desert, in a
north-westerly direction to Tedun, then westwards to the northern
bank of the Encheileh, and then still farther in a north-westerly
and northerly direction to Bamoth. There can be no doubt that
Bamoth is identical with Bamoth Baal, i.e. heights of Baal (chap.
xxii. 4). According to Josh. xiii. 17 (cf. Isa. xv. 2), Bamoth was
near to Dibon (Dibdn), between the Wady Wale and Wady Mojeb,
and also to Beth-Baal Meon, i.e. Myun, half a German mile (2£
English) to the south of Heshbon ; and, according to chap. xxii.
41, you could see Bamoth Baal from the extremity of the Israelitish
camp in the steppes of Moab. Consequently Bamoth cannot be
the mountain to the south of Wady Wale, upon the top of which
Burckhardt says there is a very beautiful plain (p. 632 ; see Heng-
stenberg, Balaam, p. 532) ; because the steppes of Moab cannot be
seen at all from this plain, as they are covered by the Jebel Attarus.
It is rather a height upon the long mountain Attarus, which runs
along the southern shore of the Zerka Maein, and may possibly be
a spot upon the summit of the Jebel Attarus, " the highest point
in the neighbourhood," upon which, according to Burckhardt (p.
630), there is a a heap of stones overshadowed by a very large
Digitized by
Google
148 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
pistachio-tree." A little farther down to the south-west of this lies
the fallen town Kereijat (called Kdrriat by Seetzen, ii. p. 342), ij.
Kerioth, Jer. xlviii. 24 ; Amos ii. 2. — Ver. 20. From Bamoth they
proceeded u to the valley, which (is) in the field of Moab, upon the
top of Pisgali, and looks across the face of the desert." "iDBn e*Fi,
head, or height of the Pisgah, is in apposition to the field of Moab.
The "field of Moab" was a portion of the table-land which stretches
from Eabbath Amm&n to the Arnon, which " is perfectly treeless
for an immense distance in one part (viz. the neighbourhood of
Eleati), but covered over with the ruins of towns that have been
destroyed," and which " extends to the desert of Arabia towards
the east, and slopes off to the Jordan and the Dead Sea towards
the west " (v. Raumer, Pal. p. 71). It is identical with " the whole
plain from Medeba to Dibon" (Josh. xiii. 9), and " the whole plain
by Medeba" (ver. 16), in which Heshbon and its cities were situated
(ver. 17 ; cf. ver. 21 and Deut. iii. 10). The valley in this table-
land was upon the height of Pisgah, i.e. the northern part of the
mountains of Abarim, and looked across the surface of the desert.
Jeshimon, the desert, is the plain of Ghor el Belka, i.e. the valley
of desolation on the north-eastern border of the Dead Sea, which
stretches from the Wady Menshalla or Wady Ghuweir (el Guer)
to the small brook el SzuSme ( Wady es Suweimeh on Van de Velde's
map) at the Dead Sea, and narrows it more and more at the north-
ern extremity on this side. " Ghor el Belha consists in part of a
barren, salt, and stony soil ; though there are some portions which
can be cultivated. To the north of the brook el SzuSme, the great
plain of the Jordan begins, which is utterly without fertility till
you reach the Nahr Hesbdn, about two hours distant, and produces
nothing but bitter, salt herbs for camels" (Seetzen, ii. pp. 373, 374),
and which was probably reckoned as part of Jeshimon, since Beth-
Jeshimoth was situated within it (see at chap, xxiii. 28). The
valley in which the Israelites were encamped in the field of Moab
upon the top of Pisgah, is therefore to be sought for to the west of
Heshbon, on the mountain range of Abarim, which slopes off into
the Ghor el Belka. From this the Israelites advanced into the
Arboth Moab (see chap. xxii. 1).
If we compare the places of encampment named in vers. 11-20
with the list of stations in chap, xxxiii. 41-49, we find, instead of the
seven places mentioned here between Ijje Abarim and the Arboth
Moab, — viz. Brook Zared, on the other side of the Arnon in the
desert, Beer, Mattana, Nahaliel, Bamoth, and the valley in the field of
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXI. 16-20. 149
Moab upon the top of Pisgah, — only three places given, viz. Dibon
of Gad, Almon Diblathaim, and Mount Abarim before Nebo. That
the last of these is only another name for the valley in the field of
Moab upon the top of Pisgah, is undoubtedly proved by the fact
that, according to Deut. xxxiv. 1 (cf. chap. iii. 27), Mount Nebo
was a peak of Pisgah, and that it was situated, according to Deut.
xxxii. 49, upon the mountains of Abarim, from which it is evident
at once that the Pisgah was a portion of the mountains of Abarim,
and in fact the northern portion opposite to Jericho (see at chap.
xxvii. 12). The two other differences in the names may be ex-
plained from the circumstance that the space occupied by the en-
campment of the Israelites, an army of 600,000 men, with their
wives, children, and cattle, when once they reached the inhabited
country with its towns and villages, where every spot had its own
fixed name, must have extended over several places, so that the
very same encampment might be called by one or other of the
places upon which it touched. If Dibon Gad (chap, xxxiii. 45)
was the Dibon built (i.e. rebuilt or fortified) by the Gadites after
the conquest of the land (chap, xxxii. 3, 34), and allotted to the
Eeubenites (Josh. xiii. 9, 17), which is still traceable in the ruins
of Dibdn, an hour to the north of the Arnon (v. Raumer, Pal. p.
261), (and there is no reason to doubt it), then the place of en-
campment, Nahaliel (Encheile), was identical with Dibon of Gad,
and was placed after this town in chap, xxxiii. 45, because the
camp of the Israelites extended as far as Dibon along the northern
bank of that river. Almon Diblathaim also stands in the same
relation to Bamoth. The two places do not appear to have been
far from one another; for Almon Diblathaim is probably iden-
tical with Beth Diblathaim, which is mentioned in Jer. xlviii. 22
along with Dibon, Nebo, and other Moabite towns, and is to be
sought for to the north or north-west of Dibon. For, according
to Jerome (Onom. s. v. Jassa), Jahza was between Medaba and
Deblatai, for which Eusebius has written Arjfiovs by mistake for
Aifioov ; Eusebius having determined the relative position of Jahza
according to a more southerly place, Jerome according to one
farther north. The camp of the Israelites therefore may easily
have extended from Almon or Beth-Diblathaim to Bamoth, and
might very well take its name from either place. 1
1 Neither this difference in the names of the places of encampment, nor the
material diversity, — viz. that in the chapter before us there are four places more
introduced than in chap, xxxiii., whereas in every other case the list in chap.
Digitized by
Google
150 ' THE FOUBTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Vers. 21-35. Defeat of the Amorite Kings, Sihon of
Heshbon and Og of Bashan, and Conquest of their
Kingdoms. — Vers. 21-23. When the Israelites reached the eastern
border of the kingdom of the Amorite king Sihon (see at ver. 13),
they sent messengers to him, as they had previously done to the
king of Edom, to ask permission to pass peaceably through his
territory upon the high road (cf. ver. 22 and chap. xx. 17) ; and
Sihon refused this request, just as the king of Edom had done, and
marched with all his people against the Israelites. But whereas
the Lord forbade the Israelites to make war upon their kinsmen
the Edomites, He now commanded them to make war upon the
Amorite king, and take possession of his land (Deut. ii. 24, 25) ;
for the Amorites belonged to the Canaanitish tribes which were
ripe for the judgment of extermination (Gen. xv. 16). And if,
notwithstanding this, the Israelites sent to him with words of peace
(Deut. ii. 26), this was simply done to leave the decision of his fate
in his own hand (see at Deut. ii. 24). Sihon came out against the
Israelites into the desert as far as Jahza, where a battle was fought,
in which he was defeated. The accounts of the Onom. concerning
Jahza, which was situated, according to Emebius, between Medamon
(Medaba) and Debous (JDibon, see above), and according to Jerome,
between Medaba and Deblatai, may be reconciled with the state-
ment that it was in the desert, provided we assume that it was not
in a straight line between the places named, but in a more easterly
direction on the edge of the desert, near to the commencement of
the Wady Wale, a conclusion to which the juxtaposition of Jahza
xxxiii. contains a larger number of stations than we read of in the historical
account, — at all warrants the hypothesis, that the present chapter is founded upon
a different document from chap, xxxiii. For they may be explained in a very
simple manner, as Kurtz has most conclusively demonstrated (vol. iii. pp. 383-5),
from the diversity in the character of the two chapters. Chap, xxxiii. is purely
statistical. The catalogue given there " contains a complete list in regular order
of all the stations properly so called, that is to say, of those places of encamp-
ment where Israel made a longer stay than at other times, and therefore not
only constructed an organized camp, but also set up the tabernacle." In the
historical account, on the other hand, the places mentioned are simply those
which were of historical importance. For this reason there are fewer stations
introduced between Mount Hor and Ijje Abarim than in chap, xxxiii., stations
where nothing of importance occurred being passed over ; but, on the other
hand, there are a larger number mentioned between Ijje Abarim and Arboth
Moab, and some of them places where no complete camp was constructed with
the tabernacle set up, probably because they were memorable as starting-points
for the expeditions into the two Amorite kingdoms.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXL ?*-85. 151
and Mephaot in Josh. xiii. 18, xxi. 37, and Jer. xlviji. 21, also
points (see at Josh. xiii. 18).— Vor. 24, Israel smote him with the
edge of the sword, i.e. without quarter (see Gen. xxxiv. 26), and
took possession of his land "from Arnon (Mojeb) to the Jabbok,
unto the children of Ammon," i.e. to the upper Jabbok, the modern
Nahr or Moiet Amman. The Jabbok, now called Zerha, i.«. the
blue, does not take its rise, as Seetzen supposed, on the pilgrim-road
by the castle of Zerka ; but its source, according to Abulfeda (tab.
Syr. p. 91) and Buckingham, is the Nahr Amman, which flowed
down from the ancient capital of the Ammonites, and was called
the upper Jabbok, and formed the western border of the Ammonites
towards the kingdom of Sihon, and subsequently towards Gad
(Deut. ii. 37, iii. 16 ; Josh. xii. 2). " For the border of the Ammon-
ites was strong" (firm), i.e. strongly fortified; "for which reason
Sihon had only been able to push his conquests to the upper Jab-
bok, not into the territory of the Ammonites." This explanation of
KnobeCs is perfectly correct ; since the reason why the Israelites
did not press forward into the country of the Ammonites, was not
the strength of their frontier, but the word of the Lord, " Make not
war upon them, for I shall give thee no possession of the land of
the children of Ammon " (Deut. ii. 19). God had only promised
the patriarchs, on behalf of their posterity, that He would give
them the land of Canaan, which was bounded towards the east by
the Jordan (chap, xxxiv. 2-12 ; compared with Gen. x. 19 and xv.
19-21) ; and the Israelites would have received no settlement at all on
the eastern side of the Jordan, had not the Canaanitish branch of
the Amorites extended itself to that side in the time of Moses, and
conquered a large portion of the possessions of the Moabites, and
also (according to Josh. xiii. 25, as compared with Judg. xi. 13) of
the Ammonites, driving back the Moabites as far as the Arnon,
and the Ammonites behind the Nahr Ammdn. With tbe defeat of
the Amorites, all the land that they had conquered passed into
the possession of the Israelites, who took possession of these towns
(cf. Deut. ii. 34-36). The statement in ver. 25, that Israel settled
in all the towns of the Amorites, is somewhat anticipatory of the
history itself, as the settlement did not occur till Moses gave the
conquered land to the tribes of Reuben and Gad for a possession
(chap, xxxii.). The only places mentioned here are Heshbon and
her daughters, i.e. the smaller towns belonging to it (cf. Josh. xiii.
17), which are enumerated singly in chap, xxxii. 34-38, and Josh,
xiii. 15-28. In explanation of the expression, " Heshbon and her
Digitized by
Google
152 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
daughters," it is added in ver. 26, that Heshbon was the city, i.e.
the capital of the Amorite king Sihon, who had made war upon
the former king of Moab, and taken away all his land as far as the
Anion. Consequently, even down to the time of the predecessor
of Balak, the king of the Moabites at that time, the. land to the
north of the Arnon, and probably even as far as the lower Jabbok,
to which point the kingdom of Sihon extended (see Deut. iii. 12,
13 ; Josh. xii. 5), belonged to the Moabites. And in accordance
with this, the country where the Israelites encamped opposite to
Jericho, before crossing the Jordan, is reckoned as part of the land
of Moab (Deut. i. 5, xxviii. 69, xxxii. 49, xxxiv. 5, 6), and called
Arboth Moab (see chap. xxii. 1) ; whilst the women who seduced
the Israelites to join in the idolatrous worship of Baal Peor are
called daughters of Moab (chap. xxv. 1).
Vers. 27-30. The glorious conquest and destruction of the
capital of the powerful king of the Amorites, in the might of the
Lord their God, inspired certain composers of proverbs (D^E'D
denom. from /W) to write songs in commemoration of the victory.
Three strophes are given from a song of this kind, and introduced
•with the words " therefore" sc. because Heshbon had fallen in this
manner, " the composers of proverbs say." The first strophe (vers.
276 and 28) runs thus : " Come to Heshbon : Built and restored
be the city of Sihon ! For fire went out of Heshbon, ; flames -from
the city of Sihon. It devoured Ar Moab, the lords of the heights
of Arnon." The summons to come to Heshbon and build this
ruined city up again, was not addressed to the Israelites, but to
the conquered Amorites, and is to be interpreted as ironical (F. v.
Meyer; Ewald, Gesch. ii. pp. 267, 268): "Come to Heshbon, ye
victorious Amorites, and build your royal city up again, wliich
we have laid in ruins 1 A fire has gone out of it, and burned up
Ar Moab, and the lords of the heights of the Arnon" The refer-
ence is to the war-fire, which the victorious Amorites kindled
from Heshbon in the land of Moab under the former king of
Moab ; that is to say, the war in which they subjugated Ar Moab
and the possessors of the heights of Arnon. Ar Moab (see at
ver. 15) appears to have been formerly the capital of all Moabitis,
or at least of that portion of it which was situated upon the north-
ern side of the Arnon ; and the prominence given to it in Deut.
ii. 9, 18, 29, is in harmony with this. The heights of Arnon are
mentioned as the limits to which Sihon had carried his victorious
supremacy over Moab. The " lords" of these heights are the Moab-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXI. 21-35. 153
ites. — Ver. 29. Second strophe : " Woe to thee, Moab ! Thou art
lost, people of Chemosh ! He has given up his sons as fugitives, and
his daughters into captivity — to Sihon, king of the Amorites" The
poet here turns to Moab, and announces its overthrow. Chemosh
(K^D3, from E*D3 = E03, subactor, domitor) was the leading deity of
the Moabites (Jer. xlviii. 7) as well as of the Ammonites (Judg. xi.
24), and related not only to Milcom, a god of the Ammonites, hut
also to the early Canaanitish deity Baal and Moloch. According
to a statement of Jerome (on Isa. xv.), it was only another name
for Baal Peor, probably a god of the sun, which was worshipped as
the king of his nation and the god of war. He is found in this
character upon the coins of Areopolis, standing upon a column,
with a sword in his right hand and a lance and shield in the left,
and with two fire-torches by his side (cf. Ekhel doctr. numm. vet.
iii. p. 504), and was appeased by the sacrifice of children in times
of great distress (2 Kings iii. 27). Further information, and to
some extent a different view, are found in the article by J. G.
Muller in Herzog's Cyclopaedia. The subject to |TU is neither Moab
nor Jehovah, but Chemosh. The thought is this: as Chemosh,
the god of Moab, could not deliver his people from the Amorite
king ; so now that Israel has conquered the latter, Moab is utterly
lost. In the triumph which Israel celebrated over Moab through
conquering its conquerors, there is a forewarning expressed of the
ultimate subjection of Moab under the sceptre of Israel. — Ver. 30.
Third strophe, in which the woe evoked upon Moab is justified :
" We cast them down : Heshbon is lost even to Dibon ; and we laid
it waste even to Nophah, with fire to Medeba" 0T31 is the first pers.
pi. imperf. Kal of JTV with the suffix D— for D-7 (as in Ex. xxix. 30).
ftv, to cast arrows, to shoot down (Ex. xix. 13) : figuratively to
throw to the ground (Ex. xv. 4). B*Bb for D#3, first pers. pi. imperf.
Hiph. of nc'J, synonymous with nvs, Jer. iv. 7. The suffixes of both
verbs refer to the Moabites as the inhabitants of the cities named.
Accordingly Heshbon also is construed as a masculine, because it
was not the town as such, but the inhabitants, that were referred to.
Heshbon, the residence of king Sihon, stood pretty nearly in the
centre between the Arnon and the Jabbok (according to the Onom.
twenty Roman miles from the Jordan, opposite to Jericho), and
still exists in extensive ruins with deep bricked wells, under the old
name of Hesbdn (cf. v. Raumer, Pal. p. 262). On Dibon in the
south, not more than an hour from Arnon, see p. 288. Nophach is
probably the same as Nobach, Judg. viii. 11, but not the same as
Digitized by
Google
154 , THE FOUBTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Kenath, which was altered into Nobach (chap, xxxii. 42). Accord-
ing to Jadg. viii. 11, it was near Jogheha, not far from the eastern
desert ; and in all probability it still exists in the rained place called
Nowakis {Burckhardt, p. 619 ; Buckingham, ii. p. 46 ; Robinson,
App. p. 188), to the north-west of Amman (Rabbath-Ammon).
Nophach, therefore, is referred to as a north-eastern town or for-
tress, and contrasted with JDibon, which was in the south. The
words which follow, 'D *ig itw, « which to Medeba," yield no intel-
ligible meaning. The Seventy give mvp em, M. (fire upon Medeba),
and seem to have adopted the reading "IJ> B>K. In the Masoretic
punctuation also, the n in "1E>K is marked as suspicions by a panel,
extraord. Apparently, therefore, i^N was a copyist's error of old
standing for &$, and is to be construed as governed by the verb
D'Bb, u with fire to Medeba? This city was about two hours to the
south-east of Heshbon, and is still to be seen in ruins bearing the
name of Medaba, upon the top of a hill of about half-an-hour's
journey in circumference (Burckhardt, p. 625 ; v. Raumer, Pal.
pp. 264-5). 1
Vers. 31, 32. When Israel was sitting, i.e. encamped, in the land
of the Amorites, Moses reconnoitred Jaezer, after which the Israel-
ites took u its daughters," i.e. the smaller places dependent upon
Jaezer, and destroyed the Amorites who dwelt in them. It is
evident from chap, xxxii. 35, that Jaezer was not only conquered,
but destroyed. This city, which was situated, according to the
Onom. (s. v. Jazer), ten Roman miles to the west of Philadelphia.
(Rabbath-Ammon), and fifteen Roman miles to the north of Hesh-
bon, is most probably to be sought for (as Seetzen supposes, i. pp.
397, 406, iv. p. 216) in the ruins of es Szir, at the source of the
Ndhr Szir, in the neighbourhood of which Seetzen found some pools,
which are probably the remains of rt the sea of Jazer," mentioned
in Jer. xlviii. 32. There is less probability in Burckhardt s con-
jecture (p. 609), that it is to be found in the ruins of Ain Hazir,
1 Ewald and Bleek (Einleitung in d. A. T. p. 200) axe both agreed that this
ode was composed on the occasion of the defeat of the Amorites by the Israel-
ites, and particularly on the capture of the capital Heshbon, as it depicts the
fall of Heshbon in the most striking way ; and this city was rebuilt shortly
afterwards by the Reubenites, and remained ever afterwards a city of some
importance. Knobel, on the other hand, has completely misunderstood the
meaning and substance of the verses quoted, and follows some of the earliest
commentators, such as CUricus and others, in regarding the ode as an Amoritish
production, and interpreting it as relating to the conquest and fortification of
Heshbon by Sihon
Digltizi
ed by Google
CHAP. XXI. 21-86. 155
near Kherbet el Suk, to the south-west of es Salt ; though v. Raumer
(Pal. p. 262) decides iu its favour (see my Commentary on Josh,
xiii. 25). — Vers. 33-35. The Israelites then turned towards the
north, and took the road to Bashan, where king Og came against
them with his people, to battle at Edrei. From what point it was
that the Israelites entered upon the expedition against Bashan, is
not stated either here or in Deut.' iii. 1 sqq., where Moses recapitu-
lates these events, and gives a more detailed account of the con-
quests than he does here, simply because it was of no importance
in relation to the main object of the history. We have probably to
picture the conquest of the kingdoms of Sihon and Og as taking
place in the following manner : namely, that after Sihon had been
defeated at Jahza, and his capital had been speedily taken in
consequence of this victory, Moses sent detachments of his army
from the places of encampment mentioned in vers. 16, 18-20, into
the different divisions of his kingdom, for the purpose of taking
possession of their towns. After the conquest of the whole of the
territory of Sihon, the main army advanced to Bashan and defeated
king Og in a great battle at Edrei, whereupon certain detachments
of the army were again despatched, under courageous generals, to
secure the conquest of the different parts of his kingdom (cf . chap.
xxxii. 39, 41, 42). The kingdom of Og embraced the northern
half of Gilead, i.e. the country between the Jabbok and the Mand-
hnr (Deut. iii. 13 ; Josh. xii. 5), the modern Jebel Ajlun, and " all
Bashan," or " all the region of Argob " (Deut. iii. 4, 13, 14), the
modern plain of Jaulan and Hauran, which extended eastwards to
Sakha, north-eastwards to Edrei (Deut. iii. 10), and northwards to
Geshur and Maacha (Josh. xii. 5). For further remarks, see Deut.
iii. 10. There were two towns in Bashan of the name of Edrei.
One of them, which is mentioned in Deut. i. 4 and Josh. xii. 4,
along with Ashtaroth, as a second residence of king Og, is described
in the Onom. («. v. Ashtaroth and Edrei) as six Roman miles, i.e.
fully two hours, from Ashtaroth, and twenty-four or twenty-five
miles from Bostra, and called Adraa or Adara. This is the modern
Dera or Draa (in Burckhardt, p. 385 ; Seetzen, i. pp. 363, 364), and
Draah, Idderat (in Buckingham, Syr. ii. p. 146), a place which still
exists, consisting of a number of miserable houses, built fpr the most
part of basalt, and standing upon a small elevation in a treeless,
hilly region, with the ruins of an old church and other smaller
buildings, supposed to belong to the time when Draa, Adraa (as
whs Arabiae), was an episcopal see, on the east of the pilgrim-road
Digitized by
Google
156 THE FOURTH BOOK OF HOSES.
between Remtha and Mezareib, by the side of a small wady (see
Bitter, Erdk. xv. pp. 838 sqq.). The other Edrei, which is men-
tioned in Dent. iii. 10 as the north-western frontier of Bashan, was
farther towards the north, and is still to be seen in the ruins of
Zorah or Ethra (see at Deut. iii. 10). In the present instance the
southern town is intended, which was not far from the south-west
frontier of Bashan, as Og certainly did not allow the Israelites to
advance to the northern frontier of his kingdom before he gave them
battle. — Vers. 34, 35. Just as in the case of Sihon, the Lord had also
promised the Israelites a victory over Og, and had given him into
their power, so that they smote him, with his sons and all his people,
without leaving any remnant, and executed the ban, according to
Deut. ii. 34, upon both the kings. (See the notes on Deut. iii.)
III.— OCCURRENCES IN THE STEPPES OF MOAB, WITH INSTRUC-
TIONS RELATING TO THE CONQUEST AND DISTRIBUTION
OF THE LAND OF CANAAN.
Chap, xxii.-xxxvi.
Chap. xxii. 1. After the defeat of the two Amorite kings, Sihon
and Og, and the conquest of their kingdoms in Gilead and Bashan,
the Israelites removed from the height of Pisgah, on the mountains
of Abarim before Nebo (see at chap. xxi. 20), and encamped in the
" Arboth Moab (the steppes of Moab), on the other side of the
Jordan of Jericho," i.e. that part of the Jordan which skirted the
province of Jericho. Arboth Moab was the name given to that
portion of the Arabah, or large plain of the Jordan, the present
Ghor (see at Deut. i. 1), which belonged to the territory of the
Moabites previous to the spread of the Amorites under Sihon in
the land to the east of the Jordan, and which probably reached
from the Dead Sea to the mouth of the Jabbok. The site of the
Israelitish camp is therefore denned with greater minuteness by the
clause "beyond the Jordan of Jericho." This place of encamp-
ment, which is frequently alluded to (chap. xxvi. 3, 63, xxxi. 12,
xxxiii. 48, 50, xxxv. 1, xxxvi. 13 ; Josh. xiii. 32), extended, according
to chap, xxxiii. 49, from Beth-Jeshimoih to AbeUShittim. JBeth-
Jeshimoth {i.e. house of wastes), on the north-eastern desert border
(Jeshimon, chap. xxi. 20) of the Dead Sea, a town allotted to the
tribe of Reuben (Josh. xii. 3, xiii. 20), was situated, according to
Digitizi
ed by Google
CHAF. XXII. 2-XXIV. 25. 157
the Onom. (s. v. BTjdaa-i/iovd, Bethsimuth), ten Roman miles, or four
hours, to the south (S.E.) of Jericho, on the Dead Sea ; according
to Josephus (bell. jud. iv. 7, 6), it was to the south of Julias (IAvias),
Le. Betli-Haram, or Rameh, on the northern edge of the Wady
Hesban (see at chap, xxxii. 36), or in the Ghor el Seisabdn, on the
northern coast of the Dead Sea, and the southern end of the plain
of the Jordan. Abel Shittim (B^f? ??K), i.e. the acacia-meadow,
or, in its briefer form, Shittim (chap. xxv. 1), was situated, according
to Josephus (Ant. iv. 8, 1), on the same spot as the later town of
Abila, in a locality rich in date-palms, sixty stadia from the Jordan,
probably by the Wady Eshtah to the north of the Wady Hesban ;
even if KnobeVs supposition that the name is connected with nOBW
= fl&& with N prost. should not be a tenable one. From Shittim or
Sitiim the Israelites advanced, under Joshua, to the Jordan, to
effect the conquest of Canaan (Josh. iii. 1).
In the steppes of Moab the Israelites encamped upon the border
of the promised land, from which they were only separated by the
Jordan. But before this boundary line could be passed, there were
many preparations that had to be made. In the first place, the
whole congregation was to pass through a trial of great importance
to all future generations, as bearing upon the relation in which it
stood to the heathen world ; and in the second place, it was here
that Moses, who was not to enter Canaan because of his sin at the
water of strife, was to bring the work of legislation to a close before
his death, and not only to issue the requisite instructions concerning
the conquest of the promised inheritance, and the division of it
among the tribes of Israel, but to impress once more upon the
hearts of the whole congregation the essential contents of the whole
law, with all that the Lord had done for Israel, that they might be
confirmed in their fidelity to the Lord, and preserved from .the
danger of apostasy. This last work of the faithful servant of God,
with which he brought his mediatorial work to a close, is described
in the book of Deuteronomy ; whilst the laws relating to the con-
quest and partition of Canaan, with the experience of Israel in the
steppes of Moab, fill up the latter portion of the present book.
BALAAM AND HIS PROPHECIES. — CHAP. XXII. 2-XXIV. 25.
The rapid defeat of the two mighty kings of the Amorites
filled the Moabites with such alarm at the irresistible might of Israel,
that Balak their king, with the princes of Midian, sought to bring
Digitized by
Google
158 THE FOUBTH BOOK OF MOSE8.
the powers of heathen magic to bear against the nation of God ;
and to this end he sent messengers with presents to Balaam, the
celebrated soothsayer, in Mesopotamia, who had the reputation of
being able both to bless and corse with great success, to entreat him
to come, and so to weaken the Israelites with his magical curses,
that he might be able to smite them, and drive them out of his land
(chap. xxii. 1-7). At first Balaam declined this invitation, in con-
sequence of divine instructions (vers. 8-14) ; but when a second
and still more imposing embassy of Moabite princes appeared be-
fore him, God gave him permission to go with them, but on this
condition, that he should do nothing but what Jehovah should tell
him (vers. 15-21). When on the way, he was warned again by
the miraculous opposition of the angel of the Lord, to say nothing
but what God should say to him (vers. 22-35). When Balak, there-
fore, came to meet him, on his arrival at the border of his kingdom,
to give him a grand reception, Balaam explained to him, that he
could only speak the word which Jehovah would put into his mouth
(vers. 36-40), and then proclaimed, in four different utterances,
what God inspired him to declare. First of all, as he stood upon
the height of Bamoth-Baal, from which he could see the end of the
Israelitish camp, he declared that it was impossible for him to curse
this matchless, numerous, and righteous people, because they had
not been cursed by their God (chap. xxii. 41— xxiii. 10). , He then
went to the head of Pisgah, where he could see all Israel, and an-
nounced that Jehovah would bless this people, because He saw no
unrighteousness in them, and that He would dwell among them as
their King, making known His word to them, and endowing them
with activity and lion-like power (chap, xxiii. 11—24). And lastly,
upon the top of Peor, where he could see Israel encamped according
to its tribes, he predicted, in two more utterances, the spread and
powerful development of Israel in its inheritance, under the blessing
of God (chap, xxiii. 25-xxiv. 9), the rise of a star out of Jacob in
the far distant future, and the appearance of a ruler in Israel, who
would break to pieces all its foes (chap. xxiv. 10—24) ; and upon
this Balak sent him away (ver. 25).
From the very earliest times opinions have been divided as to
the character of Balaam. 1 Some («.</. Philo, Ambrose, and Augus-
1 On Balaam and his prophecies see G. Moebius Prophetm Bileami historia,
Lips. 1676 ; Liiderwald, die Gesckichte Bileams deutlich u. begreifich erklSrt
(Helmst. 1787) ; B. R. de Geer, Diss, de Bileamo, ejus historia et vaticiniis ;
Tholuck's vermischte Schriften (i. pp. 406 sqq.) ; Hengstenberg, History of
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXII. 2-XX1V. 26. 159
tine) have regarded him as a wizard and false prophet, devoted to
the worship of idols, who was destitute of any susceptibility for the
true religion, and was compelled by God, against his will, to give
utterance to blessings upon Israel instead of curses. Others (e.g.
Tertullian and Jerome) have supposed him to be a genuine and true
prophet, who simply fell through covetousness and ambition. But
these views are both of them untenable in this exclusive form.
) Wksius (Miecell. se. i. lib. i. c. 16, § 33 sqq.), Hengstenberg (Balaam i
and his Prophecies), and Kurtz (History of the Old Covenant), have
all of them clearly demonstrated this. The name DV?3 (LXX.
BaXadfi) is not to be derived, as Geseniut suggests, from ?3 and DJ?,
non populus, not a people, but either from V?3 and M? (dropping
one y), devourer of the people (Simonis and Hengstenberg), or more
probably from y?2, with the terminal syllable D— , devourer, de-
stroyer (Furst, Dietrich), which would lead to the conclusion, that
" he bore the name as a dreaded wizard and conjurer ; whether he
received it at his birth, as a member of a family in which this
occupation was hereditary, and then afterwards actually became in
pablic opinion what the giving of the name expressed as an ex-
pectation and desire ; or whether the name was given to him at a
later period, according to Oriental custom, when the fact indicated
by the name had actually made its appearance" (Hengstenberg).
In its true meaning, the name is related to that of his father, Beor. 1
"rilf, from "i?3, to burn, eat off, destroy : so called on account of
the destructive power attributed to his curses (Hengstenberg). It ,
is very probable, therefore, that Balaam belonged to a family in
which the mantic character, or magical art, was hereditary. These
names at once warrant the conjecture that Balaam was a heathen
conjurer or soothsayer. Moreover, he is never called tt'M, a prophet,-
or nth, a seer, but D?pn, the soothsayer (Josh. xiii. 22), a title which '
Balaam, etc. (Berlin, 1842, and English translation by Ryland : Clark, 1847) ;
Kurtz, History of the Old Covenant (English translation : Clark, 1859) ; and
Gust. Baur, Gesch. der alttestl. TVeissagung, Giessen, 1861, where the literature
is given more fully still.
1 The form Botor, which we find instead of Beor in 2 Pet. ii. 15, appears
to have arisen from a peculiar mode of pronouncing the guttural p (see Loescher
de causis ling. ebr. p. 246) ; whereas Vitringa maintains (in his obss. is. 1. iv.
c. 9), that Peter himself invented this form, " that by this sound of the word
he might play upon the Hebrew "ifeo, whioh signifies flesh, and thus delicately
hint that Balaam, the false prophet, deserved to be called the son of Bosor,
i.e. ~fo2, or flesh, on account of his persuading to the indulgence of carnal
Digitized by
Google
160 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
is never used in connection with the true prophets. For Dpi?, sooth-
saying, is forbidden to the Israelites in Deut. xviii. 10 sqq., as an
abomination in the sight of Jehovah, and is spoken of everywhere
not only as a grievous sin (1 Sam. xv. 23 ; Ezek. xiii. 23 ; 2 Kings
xvii. 17), but as the mark of a false prophet (Ezek. xiii. 9, xxii. 28,
Jer. xiv. 14, and even in Isa. hi. 2, where Dpi? forms the antithesis
to tfO}). Again, Balaam resorts to auguries, just like a heathen
soothsayer (chap. xxiv. 1, compared with chap, xxiii. 3, 5), for the
purpose of obtaining revelations ; from which we may see that he
was accustomed to adopt this as his ordinary mode of soothsaying. 1
On the other hand, Balaam was not without a certain measure of
the true knowledge of God, and not without susceptibility for such
revelations of the true God as he actually received ; so that, without
being really a prophet, he was able to give utterance to true pro-
phecies from Jehovah. He not only knew Jehovah, but he con-
fessed Jehovah, even in the presence of Balak, as well as of the
Moabitish messengers. He asked His will, and followed it (chap. xxii.
8, 13, 18, 19, 38, xxiii. 12), and would not go with the messengers
of Balak, therefore, till God had given him permission (chap. xxii.
20). If he had been altogether destitute of the fear of God, he
would have complied at once with Balak's request. And again,
although at the outset it is only Elohim who makes known His will
(chap. xxii. 9, 20), and even when he first of all goes out in search
of oracles, it is Elohim who comes to him (chap, xxiii. 4) ; yet not
only does the angel of Jehovah meet him by the way (chap. xxii. 22
sqq.), but Jehovah also puts words into his mouth, which he an-
nounces to the king of the Moabites (chap, xxiii. 5, 12, 16), so that
all his prophecies are actually uttered from a mind moved and
governed by the Spirit of God, and that not from any physical
constraint exerted upon him by God, but in such a manner that he
enters into them with all his heart and soul, and heartily desires to
die the death of these righteous, i.e. of the people of Israel (chap,
xxiii. 10) ; and when he finds that it pleases Jehovah to bless Israel,
he leaves off resorting any longer to auguries (chap. xxiv. 1), and
eventually declares to the enraged monarch, that he cannot trans-
1 " The fact that he made use of so extremely unoertain a method as augury,
the insufficiency of which was admitted even by the heathen themselves (vid.
NtigeUbqch, homer. Theol. pp. 154 sqq..), and which no true prophet among the
Israelites ever employed, is to be attributed to the weakness of the influence
exerted upon him by the Spirit of God. When the Spirit worked with power,
there was no need to look round at nature for the purpose of ascertaining the
will of God" (Hengstenberg).
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXU. 2-XXIV. 25. 161
gress the command of Jehovah, even if the king should give him
his house full of silver and gold (chap. xxiv. 13). 1
This double-sidedness and ambiguity of the religious and pro-
phetic character of Balaam may be explained on the supposition
that, being endowed with a predisposition to divination and prophecy,
he practised soothsaying and divination as a trade ; and for the
purpose of bringing this art to the greatest possible perfection,
brought not only the traditions of the different nations, but all the
phenomena of his own times, within the range of his observations.
In this way he may have derived the first elements of the true
knowledge of God from different echoes of the tradition of the
primeval age, which was then not quite extinct, and may possibly
have heard in his own native land some notes of the patriarchal
revelations out of the home of the tribe-fathers of Israel. But
these traditions are not sufficient of themselves to explain his attitude
towards Jehovah, and his utterances concerning Israel. Balaam's
peculiar knowledge of Jehovah, the God of Israel, and of all that
He had done to His people, and his intimate acquaintance with the
promises made "to the patriarchs, which strike us in his prophecies
(comp. cbap. xxiii. 10 with Gen. xiii. 16, xxiii. 24 ; chap. xxiv. 9
with Gen. xlix. 9 ; and chap. xxiv. 17 with Gen. xlix. 10), can only
be explained from the fact that the report of the great things which
God had done to and for Israel in Egypt and at the Dead Sea, had
not only spread among all the neighbouring tribes, as was foretold
in Ex. xv. 14, and is attested by Jethro, Ex. xviii. 1 sqq., and
Eahab the Canaanite, Josh. ii. 9 sqq., but had even penetrated into
Mesopotamia, as the countries of the Euphrates had maintained a
steady commercial intercourse from the very earliest times with
Hither Asia and the land of Egypt. Through these tidings Balaam
1 The significant interchange in the use of the names of God, which is seen
in the fact, that from the very outset Balaam always speaks of Jehovah (chap,
xrii. 8, 13, 18, 19), — whereas, according to the historian, it is only Elohim who
reveals Himself to him (chap. xxii. 9, 10, 12), — has been pointed out by Heng-
stenberg in his Dissertations ; and even Baur, in his Geschichte der alttestl.
Weissagung (i. p. 884), describes it as a " fine distinction ;" but neither of them
satisfactorily explains this diversity. For the assumption that Balaam is thereby
tacitly accused of hypocrisy (Hengstenberg), or that the intention of the writer
is to intimate that " the heathen seer did not stand at first in any connection
whatever with the true God of Israel 1 " (Baur), sets up a chasm between Elohim
and Jehovah, with which the fact that, according to chap. xxii. 22, the wrath of
Elohim on account of Balaam's journey was manifested in the appearance of the
angel of Jehovah, is irreconcilable. The manifestation of God in the form of
PENT. — VOL. III. L
Digitized by
Google
162 THE FOUBTH BOOK OF MOSES.
was no doubt induced not only to procure more exact information
concerning the events themselves, that he might make a profitable
use of it in connection with his own occupation, but also to dedicate
himself to the service of Jehovah, " in the hope of being able to
participate in the new powers conferred upon the human race ; so
that henceforth he called Jehovah his God, and appeared as a
prophet in His name" (Hengstenberg). In this respect Balaam
resembles the Jewish exorcists, who cast out demons in the name of
Jesus without following Christ (Mark ix. 38, 39 ; Luke ix. 49),
but more especially Simon Magus, his " New Testament antitype,"
who was also so powerfully attracted by the new divine powers of
Christianity that he became a believer, and submitted to baptism,
because he saw the signs and great miracles that were done (Acts
viii. 13). And from the very time when Balaam sought Jehovah,
the fame of his prophetical art appears to have spread. It was no
doubt the report that he stood in close connection with the God of
Israel, which induced Balak, according to chap. xxii. 6, to hire him
to oppose the Israelites ; as the heathen king shared the belief, which
was common to all the heathen, that Balaam was able to work upon
the God he served, and to determine and regulate His will. God
had probably given to the soothsayer a few isolated but memorable
glimpses of the unseen, to prepare him for the service of His
kingdom. But " Balaam's heart was not right with God," and " he
loved the wages of unrighteousness" (Acts viii. 21 ; 2 Pet. ii. 15).
His thirst for honour and wealth was not so overcome by the reve-
lations of the true God, that he could bring himself to give up his
soothsaying, and serve the living God with an undivided heart.
Thus it came to pass, that through the appeal addressed to him by
Balak, he was brought into a situation in which, although he did
not venture to attempt anything in opposition to the will of Jehovah,
the angel of Jehovah, was only a higher stage of the previous manifestations
of Elohim. And all that follows from this is, that Balaam's original attitude
towards Jehovah was a very imperfect one, and not yet in harmony with the
true nature of the God of Israel. In his Jehovah Balaam worshipped only
Elohim, i.e. only a divine being, but not the God of Israel, who was first of all
revealed to him according to His true essence, in the appearance of the angel of
Jehovah, and still more clearly in the words which He put into his mouth. This
is indicated by the use of Elohim, in chap. xxii. 9, 10, 12. In the other pas-
sages, where this name of God still occurs, it is required by the thought, viz. in
chap. xxii. 22, to express the essential identity of Elohim and the Maleach
Jehovah ; and in chap. xxii. 38, xxiii. 27, and xxiv. 2, to show that Balaam did
not speak out of his own mind, but from the inspiration of the Spirit of God.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXII. 2-21. 163
his heart was never thoroughly changed ; so that, whilst he refused
the honours and rewards that were promised him by Balak, and
pronounced blessings upon Israel in the strength of the Spirit of
God that came upon him, he was overcome immediately afterwards
by the might of the sin of his own unbroken heart, fell back into
the old heathen spirit, and advised the Midianites to entice the
Israelites to join in the licentious worship of Baal Peor (chap. xxxi.
16), and was eventually put to death by the Israelites when they
conquered these their foes (chap. xxxi. 8). 1
Chap. xxii. 2-21. Balaam hired by Balak to curse Israel.
— Vers. 2-4. As the Israelites passed by the eastern border of the
land of Moab, the Moabites did not venture to make any attack
upon them ; on the contrary, they supplied them with bread and
water for money (Deut. ii. 29). At that time they no doubt
cherished the hope that Sihon, their own terrible conqueror, would
be able with perfect ease either to annihilate this new foe, or to
drive them back into the desert from which they had come. But
when they saw this hope frustrated, and the Israelites had over-
thrown the two kings of the Amorites with victorious power, and
had conquered their kingdoms, and pressed forward through what
was formerly Moabitish territory, even to the banks of the Jordan,
the close proximity of so powerful a people filled Balak, their king,
with terror and dismay, so that he began to think of the best means
of destroying them. There was no ground for such alarm, as the
Israelites, in consequence of divine instructions (Deut. ii. 9), had
offered no hostilities to the Moabites, but had conscientiously spared
their territory and property; and even after the defeat of the
1 When modern critics, such as Knobel, Baur, etc., affirm that the tradition
in chap. xxxi. 8, 16, Josh. xiii. 22 — viz. that Balaam was a kosem, or soothsayer,
who advised the Midianites to seduce the Israelites to join in the worship of
Baal — is irreconcilable with the account in chap, xxii.-xxiv. concerning Balaam
himself, his attitude towards Jehovah, and his prophecies with regard to Israel,
they simply display their own incapacity to comprehend, or form any psycho-
logical appreciation of, a religious character such as Balaam ; but they by no
means-prove that the account in chap, xxii.-xxiv. is interpolated by the Jehovist
into the Elohistic original. And all that they adduce as a still further confirma-
tion of this hypothesis (namely, that the weaving of prophetic announcements
into the historical narrative, the interchange of the names of God, Jehovah, and
Elohim, the appearance of the angel of the Lord, the talking of the ass, etc., are
foreign to the Elohistic original), are simply assertions and- assumptions, which
do not become any more conclusive from the fact that they are invariably
adduced when no better arguments can be hunted up.
Digitized by
Google
164 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Amorites, had not turned their arms against them, but had advanced
to the Jordan to take possession of the land of Canaan. But the
supernatural might of the people of God was a source of such dis-
comfort to the king of the Moabites, that a horror of the Israelites
came upon him. Feeling too weak to attack them with force of
arms, he took counsel with the elders of Midian. With these words,
" This crowd will now lick up all our environs, as the ox licheih up the
green of the field," i.e. entirely consume all our possessions, he called
their attention to the danger which the proximity of Israel would
bring upon him and his territory, to induce them to unite with him
in some common measures against this dangerous foe. This in-
tention is implied in his wordsj and clearly follows from the sequel
of the history. According to ver. 7, the elders of Midian went to
Balaam with the elders of Moab ; and there is no doubt that the
Midianitish elders advised Balak to send for Balaam, with whom
they had become acquainted upon their trading journeys (cf. Gen.
xxxvii.), to come and curse the Israelites. Another circumstance
also points to an intimate connection between Balaam and the
Midianites, namely, the fact that, after he had been obliged to bless
the Israelites in spite of the inclination of his own natural heart,
he went to the Midianites and advised them to make the Israelites
harmless, by seducing them to idolatry (chap. xxxi. 16). The
Midianites, who are referred to here, must be distinguished from
the branch of the same tribe which dwelt in the peninsula of Sinai
(chap. x. 29, 30 ; Ex. ii. 15, 16, iii. 1). They had been settled for
a long time (cf. Gen. xxxvi. 35) on the eastern border of the
Moabitish and Amoritish territory, in a grassy but treeless steppe-
land, where many ruins and wells are still to be found belonging to
very ancient times (Buckingham, Syr. ii. pp. 79 sqq., 95 sqq.), and
lived by grazing (chap. xxxi. 32 sqq.) and the caravan trade. They
were not very warlike, and were not only defeated by the Edomites
(Gen. xxxvi. 35), but were also subdued and rendered tributary by
Sihon, king of the Amorites (see at chap. xxxi. 8). In the time of
the Judges, indeed, they once invaded the land of Israel in company
with the Amalekites and the sons of the East, but they were beaten
by Gideon, and entirely repulsed (Judg. vi. and vii.), and from that
time forth they disappear entirely from history. The " elders of
Midian" are heads of tribes, who administered the general affairs
of the people, who, like the Israelites, lived under a^ patriarchal
constitution. The most powerful of them bore the title of " kings"
(chap. xxxi. 8) or "princes" (Josh. xiii. 21). The clause, "and
Digitized by
Google
' CHAP. xxn. 2-21. 165
Balak, the son of Zippor, was king of the Moahites at that time,"
is added as' a supplementary note to explain the relation of Balak
to the Moabites.
Vers. 5 and 6. Balak sent messengers to Balaam to Pethor in
Mesopotamia. The town of Pethor, or Pethora ($a8ovpa, LXX.),
is unknown. There is something very uncertain in KnobeVs sup-
position, that it is connected with $adowai, a place to the south of
Circessium (Zozim. iii. 14), and with the Bedawa mentioned by
Ptolemy, v. 18, 6, and that these are the same as Anah, 'AvaOm,
Anatha (Ammian. Marcell. xxiv. 1, 6). And the conjecture that
the name is derived from ">riB, to interpret dreams (Gen. xli. 8),
and marks the place as a seat of the possessors of secret arts, is also
more than doubtful, since "IPS corresponds to ">riB in Aramaean;
although there can be no doubt that Pethor may have been a noted
seat of Babylonian magi, since these wise men were accustomed to
congregate in particular localities (cf. Strabo, xvi. 1, § 6, and Miln-
ter Relig. der Babyl. p. 86). Balak desired Balaam to come and
curse the people of Israel, who had come out of Egypt, and were
so numerous that they covered the eye of the earth (see Ex. x. 5),
i.e. the whole face of the land, and sat down (were encamped)
opposite to him ; that he might then perhaps be able to smite them
and drive them out of the land. On n^K for "ik, the imperative of
"HK, see Ewald, § 228, b. — " For I know that he whom thou blestest
is blessed, and he whom thou cursest is cursed" Balak believed, in
common with the whole of the ancient world, in the real power and
operation of the curses, anathemas, and incantations pronounced by
priests, soothsayers, and goetce. And there was a truth at the
foundation of this belief, however it may have been perverted by
heathenism into phantasy and superstition. When God endows a
man with supernatural powers of His word and Spirit, he also con-
fers upon him the power of working upon others in a supernatural
way. Man, in fact, by virtue of the real connection between his spirit
and the higher spiritual world, is able to appropriate to himself
supernatural powers, and make them subservient to the purposes of
sin and wickedness, so as to practise magic and witchcraft with them,
arts which we cannot pronounce either mere delusion or pure super-
stition, since the scriptures of both the Old and New Testaments
speak of witchcraft, and condemn it as a real power of evil and of
the kingdom of darkness (see vol. i. p. 476). Even in the narrative
itself, the power of Balaam to bless and to curse is admitted ; and,
in addition to this, it is frequently celebrated as a great favour dis-
Digitizi
ed by Google
166 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
played towards Israel, that the Lord did not hearken to Balaam,
but turned the curse into a blessing (Deut. xxiii. 5 ; Josh. xxiv. 10 ;
Micah vi. 3 ; Neh. xiii. 2). This ppwer of Balaam is not there-
fore traced, it is true, to the might of heathen deities, but to the
might of Jehovah, whose name Balaam confessed ; but yet the
possibility is assumed of his curse doing actual, and not merely
imaginary, harm to the Israelites. Moreover, the course of the
history shows that in his heart Balaam was very much inclined to
fulfil the desire of the king of the Moabites, and that this subjective
inclination of his was overpowered by the objective might of the
Spirit of Jehovah.
Vers. 7-14. When the elders of Moab and Midian came to
him with wages of divination in their hand, he did not send them
away, but told them to spend the night at his house, that he might
bring them word what Jehovah would say to him. CODp^ from
DDj?, soothsaying, signifies here that which has been wrought or
Won by soothsaying — the soothsayer's wages ; just as n *jfef, which
signifies literally glad tidings, is used in 2 Sam. iv. 10 for the
wages of glad tidings ; and ?V*B, fwB, which signifies work, is fre-
quently used for that which is wrought, the thing acquired, or the
wages. If Balaam had been a true prophet and a faithful servant
of Jehovah, he would at once have sent the messengers away and
refused their request, as he must then have known that God
would not curse His chosen people. But Balaam loved the wages
of unrighteousness. This corruptness of his heart obscured his
mind, so that he turned to God not as a mere form, but with the
intention and in the hope of obtaining the consent of God to his
undertaking. And God came to him in the night, and made
known His will. Whether it was through the medium of a
dream or of a vision, is not recorded, as this was of no moment
in relation to the subject in hand. The question of God in ver.
9, " Who are these men with thee f" not only served to introduce
the conversation (Knobel), but was intended to awaken "the
slumbering conscience of Balaam, to lead him to reflect upon the
proposal which the men had made, and to break the force of his
sinful inclination" (Hengstenberg). — Ver. 12.- God then expressly
forbade him to go with the messengers to curse the Israelites, as
the people was blessed ; and Balaam was compelled to send back
the messengers without attaining their object, because Jehovah had
refused him permission to go with them. "T^p,, ver. 11, imper.of
3p3 = 33j? (see at Lev. xxiv. 11).
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXII. 2-21. 167
Vers. 15-21. The answer with which Balaam had sent the
Moabitish messengers away, encouraged Balak to cherish the hope
of gaining over the celebrated soothsayer to his purpose notwith-
standing, and to send an embassy " of princes more numerous and
more honourable than those," and to make the attempt to over-
come his former resistance by more splendid promises ; whether he
regarded it, as is very probable, " as the remains of a weakly fear
of God, or simply as a ruse adopted for the purpose of obtaining
better conditions" (Hengstenberg). As a genuine heathen, who
saw nothing more in the God of Israel than a national god of that
people, he thought that it would be possible to render not only men,
but gods also, favourable to his purpose, by means of splendid
honours and rich rewards. 1 — Vers. 18, 19. But Balaam replied to
the proposals of these ambassadors : " If Balak gave me his house
full of silver arid gold, I cannot transgress tlie mouth (command) of
Jehovah, my God, to do little or great," i.e. to attempt anything in
opposition to the will of the Lord (cf. 1 Sam. xx. 2, xxii. 15, xxv. /
36). The inability flowed from moral awe of God and dread of
His punishment. " From beginning to end this fact was firmly \
established in Balaam's mind, viz. that in the work to which Balak
summoned him he could do nothing at all except through Jehovah.
This knowledge he had acquired by virtue of his natural gifts as
seer, and his previous experience. But this clear knowledge of
Jehovah was completely obscured again by the love for the wages
which ruled in his heart. Because he loved Balak, the enemy
of Israel, for the sake of the wages, whereas Jehovah loved Israel
for His own name's sake ; Balaam was opposed to Jehovah in his in-
most nature and will, though he knew himself to be in unison with
Him by virtue of his natural gift. Consequently he fell into the
same blindness of contradiction to which Balak was in bondage" /
(Baumgarten). And in this blindness he hoped to be able to turn
Jehovah round to oppose Israel, and favour the wishes of his own
and Balak's heart. He therefore told the messengers to wait again,
that he might ask Jehovah a second time (ver. 19). And this
1 Compare the following remarks of Pliny (h. n. xxviii. 4) concerning this
belief among the Romans : " Verrius Flaccus auctores ponit, quibus credat, in
oppugnationibus ante omnia solitum a Romanis sacerdotibus evocari Deum, cujus
u> tutela id oppidum esset, promittique, Mi eundem aut ampliorem apud Romanos
cultum. Et durat in Pontificum disciplina id sacrum, constatque ideo occuliatum,
<n cujus Dei tutela Roma esset, ne qui hostium simili tnodo agerent;" — and the
further explanations of this heathen notion in Hengstenberg' 's Balaam and his
Prophecies.
Digitizi
ed by Google
168 THE FOUBXH BOOK OF MOSES.
time (ver. 20) God allowed him to go with them, but only on the
condition that he should do nothing but what He said to him. The
apparent contradiction in His first of all prohibiting Balaam from
going (ver. 12), then permitting it (ver. 20), and then again, when
Balaam set out in consequence of this permission, burning with
anger against him (ver. 22), does not indicate any variableness in
the counsels of God, but vanishes at once when we take into ac-
count the pedagogical purpose of the divine consent. When the
first messengers came and Balaam asked God whether he might go
with them and curse Israel, God forbade him to go and curse.
But since Balaam obeyed this command with inward repugnance,
when he asked a second time on the arrival of the second embassy,
God permitted him to go, but on the condition already mentioned,
namely, that he was forbidden to curse. God did this not merely
because it was His own intention to put blessings instead of curses
into the prophet's mouth, — and " the blessings of the celebrated pro-
phet might serve as means of encouraging Israel and discouraging
their foes, even though He did not actually stand in need of them"
(Knobel), — but primarily and principally for the sake of Balaam
himself, viz. to manifest to this soothsayer, who had so little sus-
ceptibility for higher influences, both His own omnipotence and
true deity, and also the divine election of Israel, in a manner so
powerful as to compel him to decide either for or against the God
of Israel and his salvation. To this end God permitted him to go
to Balak, though not without once more warning him most power-
fully by the way of the danger to which his avarice and ambition
would expose him. This immediate intention in the guidance of
Balaam, by which God would have rescued him if possible from
the way of destruction, into which he had been led by the sin
which ruled in his heart, does not at all preclude the much further-
reaching design of God, which was manifested in Balaam's bless-
ings, namely, to glorify His own name among the heathen and in
Israel, through the medium of this far-famed soothsayer.
Vers. 22-35. Balaam's Speaking Ass. — Ver. 22. " And the
anger of God burned, that he was going (t«n ^Tin) : and the angel of
Jehovah placed himself in the way, as an adversary to him" From
the use of the participle *I?n instead of the imperfect, with which
it is not interchangeable, it is evident, on the one hand, that the
anger of God was not excited by the fact that Balaam went with
the elders of Moab, but by his behaviour either on setting out or
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXII. 22-85. 169
upon the journey ; x and, on the other hand, that the occurrence
which followed did not take place at the commencement, but rather
towards the close of, the journey. As it was a longing for wages
and honour that had induced the soothsayer to undertake the jour-
ney, the nearer he came to his destination, under the guidance of
the distinguished Moabitish ambassadors, the more was his mind
occupied with the honours and riches in prospect ; and so completely
did they take possession of his heart, that he was in danger of cast-
ing to the winds the condition which had been imposed upon him
by God. The wrath of God was kindled against this dangerous
enemy of his soul ; and as he was riding upon his ass with two
attendants, the angel of the Lord stood in his way v JDB9, " aa an
adversary to him," i.e. to restrain him from advancing farther on a
road that would inevitably lead him headlong into destruction (cf.
ver. 32). This visible manifestation of God (on the angel of the
Lord, see vol. i. pp. 185 sqq.) was seen by the ass ; but Balaam the
seer was so blinded, that it was entirely hidden from his eye,
darkened as it was by sinful lust ; and this happened three times
before Jehovah brought him to his senses by the speaking of the
dumb animal, and thus opened his eyes.* The u drawn sword" in
the angel's hand was a manifestation of the wrath of God. The
1 From a failure to observe the use of the participle in distinction from the
preterite, and from a misinterpretation of the words of the angel of the I/ord
(ver. 32), " I have come out as an adversary, for the way leads headlong to
destruction," which have been understood as implying that the angel meant to
prohibit the seer from going, whereas he only intended to warn him of the
destruction towards which he was going, the critics have invented a contradic-
tion between the account of the speaking ass (vers. 22-35) and the preceding
part of the history. And in consequence of this, A. G. Hoffmann and others
have pronounced the Bection from ver. 22 to ver. 35 to be a later interpolation ;
whilst JBaur, on the other hand (in his Geschichte d. alttestl. Weissagung), regards
the account of the ass as the original form of the narrative, and the preceding
portion as a composition of the Jehovist. But there is no " contradiction" or
" evident incongruity," unless we suppose that the only reason for the appear-
ance of the angel of the Lord was, that he might once more forbid the seer to
go, and then give him permission, with a certain limitation. The other dif-
ferences, which E. v. Ortenberg adduces, are involved in the very nature of the
case. The manifestation of God, in the form of the Angel of Jehovah, was
necessarily different in its character from a direct spiritual revelation of the
divine will. And lastly, the difference in the expressions used to signify " three
times," in chap. xxii. 28, 32, 33, and chap. xxiv. 10, etc., prove nothing more than
that king Balak did not mould his style of speaking according to that of the ass.
2 " To the great disgrace of the prophet, the glory of the angel was first of
all apparent to the ass. ... He had been boasting before this of extraordinary
Digitized by
Google
170 THE FOUETH BOOK OF MOSES.
ass turned from the road into the field before the threatening sight,
and was smitten by Balaam in consequence to turn her or guide
her back into the road. — Vers. 24, 25. The angel then stationed
himself in a pass of the vineyards where walls ("H3, vineyard walls,
Isa. v. 5) were on both sides, so that the animal, terrified by the
angel, pressed against the wall, and squeezed Balaam's foot against
the wall, for which Balaam smote her again. — Vers. 26, 27. The
angel moved still farther, and stationed himself in front' of him, in
so narrow a pass, that there was no room to move either to the right
or to the left. As the ass could neither turn aside nor go past this
time, she threw herself down. Balaam was still more enraged at
this, and smote her with the stick (?i??3, which he carried ; see Gen.
xxxviii. 18). — Vers. 28 sqq. " Then Jehovah opened the mouth of the
ass, and she said to Balaam, What have I done to thee, that thou hast
smitten me now three times ?" But Balaam, enraged at the refrac-
toriness of his ass, replied, " Because thou hast played me ill (^Vnn,
see Ex. x. 2) : if there were only a sword in my hand, verily I should
now have killed thee" But the ass replied, that she had been ridden
by him from a long time back, and had never been accustomed to
act in this way towards him. These words of the irrational beast,
the truth of which Balaam was obliged to admit, made an impres-
sion upon him, and awakened him out of his blindness, so that God
could now open his eyes, and he saw the angel of the Lord.
In this miraculous occurrence, which scoffers at the Bible con-
stantly bring forward as a weapon of attack upon the truth of the
word of God, the circumstance that the ass perceived the appear-
ance of the angel of the Lord sooner than Balaam did, does not
present the slightest difficulty; for it is a well-known fact, that
irrational animals have a much keener instinctive presentiment of
many natural phenomena, such as earthquakes, storms, etc., than
man has with the five senses of his mind. And the fact is equally
undeniable, that many animals, e.g. horses and cows, see the so-
called second sight, and are terrified in consequence. 1 The rock of
offence in this narrative is to be found in the rational words of an
visions, and now what was visible to the eyes of a beast was invisible to him.
Whence came this blindness, but from the avarice by which he had been so
stupefied, that he preferred filthy lucre to the holy calling of God ? " (Cafotn.)
1 In support of this we will simply cite the following from the remarks made
by Martin upon this subject, and quoted by Hengstenberg in his Balaam (p. 385),
from PassavanCs work on animal magnetism and clairvoyance : " That horses
see it (the second sight), is also evident from their violent and rapid snorting,
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXII. 22-36. 171
irrational and speechless ass. It is true, that in the actual meaning
of the words there is nothing beyond the sensations and feelings to
which animals constantly give utterance in gestures and inarticulate
sounds, when subjected to cruel treatment. But in this instance
the feelings were expressed in the rational words of human lan-
guage, which an animal does not possess ; and hence the question
arises, Are we to understand this miracle as being a purely internal
fact of an ecstatic nature, or a fact that actually came under the
cognizance of the senses? If we examine the arguments which
Hengstenberg has adduced in favour of the former, and Kurtz in
support of the latter, there is nothing at all in the circumstance,
that the narrative itself says nothing about Balaam being in an
ecstasy, nor in the statement that " Jehovah opened the mouth of
the ass," nor lastly, in the words of 2 Pet. ii. 16, " The dumb ass,
speaking with man's voice, forbade the madness of the prophet," to
furnish conclusive, not to say irresistible, proofs of the assertion,
that " as the ass was corporeally and externally visible, its speaking
must have been externally and corporeally audible" {Kurtz). All
that is contained in the two scriptural testimonies is, that the ass
spoke in a way that was perceptible to Balaam, and that this speak-
ing was effected by Jehovah as something altogether extraordinary.
But whether Balaam heard the words of the animal with the out-
ward, i.e. the bodily ear, or with an inward spiritual ear, is not
decided by them. On the other hand, neither the fact that Balaam
expressed no astonishment at the ass y speaking, nor the circumstance
that Balaam's companions — viz. his two servants (ver. 22) and the
Moabitish messengers, who were also present, according to ver. 35 —
did not see the angel or hear the ass speaking, leads with certainty
to the conclusion, that the whole affair must have been a purely
internal one, which Balaam alone experienced in a state of ecstasy,
since argumenta e silentio confessedly prove but very little. With
regard to Balaam, we may say with Augustine (qucest. 50 in Num.),
" he was so carried away by his cupidity, that he was not terrified
by this marvellous miracle, and replied just as if he had been
speaking to a man, when God, although He did not change the
nature of the ass into that of a rational being, made it give utter-
ance to whatever He pleased, for the purpose of restraining his
-when their rider has had a vision of any kind either by day or night. And in
the case of the horse it may also be observed, that it will refuse to go any
farther in the same road until a circuitous course has been taken, and even then
it is quite in a sweat."
Digitized by
Google
172 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
madness." But with regard to the Moahitish messengers, it is very
doubtful whether they were eye-witnesses and auditors of the affair.
It is quite possible that they had gone some distance in advance, or ,
were some distance behind, when Balaam had the vision. On the
other hand, there was no necessity to mention particularly that they
saw the appearance of the angel, and heard the speaking of the
animal, as this circumstance was not of the least importance in con-
nection with the main purpose of the narrative. And still less can
it be said that " the ass's speaking, if transferred to the sphere
of outward reality, would obviously break through the eternal
boundary-line which has been drawn in Gen. i. between the human
and the animal world." The only thing that would have broken
through this boundary, would have been for the words of the ass
to have surpassed the feelings and sensations of an animal ; that is
to say, for the ass to have given utterance to truths that were essen-
tially human, and only comprehensible by human reason. Now that
was not the case. All that the ass said was quite within the sphere
of the psychical life of an animal.
The true explanation lies between the notion that the whole
occurrence was purely internal, and consisted exclusively in ecstasy
brought by God upon Balaam, and the grossly realistic reduction
of the whole affair into the sphere of the senses and the outward
material world. The angel who met the soothsayer in the road,
as he was riding upon his ass, and who was seen at once by the
ass, though he was not seen by Balaam till Jehovah had opened
his eyes, did really appear upon the road, in the outward world of
the senses. But the form in which he appeared was not a grossly
sensuous or material form, like the bodily frame of an ordinary
visible being ; for in that case Balaam would inevitably have seen
him, when his beast became alarmed and restive again and again
and refused to go forward, since it is not stated anywhere that
God had smitten him with blindness, like the men of Sodom (Gen.
xix. 11), or the people in 2 Kings vi. 18. It rather resembled the
appearance of a spirit, which cannot be seen by every one who has
healthy bodily eyes, but only by those who have their senses
awakened for visions from the spirit-world. Thus, for example, the
men who went to Damascus with Paul, saw no one, when the Lord
appeared to him in a miraculous light from heaven, and spoke to
him, although they also heard the voice 1 (Acts ix. 7). Balaam
1 Or, strictly speaking, they saw the light (Acts xxii. 9), but saw no man
(Acts ix. 7) ; and they heard the sound (rw ?««%, the voice or noise generally.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXII. 22-85. . 173
wanted the spiritual sense to discern the angel of the Lord, because'
his spirit's eye was blinded by his thirst for wealth and honour.
This blindness increased to such an extent, with the inward excite-
ment caused by the repeated insubordination of his beast, that he
lost all self-control. As the ass had never been so restive before,
if he had only been calm and thoughtful himself, he would have
looked about to discover the cause of this remarkable change, and
would then, no doubt, have discovered the presence of the angel.
But as he lost all his thoughtfulness, God was obliged to open the
mouth of the dumb and irrational animal, to show a seer by pro-
fession his own blindness. " He might have reproved him by the
words of the angel ; but because the rebuke would not have been
sufficiently severe without some deep humiliation, He made the
beast his teacher" (Calvin). The ass's speaking was produced by
the omnipotence of God ; but it is impossible to decide whether the
modulation was miraculously communicated to the animal's voice,
so that it actually gave utterance to the human words which fell
upon Balaam's ears (Kurtz), or whether the cries of the animal
were formed into rational discourse in Balaam's soul, by the direct
operation of God, so that he alone heard and understood the speech
of the animal, whereas the servants who were present heard nothing
more than unintelligible cries. 1 In either case Balaam received a
deeply humiliating admonition from the mouth of the irrational beast,
and that not only to put him to shame, but also to call him to his
senses, and render him capable of hearing the voice of God. The
seer, who prided himself upon having eyes for divine revelations,
was so blind, that he could not discern the appearance of the angel,
which even the irrational beast had been able to see. 2 By this he
was taught, that even a beast is more capable of discerning things
from the higher world, than a man blinded by sinful desires. It
was not till after this humiliation that God opened his eyes, so that
Acts ix. 7), but not the words (tij» Qavw to5 AeeAowToV fcoi, the voice or articu-
late words of the person speaking, Acts xzii. 9). The construction of ecxot/a,
with the genitive in the one case and the accusative in the other, is evidently
intended to convey this distinct and distinctive meaning. — Tb.
1 See the analogous case mentioned in John xii. 28, 29, of the voice which
came to Jesus from the skies, when some of the people who were standing by
said that it only thundered, whilst others said an angel spoke to Him.
s God made use of the voice of an ass, both because it was fitting that a
brutish mind Bhould be taught by a brute, and also, as Nyssenux says, to instruct
and chastise the vanity of the augur (Balaam), who was accustomed to observe
the meaning of the braying of the ass and the chirping of birds (C. a. Lap.).
Digitized by
Google
174 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
he saw the angel of the Lord with a drawn sword standing in his
road, and fell upon his face before this fearful sight.
Vers. 32-34. To humble him deeply and inwardly, the Lord
held up before him the injustice of his cruel treatment of the ass,
and told him at the same time that it had saved his life by turning
out of the way. " / have come out," said the angel of the Lord,
" as an adversary ; for the way leads headlong into destruction before
me ;" i.e. the way which thou art going is leading thee, in my eyes,
in my view, into destruction. BT, to plunge, sc. into destruction,
both here, and also in Job xvi. 11, the only other passage in which
it occurs. — Ver. 33. The angel of the Lord sought to preserve
Balaam from the destruction which threatened him, by standing
in his way; but he did not see him, though his ass did. vttt
'HI fnw, "perhaps it turned out before me; for otherwise I should
surely have killed thee, and let her live." The first clause is to be
regarded, as Hengstenberg supposes, as an aposiopesis. The angel
does not state positively what was the reason why perhaps the ass
had turned out of the way : he merely hints at it lightly, and leaves
it to Balaam to gather from the hint, that the faithful animal had
turned away from affection to its master, with a dim foreboding of
the danger which threatened him, and yet for that very reason, as
it were as a reward for its service of love, had been ill-treated by
him. The traditional rendering, " if the ass had not turned aside,
surely," etc., cannot be defended according to the rules of the lan-
guage ; and there is not sufficient ground for any such alteration of
the text as Knobel suggests, viz. into W. These words made an
impression, and Balaam made this acknowledgment (ver. 34) : " I
have sinned, for I knew not that thou stoodest in the way against me;
and now, if it displease thee, I will get me back again." The angel
of the Lord replied, however (ver. 35) : " Go with the men ; but
only the word that I shall speak unto thee, that shalt thou speak."
This was sufficient to show him, that it was not the journey in itself
that was displeasing to God, but the feelings and intentions with
which he had entered upon it. The whole procedure was intended
to sharpen his conscience and sober his mind, that he might pay
attention to the word which the Lord would speak to him. At the
same time the impression which the appearance and words of the
angel of the Lord made upon his heart, enveloped in mist as it was
by the thirst for gold and honour, was not a deep one, nor one that
led him to a thorough knowledge of his own heart; otherwise,
after such a warning, he would never have continued his journey.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXII. 36-41. 175
Vers. 36-41. Reception op Balaam by the King op the
Moabites.— Vers. 36, 37. As soon as Balak heard of Balaam's
coming, he went to meet him at a city on the border of the Arnon,
which flowed at the extreme (north) boundary (of the Moabitish
territory), viz. at Areopolis (see at chap. xxi. 15), probably the
capital of the kingdom at one time, but now reduced to a frontier
town, since Sihon the Amorite had taken all the land as far as the
Arnon ; whilst Rabbah, which was farther south, had been selected
as the residence of the king. By coming as far as the frontier of
his kingdom to meet the celebrated soothsayer, Balak intended to
do him special honour. But he could not help receiving him with
a gentle reproof for not having come at his first invitation, as if
he, the king, had not been in a condition to honour him according
to his merits. — Ver. 38. But Balaam, being still mindful of the
warning which he had just received from God, replied, " Lo, I am
come unto thee now : have I then any power to speak anything (sc. of
my own accord) ? The word which God puts into my mouth, that
will I speak." With this reply he sought, at the very outset, to
soften down the expectations of Balak, inasmuch as he concluded
at once that his coming was a proof of his willingness to curse
{Hengstenberg). As a matter of fact, Balaam did not say anything
different to the king from what he had explained to his messengers
at the very first (cf. ver. 18). But just as he had not told them
the whole truth, but had concealed the fact that Jehovah, his God,
had forbidden the' journey at first, on the ground that he was not
to curse the nation that was blessed (ver. 12), so he could not ad-
dress the king in open, unambiguous words. — Vers. 39, 40. He then
went with Balak to Kirjath-Chuzoth, where the king had oxen and
sheep slaughtered in sacrifice, and sent flesh to Balaam as well as
to the princes that were with him for a sacrificial meal, to do honour
to the soothsayer thereby. The sacrifices were not so much thank-
offerings for Balaam's happy arrival, as supplicatory offerings for
the success of the undertaking before them. " This is evident," as
Hengstenberg correctly observes, " from the place and time of their
presentation ; for the place was not that where Balak first met with
Balaam, and they were only presented on the eve of the great
event." Moreover, they were offered unquestionably not to the
Moabitish idols, from which Balak expected no help, but to Jehovah,
whom Balak wished to draw away, in connection with Balaam, from
His own people (Israel), that he might secure His favour to the
Moabites. The situation of Kirjath-Chuzoth, which is only men-
Digitized by
Google
176 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
tioned here, cannot be determined with absolute certainty. As
Balak went with Balaam to Bamoth-Baal on the morning following
the sacrificial meal, which was celebrated there, Kirjath-Chuzoth
cannot have been very far distant. Knobel conjectures, with some
probability, that it may have been the same as Kerioth (Jer. xlviii.
24), i.e. Kereijat or K&rriat, at the foot of Jebel Attarus, at the
top of which Bamoth-Baal was situated (see at chap. xxi. 19). —
Ver. 41. But Balak conducted the soothsayer to Bamoth-Baal, not
because it was consecrated to Baal, but because it was the first
height on the way to the steppes of Moab, from which they could
see the camp of Israel, or at all events, " the end of the people,"
i.e. the outermost portion of the camp. For " Balak started with
the supposition, that Balaam must necessarily have the Israelites in
view if his curse was to take effect" (Hengstenberg).
Chap, xxiii. 1-24. Balaam's First Words. — Vers. 1-3. Pre-
parations for the first act, which was performed at Bamoth-Baal.
At Balaam's command Balak built seven altars, and then selected
seven bullocks and seven rams, which they immediately sacrificed,
namely, one bullock and one ram upon each altar. The nations of
antiquity generally accompanied all their more important under-
takings with sacrifices, to make sure of the protection and help of
the gods ; but this was especially the case with their ceremonies of
adjuration. According to Diod. Sic. ii. 29, the Chaldeans sought to
avert calamity and secure prosperity by sacrifices and adjurations.
The same thing is also related of other nations (see Hengstenberg,
Balaam, p. 392). Accordingly, Balaam also did everything that
appeared necessary, according to his own religious notions, to ensure
the success of Balak's undertaking, and bring about the desired
result. The erection of seven altars, and the sacrifice of seven
animals of each kind, are to be explained from the sacredness ac-
quired by this number, through the creation of the world in seven
days, as being the stamp of work that was well-pleasing to God.
The sacrifices were burnt-offerings, and were offered by themselves
to Jehovah, whom Balaam acknowledged as his God. — Vers. 3, 4.
After the offering of the sacrifices, Balaam directed the king to
stand by bis burnt-offering, i.e. by the sacrifices that had been
offered for him upon the seven altars, that he might go out for
auguries. The meaning of the words, " I will go, peradventure
Jehovah will come to meet me," is apparent from chap, xriv. 1 : and
" he went no more to meet with the auguries" (WWy*, see at Lev. xix.
Digitized by
Google
. CHAP. XXIII. 1-24. 177
26). Balaam went out to look for a manifestation of Jehovah in
the significant phenomena of nature. The word which Jehovah
should show to him, he would report to Balak. We have here what
is just as characteristic in relation to Balaam's religious stand-point,
as it is significant in its hearing upon the genuine historical charac-
ter of the narrative, namely, an admixture of the religious ideas of
both the Israelites and the heathen, inasmuch as Balaam hoped to
receive or discover, in the phenomena of nature, a revelation from
Jehovah. Because heathenism had no " sure word of prophecy," it
sought to discover the will and ' counsel of God, which are displayed
in the events of human history, through various signs that were dis-
cernible in natural phenomena, or, as Chrysippus the Stoic expresses
it in Cicero de divin. ii. 63, " Signa quce a Diis hominibus porten-
dantur." 1 To look for a word of Jehovah in this way, Balaam
betook himself to a " bald height" This is the only meaning of
W, from flBE>, to rub, to scrape, to make hare, which is supported
by the usage of the language ; it is also in perfect harmony with
the context, as the heathen augurs were always accustomed to select
elevated places for their auspices, with an extensive prospect, espe-
cially the towering and barren summits of mountains that were
rarely visited by men (see Hengstenberg, ut sup.). Ewald, how-
ever, proposes the meaning " alone," or u to spy," for which there
is not the slightest grammatical foundation. — Ver. 4. " And God
came to meet Balaam" who thought it necessary, as a true hariolus,
to call the attention of God to the altars which had been built for
Him, and the sacrifices that had been offered upon them. And God
made known His will to him, though not in a natural sign of doubt-
ful signification. He put a very distinct and unmistakeable word
into his mouth, and commanded him to make it known to the king.
1 See the remarks of Nagelshach and Hartung on the nature of the heathen
auspices, in Hengstenberg'' s Balaam and his Prophecies (pp. 896-7). Hartung
observes, for example : " As the gods did not live outside the world, or separated
from it, but the things of time and space were filled with their essence, it fol-
lowed, as a matter of course, that the signs of their presence were sought and
seen in all the visible and audible occurrences of nature, whether animate or
inanimate. Hence all the phenomena which affected the senses, either in the
elements or in the various creatures, whether sounds or movements, natural
productions or events, of a mechanical or physical, or voluntary or involuntary
land, might serve as the media of revelation." And again (p. 397) : " The
sign in itself is useless, if it be not observed. It was therefore necessary that
man and God should come to meet one another, and that the sign should not
merely be given, but should also be received."
PENT. — VQL. III. M
Digltizi
ed by Google
178 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Vers. 7-10. Balaam's first saying. — Having come back to the
burnt-offering, Balaam commenced his utterance before the king
and the assembled princes. 7&n, lit. a simile, then a proverb,
because the latter consists of comparisons and figures, and lastly a
sentence or saying. The application of this term to the announce-
ments made by Balaam (vers. 7, 18, xxiv. 3, 15, 20), whereas it
is never used of the prophecies of the true prophets of Jehovah,
but only of certain songs and similes inserted in them (cf. Isa.
xiv. 4 ; Ezek. xvii. 2, xxiv. 3 ; Micah ii. 4), is to be accounted
for not merely from the poetic form of Balaam's utterances, the
predominance of poetical imagery, the sustained parallelism, the
construction of the whole discourse in brief pointed sentences, and
other peculiarities of poetic language (e.g. Uf, chap. xxiv. 3, 15),
but it points at the same time to the difference which actually exists
between these utterances and the predictions of the true prophets.
The latter are orations addressed to the congregation, which deduce
from the general and peculiar relation of Israel to the Lord and to
His law, the conduct of the Lord towards His people either in their
own or in future times, proclaiming judgment upon the ungodly
and salvation to the righteous. "Balaam's mental eye," on the con-
trary, as Hengstenberg correctly observes, u was simply fixed upon
what he saw ; and this he reproduced without any regard to the
impression that it was intended to make upon those who heard it."
But the very first utterance was of such a character as to deprive
Balak of all hope that his wishes would be fulfilled. — Ver. 7. "Balak,
the king of Moab, fetches me from Aram, from the mountains of the
East," i.e. of Mesopotamia, which was described, as far back as Gen.
xxix. 1, as the land of the sons of the East (cf. chap. xxii. 5).
Balaam mentions the mountains of his home in contradistinction to
the mountains of the land of the Moabites upon which he was then
standing. " Come, curse me Jacob, and come threaten Israel" Balak
had sent for him for this purpose (see chap. xxii. 11, 17). nojrf,
for np»t, imperative (see Ewald, § 228, b.). W, to be angry, here
to give utterance to the wrath of God, synonymous with 2i?3 or
23j?, to curse. Jacob : a poetical name for the nation, equivalent
to Israel. — Ver. 8. " How shall I curse whom God does not curse,
and how threaten whom Jehovah does not threaten ?" Balak imagined,
like all the heathen, that Balaam, as a goetes and magician, could
distribute blessings and curses according to his own will, and put
such constraint upon his God as to make Him subservient to his
own will (see at chap. xxii. 6). The seer opposes this delusion:
Digitizi
ed by Google
CHAP. XXIII. 1-24. 179
The God of Israel does not curse His people, and therefore His
servant cannot curse them. The following verses (vers. 9 and 10)
give the reason why : " For from the top of the rocks I see him, and
from the hills I behold him. Lo, it is a people that dwelleth apart,
and is not numbered among the heathen. Who determines the dust
of Jacob, and in number the fourth part of Israel ? Let my soul die
the death of the righteous, and my end be like his !" There were
two reasons which rendered it impossible for Balaam to curse Israel :
(1) Because they were a people both outwardly and inwardly dif-
ferent from other nations, and (2) because they were a people
richly blessed and highly favoured by God. From the top of the
mountains Balaam looked down upon the people of Israel. The
outward and earthly height upon which he stood was the substratum
of the spiritual height upon which the Spirit of God had placed
him, and had so enlightened his mental sight, that he was able to
discern all the peculiarities and the true nature of Israel. In this
respect the first thing that met his view was the fact that this people
dwelt alone. Dwelling alone does not denote a quiet and safe re-
tirement, as many commentators have inferred from Deut. xxxiii.
28, Jer. xlix. 31, and Micah vii. 14 ; but, according to the parallel
clause, "it is not reckoned among the nations," it expresses the
separation of Israel from the rest of the nations. This separa-
tion was manifested outwardly to the seer's eye in the fact that
" the host of Israel dwelt by itself in a separate encampment upon
the plain. In this his spirit discerned the inward and essential
separation of Israel from all the heathen" (Baumgarten). This
outward " dwelling alone" was a symbol of their inward separation
from the heathen world, by virtue of which Israel was not only
saved from the fate of the heathen world, but could not be over-
come by the heathen ; of course only so long as they themselves
should inwardly maintain this separation from the heathen, and
faithfully continue in covenant with the Lord their God, who had
separated them from among the nations to be His own possession.
As soon as Israel lost itself in heathen ways, it also lost its own
external independence. This rule applies to the Israel of the New
Testament as well as the Israel of the Old, to the congregation or
Church of God of all ages. 3#fW t6, " it does not reckon itself among
the heathen nations," i.e. it does not share the lot of the other nations,
because it has a different God and protector from the heathen (cf.
Deut. iv. 8, xxxiii. 29). The truth of this has been so marvel-
lously realized in the history of the Israelites, notwithstanding their
Digitized by
Google
180 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
falling short of the idea of their divine calling, " that whereas all the
mightier kingdoms of the ancient world, Egypt, Assyria, Babel,
etc., have perished without a trace, Israel, after being rescued from
so many dangers which threatened utter destruction under the Old
Testament, still flourishes in the Church of the New Testament,
and continues also to exist in that part which, though rejected
now, is destined one day to be restored" (Hengstenberg).
In this state of separation from the other nations, Israel rejoiced
in the blessing of its God, which was already visible in the innumer-
able multitude into which it had grown. " Who has ever determined
the dust of Jacob V As the dust cannot be numbered, so is the
multitude of Israel innumerable. These words point back to the
promise in Gen. xiii. 16, and applied quite as much to the existing
state as to the future of Israel. The beginning of the miraculous
fulfilment of the promise given to the patriarchs of an innumerable
posterity, was already before their eyes (cf. Deut. x. 22). Even
now the fourth part of Israel is not to be reckoned. Balaam speaks
of the fourth part with reference to the division of the nation into
four camps (chap, ii.), of which he could see only one from his
point of view (chap. xxii. 41), and therefore only the fourth part
of the nation. IB DD is an accusative of definition, and the subject
and verb are to be repeated from the first clause ; so that there is no
necessity to alter ^BDO into 12D 'p. — But Israel was not only visibly
blessed by God with an innumerable increase ; it was also inwardly
exalted into a people of D , *l^ , ., righteous or honourable men. The
predicate D^B* is applied to Israel on account of its divine calling,
because it had a God who was just and right, a God of truth and
without iniquity (Deut. xxxii. 4), or because the God of Israel was
holy, and sanctified His people (Lev. xx. 7, 8 ; Ex. xxxi. 13) and
made them into a Jeshurun (Deut. xxxii. 15, xxxiii. 5, 26). Right-
eousness, probity, is the idea and destination of this people, which
has never entirely lost it, though it has never fully realized it.
Even in times of general apostasy from the Lord, there was always
an eickoyy in the nation, of which probity and righteousness could
truly be predicated (cf. 1 Kings xix. 18). ' The righteousness of
the Israelites was " a product of the institutions which God had
established among them, of the revelation of His holy will which
He had given them in His law, of the forgiveness of sins which He
had linked on to the offering of sacrifices, and of the communica-
tion of His Spirit, which was ever living and at work in His Church,
and in it alone" {Hengstenberg). Such a people Balaam could not
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIII. 1-24. 181
corse ; he could only wish that the end of his own life might re-
semble the end of these righteous men. Death is introduced here
as the end and completion of life. " Balaam desires for himself
the entire, full, indestructible, and inalienable blessedness of the
Israelite, of which death is both the close and completion, and also
the seal and attestation" (Kurtz). This desire did not involve the
certain hope of a blessed life beyond the grave, which the Israelites
themselves did not then possess ; it simply expressed the thought
that the death of a pious Israelite was a desirable good. And this
it was, whether viewed in the light of the past, the present, or the
future. In the hour of death the pious Israelite could look back
with blessed satisfaction to a long life, rich " in traces of the bene-
ficent, forgiving, delivering, and saving grace of God ;" he could
comfort himself with the delightful hope of living on in his children
and his children's children, and in them of participating in the
future fulfilment of the divine promises of grace ; and lastly, when
dying in possession of the love and grace of God, he could depart
hence with the joyful confidence of being gathered to his fathers
in Sheol (Gen. xxv. 8).
Vers. 11-17. Balak reproached Balaam for this utterance, which
announced blessings to the Israelites instead of curses. But he met
his reproaches with the remark, that he was bound by the command
of Jehovah. The infinitive absolute, ^3, after the finite verb, ex-
presses the fact that Balaam had continued to give utterance to no-
thing but blessings. 13t> "idb>, to observe to speak ; lot?, to notice
carefully, as in Deut. v. 1, 29, etc. But Balak thought that the reason
might be found in the unfavourable locality ; he therefore led the
seer to " the field of the watchers, upon the top of Pisgah," whence he
could see the whole of the people of Israel. The words 'Ml NK"U? new
(ver. 13) are to be rendered, " whence thou wilt see it (Israel) ; thou
west only the end of it, but not the whole of it" (sc. here upon Bamoth-
Baal). This is required by a comparison of the verse before us with
chap. xxii. 41, where it is most unquestionably stated, that upon the
top of Bamoth-Baal Balaam only saw u the end of the people." For
this reason Balak regarded that place as unfavourable, and wished
to lead the seer to a place from which he could see the people,
without any limitation whatever. Consequently, notwithstanding
the omission of '3 (for), the words WVjJ DBK can only be intended
to assign the reason why Balak supposed the first utterances of
Balaam to have been unfavourable. *rixj? = D)Ki nvp, the end of the
people (chap. xxii. 41), cannot possibly signify the whole nation,
Digitized by
Google
182 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
or, a3 March, de Geer, Gesenius, and Kurtz suppose, " the people
from one end to the other," in which case D^n nxp (the end of the
people) would signify the very opposite of *n?j3 (the end of it) ; for
B ?f? n ?i? is not interchangeable, or to be identified, with nvjpD Dyrri>3
(Gen. xix. 4), u the whole people, from the end or extremity of it,"
or from its last man ; in other words, " to the very last man." Still
less does oyn fivp DDK signify " the uttermost end of the whole
people, the end of the entire people," notwithstanding the fact that
Kurtz regards the expression, " the end of the end of the people,"
as an intolerable tautology. U?P T , imperative with nun epenth., from
33|5. The " field of the watchers," or " spies (zophim), upon the
top of Pisgah," corresponds, no doubt, to " the field of Moab, upon
the top of Pisgah," on the west of Heshbon (see at chap. xxi. 20).
Mount Nebo, from which Moses surveyed the land of Canaan in all
its length and breadth, was one summit, and possibly the summit of
Pisgah (see Deut. iii. 27, xxxiv. 1). The field of the spies was
very probably a tract of table-land upon Nebo ; and so called either
because watchers were stationed there in times of disturbance, to
keep a look-out all round, or possibly because it was a place where
augurs made their observations of the heavens and of birds (Knobel).
The locality has not been thoroughly explored by travellers ; but
from the spot alluded to, it must have been possible to overlook a
very large portion of the Arboth Moab. Still farther to the north,
and nearer to the camp of the Israelites in these Arboth, was the
summit of Pear, to which Balak afterwards conducted Balaam
(ver. 28), and where he not only saw the whole of the people, but
could see distinctly the camps of the different tribes (chap. xxiv. 2).
— Vers. 146-17. Upon Pisgah, Balak and Balaam made the same
preparations for a fresh revelation from God as upon Bamoth-Baal
(vers. 1-6). nb in ver. 15 does not mean " here" or " yonder," but
" so" or " thus," as in every other case. The thought is this : " Do
thou stay (sc. as thou art), and I will go and meet thus" («c. in the
manner required), rrijas (I will go and meet) is a technical term here
for going out for auguries (chap. xxiv. 1), or for a divine revelation.
Vers. 18-24. The second saying " Up, Balak, and hear!
Hearken to me, son of Zippor /" mp, u stand up," is a call to
mental elevation, to the perception of the word of God ; for Balak
was standing by his sacrifice (ver. 17). ?]$} with IV, as in Job
xxxii. 11, signifies a hearing which presses forward to the speaker,
i.e. in keen and minute attention {Hengstenberg). foa, with the
antiquated union vowel for }3 ; see at Gen. i. 24. — Ver. 19. " God
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIII. 1-24. 183
is not a man, that He should lie ; nor, a son of man, that He should
repent: Iiath He said, and should He not do it? and spoken, and
sJiould not carry it out ? " — Ver. 20. " Behold, I have received to bless :
and He hath blessed; and 1 cannot turn it" Balaam meets Balak's
expectation that he will take back the blessing that he has uttered,
with the declaration, that God does not alter His purposes like
changeable and fickle men, but keeps His word unalterably, and
carries it into execution. The unchangeableness of the divine
purposes is a necessary consequence of the unchangeableness of the
divine nature. With regard to His own counsels, God repents of
nothing ; but this does not prevent the repentance of God, under-
stood as an anthropopathic expression, denoting the pain expe-
rienced by the love of God, on account of the destruction of its
creatures (see at Gen. vi. 6, and Ex. xxxii. 14). The n before ton
(ver. 19) is the interrogative n (see Ges. § 100, 4). The two
clauses of ver. 196, " Hath He spoken," etc., taken by themselves,
are no doubt of universal application ; but taken in connection with
the context, they relate specially to what God had spoken through
Balaam, in his first utterance with reference to Israel, as we may
see from the more precise explanation in ver. 20, " Behold, I have
received to bless" (np?, taken, accepted), etc. ^[}, to lead back,
to make a thing retrograde (Isa. xliii. 13). Samuel afterwards
refused Saul's request in these words of Balaam (ver. 19a), when
he entreated him to revoke his rejection on the part of God (1 Sam.
xv. 29). — Ver. 21. After this decided reversal of Balak's expecta-
tions, Balaam carried out still more fully the blessing which had
been only briefly indicated in his first utterance. " He beholds not
wickedness in Jacob, and sees not suffering in Israel : Jehovah his God
is with him, and the shout (jubilation) of a king in the midst of him."
The subject in the first sentence is God (see Hab. i. 3, 13). God
sees not !}*}, worthlessness, wickedness, and 70V, tribulation, misery,
as the consequence of sin, and therefore discovers no reason for
cursing the nation. That this applied to the people solely by virtue
of their calling as the holy nation of Jehovah, and consequently
that there is no denial of the sin of individuals, is evident from the
second hemistich, which expresses the thought of the first in a posi-
tive form : so that the words, " Jehovah his God is with him," cor-
respond to the words, " He beholds not wickedness ;" and " the
shout of a king in the midst of it," to His not seeing suffering.
Israel therefore rejoiced in the blessing of God only so long as it
remained faithful to the idea of its divine calling, and continued in
Digitized by
Google
184 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
covenant fellowship with the Lord. So long the power of the world
could do it no harm. The " shout of a king" in Israel is the re-
joicing of Israel at the fact that Jehovah dwells and rules as King
in the midst of it (cf. Ex. xv. 18 ; Deut. xxxiii. 5). Jehovah had
manifested Himself as King, by leading them out of Egypt. —
Ver. 22. " God brings them out of Egypt ; his strength is like that of
a buffalo" 7* is God as the strong, or mighty one. The participle
DK'Sto is not used for the preterite, but designates the leading out
as still going on, and lasting till the introduction into Canaan.
The plural suffix, D— , is used ad sensum, with reference to Israel
as a people. Because God leads them, they go forward with the
strength of a buffalo, niajjfri, from fjJfJ, to weary, signifies that
which causes weariness, exertion, the putting forth of power ; hence
the fulness of strength, ability to make or bear exertions. DK"! is
the buffalo or wild ox, an indomitable animal, which is especially
fearful on account of its horns (Job xxxix. 9-11 ; Deut. xxxiii. 17 ;
Ps. xxii. 22).— Ver. 23. The fellowship of its God, in which Israel
rejoiced, and to which it owed its strength, was an actual truth.
" For there is no augury in Jacob, and no divination in Israel. At
the time it is spoken to Jacob, and to Israel what God doeth." *3 does
not mean, " so that, as an introduction to the sequel," as Knobel
supposes, but " for" as a causal particle. The fact that Israel was
not directed, like other nations, to the uncertain and deceitful in-
strumentality of augury and divination, but enjoyed in all its con-
cerns the immediate revelation of its God, furnished the proof that
it had its God in the midst of it, and was guided and endowed with
power by God Himself. BTO and DD£, oUovwfws and fjuunela,
augurium et divinatio (LXX., Vulg.), were the two means employed
by the heathen for looking into futurity. The former (see at Lev.
xix. 26) was the unfolding of the future from signs in the pheno-
mena of nature, and inexplicable occurrences in animal and human
life ; the latter, prophesying from a pretended or supposed revela-
tion of the Deity within the human mind. nj?3, " according to the
time," i.e. at the right time, God revealed His acts, His counsel, and
His will to Israel in His word, which He had spoken at first to the
patriarchs, and afterwards through Moses and the prophets. In
this He revealed to His people in truth, and in a way that could
not deceive, what the heathen attempted in vain to discover through
augury and divination (cf. Deut. xviii. 14-19). 1 — Ver. 24. Through
1 " What is here affirmed of Israel, applies to the Church of all ages, and also
to every individual believer. The Church of God knows from His word what
Digltizi
ed by Google
CHAP. XXIII. 25-XXIV. 25. 185
the power of its God, Israel was invincible, and would crush all its
foes. " Behold, it rises up, a people like the lioness, and lifts itself up
like the lion. It lies not down till it eats dust, and drinks the blood of
the slain." What the patriarch Jacob prophesied of Judah, the
ruler among his brethren, in Gen. xlix. 9, Balaam here transfers to
the whole nation, to put to shame all the hopes indulged by the
Moabitish king of the conquest and destruction of Israel.
Chap, xxiii. 25-xxiv. 25. Balaam's Last Words. — Vers.
25—30. Balak was not deterred, however, from making another
attempt. At first, indeed, he exclaimed in indignation at these
second sayings of Balaam : " T/wu shalt neither curse it, nor even
bless." The double M with j6 signifies "neither — nor;" and the
rendering, " if thou do not curse it, thou shalt not bless it," must
be rejected as untenable. In his vexation at the second failure, he
did not want to hear anything more from Balaam. But when he
replied again, that he had told him at the very outset that he could
do nothing but what God should say to him (cf. chap. xxii. 38),
he altered his mind, and resolved to conduct Balaam to another
place with this hope : u peradventure it will please God that thou
mayest curse me them from thence" . Clericus observes upon this
passage, " It was the opinion of the heathen, that what was not
obtained through the first, second, or third victim, might neverthe-
less be secured through a fourth ;" and he addnces proofs from
Suetonius, Curtius, Gellius, and others. — Ver. 29. He takes the
seer " to the top of Peor, which looks over the face of the desert "
(Jeshimon : see at chap. xxi. 20), and therefore was nearer to the
camp of the Israelites. Mount Peor was one peak of the northern
part of the mountains of Abarim by the town of Beth-peor, which
afterwards belonged to the Reubenites (Josh. xiii. 20), and opposite
to which the Israelites were encamped in the steppes of Moab
(Deut. iii. 29, iv. 46). According to Eusebius (Onom. s. v. $oya>p),
Peor was above Libias {i.e. Bethharam), 1 which was situated in the
valley of the Jordan ; and according to the account given under
God does, and what it has to do in consequence. The wisdom of this world
resembles augury and divination. The Church of God, which is in possession
of His word, has no need of it, and it only leads its followers to destruction,
from inability to discern the will of God. To discover this with certainty, is the
great privilege of the Church of God" (Hengstenberg).
1 '1iripx.tnxi Se T>jf »5» A43<«Sof *<tKwp.in\s. Jerome has "in supercilio
Libiados."
Digitized by
Google
186 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Arabotk Moab, 1 it was close by the Arboth Moab, opposite to Jericho,
on the way from Libias to Heshbon. Peor was about seven Roman
miles from Heshbon, according to the account given s. v. Danaba ;
and Beth-peor (s. v. Bethphozor) was near Mount Peor, opposite to
Jericho, six Roman miles higher than Libias, i.e. to the east of it
(see Hengstenberg, Balaam, p. 538). — Vers. 29, 30. The sacrifices
offered in preparation for this fresh transaction were the same as
in the former cases (ver. 14, and vers. 1, 2).
Chap. xxiv. 1-9. The third saying. — Vers. 1 and 2» From the
two revelations which he had received before, Balaam saw, i.e. per-
ceived, that it pleased Jehovah to bless Israel. This induced him
not to go out for auguries, as on the previous occasions. DVSZTDyBS,
" as time after time," i.e. as at former times (chap, xxiii. 3 and 15).
He therefore turned his face to the desert, i.e. to the steppes of
Moab, where Israel was encamped (chap. xxii. 1). And when he
lifted up his eyes, "he saw Israel encamping according to its tribes;
and the Spirit of God came over him." The impression made upon
him by the sight of the tribes of Israel, served as the subjective
preparation for the reception of the Spirit of God to inspire, him.
Of both the earlier utterances it is stated that "Jehovah put a
word into his mouth" (chap, xxiii. 5 and 16) ; but of this third it
is affirmed that " the Spirit of God came over him." The former
were communicated to him, when he went out for a divine revela-
tion, without his being thrown into an ecstatic state ; he heard the
voice of God within him telling him what he was to say. But this
time, like the prophets in their prophesy ings, he was placed by the
Spirit of God in a state of ecstatic sight ; so that, with his eyes
closed as in clairvoyance, he saw the substance of the revelation
from God with his inward mental eye, which had been opened by
the Spirit of God. Thus not only does he himself describe his
own condition in vers. 3 and 4, but his description is in harmony
with the announcement itself, which is manifestly the result both
in form and substance of the intuition effected within him by the
Spirit of God. — Vers. 3 and 4 contain the preface to the prophecy:
" The divine saying of Balaam the son of Beor, the divine saying of
the man with closed eye, the divine saying of the hearer of divine
words, who sees the vision of the Almighty, falling down and with
opened eyes." For the participial noun DRJ the meaning divine
saying (effatum, not inspiratum, Domini) is undoubtedly established
1 Keei Ion roxos tis isvpo itixrvfitrof vetpa t$ Spit <J>oy«/>, 6 itupaxttrtu
av ion mu iici Aijlttbloi M 'E<r«/3ovj (i.e. Heshbon) t% 'Apx&ix; ctiniKpii 'Iipijpi.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIV. 1-9. 187
by the expression rtnj DM, which recurs in chap. xiv. 28 and Gen.
xxii. 16, and is of constant use in the predictions of the prophets ;
and this applies even to the few passages where a human author is
mentioned instead of Jehovah, such as vers. 3, 4, and 15, 16 ; also
2 Sam. xxiii. 1 ; Prov. xxx. 1 ; and Ps. xxxvi. 2, where a DM is
ascribed to the personified wickedness. Hence, when Balaam calls
the following prophecy a DNU, this is done for the purpose of desig-
nating it as a divine revelation received from the Spirit of God.
He had received it, and now proclaimed it as a man $>n DnB', with
closed eye. Dnc> does not mean to open, a meaning in support of
which only one passage of the Mishnah can be adduced, but to
close, like Dnp in Dan. viii. 26, and Drjfe> in Lam. iii. 8, with the E>
softened into D or b (see Roediger in Ges. thes., and Dietrich's
Hebrew Lexicon). "Balaam describes himself as the man with
closed eye with reference to his state of ecstasy, in which the closing
of the outer senses went hand in hand with the opening of the
inner " (Hengstenberg). The cessation of all perception by means
of the outer senses, so far as self-conscious reflection is concerned,
was a feature that was common to both the vision and the dream,
the two forms in which the prophetic gift manifested itself (chap,
xii. 6), and followed from the very nature of the inward intuition.
In the case of prophets whose spiritual life was far advanced, in-
spiration might take place without any closing of the outward
senses. But upon men like Balaam, whose inner religious life was
still very impure and undeveloped, the Spirit of God could only
operate by closing their outward senses to impressions from the
lower earthly world, and raising them up to visions of the higher
and spiritual world. 1 What Balaam heard in this ecstatic condi-
tion was <*? ^ON, the sayings of God, and what he saw *w n?H9>
the vision of the Almighty. The Spirit of God came upon him
with such power that he fell down (??:), like Saul in 1 Sam.
xix. 24 ; not merely " prostrating himself with reverential awe at
seeing and hearing the things of God " (Knobel), but thrown to
the ground by the Spirit of God, who " came like an armed man
upon the seer," and that in such a way that as he fell his (spirit's)
1 Hence, as Hengstenberg observes (Balaam, p. 449), we have to picture
Balaam as giving utterance to his prophecies with the eyes of his body closed ;
though we cannot argue from the fact of his being in this condition, that an
Isaiah would be in precisely the same. Compare the instructive information
concerning analogous phenomena in the sphere of natural mantik and ecstasy in
Hengstenberg (pp. 449 sqq.), and Tholuck's Propheten, pp. 49 sqq.
Digltizi
ed by Google
188 THE FOUBTH BOOK OP MOSES.
eyes were opened. This introduction to his prophecy is not an
utterance of boasting vanity; but, as Calvin correctly observes,
" the whole preface has no other tendency than to prove that he
was a true prophet of God, and had received the blessing which he
uttered from a celestial oracle."
The blessing itself in vers. 5 sqq. contains two thoughts : (1)
the glorious prosperity of Israel, and the exaltation of its kingdom
(vers. 5-7) ; (2) the terrible power, so fatal to all its foes, of the
people which was set to be a curse or a blessing to all the nations
(vers. 8, 9). — Vers. 5-7. " How beautiful are thy tents, O Jacob !
thy dwellings, Israel! Like valleys are they spread out, like
gardens by the stream, like aloes which Jehovah has planted, like
cedars by the waters. Water will flow out of his buckets, and his
seed is by many waters. And loftier than Agag be his king, and his
kingdom will be exalted? What Balaam had seen before his ecstasy
with his bodily eyes, formed the substratum for his inward vision, in
which the dwellings of Israel came before his mental eye adorned
with the richest blessing from the Lord. The description starts, it
is true, from the time then present, but it embraces the whole future
of Israel. In the blessed land of Canaan the dwellings of Israel
will spread out like valleys. D^rtJ does not mean brooks here, but
valleys watered by brooks, ntsj, to extend oneself, to stretch or
spread out far and wide. Yea, " like gardens by the stream,"
which are still more lovely than the grassy and flowery valleys with
brooks. This thought is carried out still further in the two follow-
ing figures. By?*? are aloe-trees, which grow in the East Indies,
in Siam, in Cochin China, and upon the Moluccas, and from
which the aloe-wood was obtained, that was so highly valued in
the preparation of incense, on account of its fragrance. As the
aloes were valued for their fragrant smell, so the cedars were
valued on account of their lofty and luxuriant growth, and the
durability of their wood. The predicate, " which Jehovah hath
planted," corresponds, so far as the actual meaning is concerned, to
a V? YSj " by water ; " for this was " an expression used to designate
trees that, on account of their peculiar excellence, were superior to
ordinary trees" (Calvin; cf. Ps. civ. 16). — Ver. 7. And not only
its dwellings, but Israel itself would also prosper abundantly. It
would have an abundance of water, that leading source of all bless-
ing and prosperity in the burning East. The nation is personified
as a man carrying two pails overflowing with water, ivi is the
dual B*v^f. The dual is generally used in connection with objects
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIV. 1-9. 189
which are arranged in pairs, either naturally or artificially (Ges. §
88, 2). " His seed " (i.e. his posterity, not his sowing corn, the
introduction of which, in this connection, would, to say the least,
be very feeble here) " is," Le. grows up, " by many waters" that is
to say, enjoys the richest blessings (comp. Deut. viii. 7 and xi. 10
with Isa. xliv. 4, lxv. 23). B*P (optative), " his king be high before
(higher than) Agag." Agog (JJK, the fiery) is not the proper name-
of the Amalekite king defeated by Saul (1 Sam. xv. 8), but the
title (nomen dignitatis) of the Amalekite kings in general, just as
all the Egyptian kings had the common name of Pharaoh, and the
Philistine kings the name of Abimelech. 1 The reason for mention-
ing the king of the Amalekites was, that he was selected as the im-
personation of the enmity of the world against the kingdom of God,
which culminated in the kings of the heathen; the Amalekites
having been the first heathen tribe that attacked the Israelites on
their journey to Canaan (Ex. xvii. 8). The introduction of one
particular king would have been neither in keeping with the con-
text, nor reconcilable with the general character of Balaam's utter-
ances. Both before and afterward, Balaam predicts in great general
outlines the good that would come to Israel ; and how is it likely
that he would suddenly break off in the midst to compare the king-
dom of Israel with the greatness of one particular king of the
Amalekites ? Even his fourth and last prophecy merely announces
in great general terms the destruction of the different nations that
rose up in hostility against Israel, without entering into special
details, which, like the conquest of the Amalekites by Saul, had no
material or permanent influence upon the attitude of the heathen
towards the people of God ; for after the defeat inflicted upon this
tribe by Saul, they very speedily invaded the Israelitish territory
again, and proceeded to plunder and lay it waste in just the same
1 See Hengstenberg (Dissertations, ii. 250 ; and Balaam, p. 458). Even
Gesenius could not help expressing some doubt about there being any reference
in this prophecy to the event described in 1 Sam. xv. 8 sqq., " unless," he says,
" you suppose the name Agag to have been a name that was common to the
kings of the Amalekites " (this. p. 19). He also points to the name Abimelech,
of which he says (p. 9) : " It was the name of several kings in the land of the
Philistines, as of the king of Gerar in the times of Abraham (Gen. xx. 2, 3,
xxi. 22, 23), and of Isaac (Gen. xxvi. 1, 2), and also of the king of Gath in the
time of David (Ps. xxxiv. 1 ; coll. 1 Sam. xxL 10, where the Bame king is
called Achish). It seems to have been the common name and title of those
kings, as Pharaoh was of the early kings of Egypt, and Caesar and Augustus of
the emperors of Borne."
ARY OF
TJ 1ST I O 1ST
THEOLOGICAL SE.MINAKY.
Digitized byj
ICAL SEMINAR
190 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
manner as before (cf. 1 Sam. xxvii. 8, xxx. 1 sqq. ; 2 Sam. viii.
12). 1 tafO, his king, is not any one particular king of Israel, but
quite generally the king whom the Israelites would afterwards
receive. For tata is substantially the same as the parallel ^td,
the kingdom of Israel, which had already been promised to the
patriarchs (Gen. xvii. 6, xxxv. 11), and in which the Israelites
were first of all to obtain that full development of power which cor-
responded to its divine appointment ; just as, in fact, the development
of any people generally culminates in an organized kingdom. — The
king of Israel, whose greatness was celebrated by Balaam, was
therefore neither the Messiah exclusively, nor the earthly kingdom
without the Messiah, but the kingdom of Israel that was established by
David, and was exalted in the Messiah into an everlasting kingdom,
the enemies of which would all be made its footstool (Ps. ii. and ex.).
In vers. 8 and 9, Balaam proclaims still further : " God leads him
out of Egypt ; his strength is as that of a buffalo : he will devour
nations his enemies, and crush their bones, and dash them in pieces
vnth his arrows. He has encamped, he lies down like a lion, and like
a lioness : who can drive him up? Blessed be they who bless thee, and
cursed they who curse thee! " The fulness of power that dwelt in
the people of Israel was apparent in the force and prowess with
which their God brought them out of Egypt. This fact Balaam
repeats from the previous saying (chap, xxiii. 22), for the purpose
of linking on to it the still further announcement of the manner in
which the power of the nation would show itself upon its foes in
time to come. The words, " he will devour nations," call up the
image of a lion, which is employed in ver. 9 to depict the indomi-
table heroic power of Israel, in words taken from Jacob's blessing
in Gen. xlix. 9. The Piel D*}3 is a denom. verb from ffia, with the
meaning to destroy, crush the bones, like BHE>, to root out (cf. Ges.
§ 52, 2 ; Ewald, § 120, e.). 1WI is not the object to yno\ ; for JTO,
to dash to pieces, does not apply to arrows, which may be broken in
pieces, but not dashed to pieces ; and the singular suffix in vsn can
only apply to the singular idea in the verse, i.e. to Israel, and not to
1 Even on the supposition (which is quite at variance with the character of
all the prophecies of Balaam) that in the name of Agag, the contemporary of
Saul, we have a vaticinivm ex eventu, the allusion to this particular king would
be exceedingly strange, as the Amalekites did not perform any prominent part
among the enemies of Israel in the time of Saul ; and the command to extermi-
nate them was given to Saul, not because of any special harm that they had done
to Israel at that time, but on account of what they had done to Israel on their
way out of Egypt (comp. 1 Sam. xv. 2 with Ex. xvii. 8).
Digltizi
ed by Google
CHAP. XXIV. 15-24. 191
its enemies, who, are spoken of in the plural. Arrows are singled
out as representing weapons in general. 1 Balaam closes this utter-
ance, as he had done the previous one, with a quotation from Jacob's
blessing, which he introduces to show to Balak, that, according to
words addressed by Jehovah to the Israelites through their own
tribe-father, they were to overcome their foes so thoroughly, that
none of them should venture to rise up against them again. To this
he also links on the word with which Isaac had transferred to Jacob
in Gen. xxvii. 29 the blessing of Abraham in Gen. xii. 3, for the
purpose of warning Balak to desist from his enmity against the
chosen people of God.
Vers. 10-14. This repeated blessing of Israel threw. Balak into
such a violent rage, that he smote his hands together, and advised
Balaam to fly to his house : adding, " I said, I will honour thee
greatly (cf. xxii. IT and 37) ; but, behold, Jehovah has kept thee
back from honour." " Smiting the hands together" was either a
sign of horror (Lam. ii. 15) or of violent rage ; it is in the latter
sense that it occurs both here and in Job xxvii. 33. In the words,
" Jehovah hath kept thee back from honour," the irony with which
Balak scoffs at Balaam's confidence in Jehovah is unmistakeable.
— Ver. 12. Bat Balaam reminds him, on the other hand, of the
declaration which he made to the messengers at the very outset
(chap. xxii. 18), that he could not on any account speak in opposi-
tion to the command of Jehovah, and then adds, " And now, behold,
I go to my people. Come, I will tell thee advisedly what this people
will do to thy people at the end of the days." yV, to advise ; here it
denotes an announcement, which includes advice. The announce-
ment of what Israel would do to the Moabites in the future, con-
tains the advice to Balak, what attitude he should assume towards
Israel, if this people was to bring a blessing upon his own people
and not a curse. On " the end of the days," see at Gen. xlix. 1.
Vers. 15-24. Balaam's fourth and last prophecy is distinguished
from the previous ones by the fact that, according to the announce-
ment in ver. 14, it is occupied exclusively with the future, and
foretells the victorious supremacy of Israel over all its foes, and the
1 The difficulty which many feel in connection with the word yjfn cannot be
removed by alterations of the text. The only possible conjecture VX?n (his
loins) is wrecked upon the singular suffix, for the dashing to pieces of the loins
of Israel is not for a moment to be thought of. KnobeFs proposal, viz. to read
y»p, has no support in Deut. xxxiii. 11, and is much too violent to reckon upon
any approval.
Digitized by
Google
192 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
destruction of all the powers of the world. This prophecy is divided
into four different prophecies by the fourfold repetition of the
words, " he took up his parable" (vers. 15, 20, 21, and 23). The
first of these refers to the two nations that were related to Israel,
viz. Edom and Moab (vers. 17—19) ; the second to Amalek, the
arch-enemy of Israel (ver. 20) ; the third to the Kenites, who were
allied to Israel (vers. 21 and 22); and the fourth proclaims the
overthrow of the great powers of the world (vers. 23 and 24). — The
introduction in vers. 15 and 16 is the same as that of the previous
prophecy in vers. 3 and 4, except that the words, " he which knew
the knowledge of the Most High" are added to the expression, " he
that heard the words of God" to show that Balaam possessed the
knowledge of the Most High, Le. that the word of God about to be
announced had already been communicated to him, and was not
made known to him now for the first time ; though without imply-
ing that he had received the divine revelation about to be uttered
at the same time as those which he had uttered before. — Ver. 17.
The prophecy itself commences with a picture from the u end of
the days," which rises up before the mental eye of the seer. * /
see Him, yet not now ; I behold Him, but not nigh. A star appears
out of Jacob, and a sceptre rises out of Israel, and dashes Moab in
pieces on both sides, and destroys all the sons of confusion." The
suffixes to *3N"1K and WW0* refer to the star which is mentioned
afterwards, and which Balaam sees in spirit, but " not now," t.«.
not as having already appeared, and " not nigh," i.e. not to appear
immediately, but to come forth out of Israel in the far distant
future. " A star is so natural an image and symbol of imperial
greatness and splendour, that it has been employed in this sense in
almost every nation. And the fact that this figure and symbol are
so natural, may serve to explain the belief of the ancient world, that
the birth and accession of great kings was announced by the ap-
pearance of stars" (Hengstenberg, who cites Justini hist, xxxvii. 2 ;
Plinii h. n. ii. 23 ; Sueton. Jul. Cms. c. 78 ; and Dio Cass. xlv. p.
273)'. If, however, there could be any doubt that the rising star
represented the appearance of a glorious ruler or king, it would be
entirely removed by the parallel, " a sceptre arises out of Israel."
The sceptre, which was introduced as a symbol of dominion even
in Jacob's blessing (Gen. xlix. 10), is employed here as the figura-
tive representation and symbol of the future ruler in Israel. This
ruler would destroy all the enemies of Israel. Moab and (ver. 18)
Edom are the first of these that are mentioned, viz. the two nations
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIV. 15-24. 193
that were related to Israel by descent, but had risen up in hostility
against it at that time. Moab stands in the foremost rank, not
merely because Balaam was about to announce to the king of Moab
what Israel would do to his people in the future, but also because
the hostility of the heathen to the people of God had appeared
most strongly in Balak's desire to curse the Israelites. 3Kto 'ntMS,
" the two corners or sides of Moab," equivalent to Moab on both
sides, from one end to the other. For "ip"ij>, the inf. Pilp. of "Hp or
T 1 ?, the meaning to destroy is fully established by the parallel pro,
and by Isa. xxii. 5, whatever may be thought of its etymology and
primary meaning. And neither the Samaritan text nor the passage
in -Isaiah (xlviii. 45), which is based upon this prophecy, at all war-
rants an alteration of the reading "ip/)g. into "lp"lp T (the crown of the
head), since Jeremiah almost invariably uses earlier writings in this
free manner, viz. by altering the expressions employed, and substi-
tuting in the place of unusual words either more common ones, or
such as are similar in sound (cf . Kuper, Jerem. libror. ss. interpres
atque vindex, pp. xiii. sqq. and p. 43). — TIB^33"73 does not mean
" all the sons of Seth," i.e. all mankind, as the human race is never
called by the name of Seth ; and the idea that the ruler to arise out
of Israel would destroy all men, would be altogether unsuitable. It
signifies rather " all the sons of confusion," by which, according to
the analogy of Jacob and Israel (ver. 17), Edom and Seir (ver. 18),
the Moabites are to be understood as being men of wild, warlike
confusion, nt? is a contraction of nNE> (Lam. iii. 47), and derived
from fiMP ; and in Jer. xlviii. 45 it is correctly rendered tf N^ ya. 1
In the announcement of destruction which is to fall upon the
enemies of Israel through the star and sceptre out of the midst of
1 On the other hand, the rendering, " all the sons of the drinker, i.e. of Lot,"
which Hiller proposed, and v. Hofmann and Kurtz have renewed, is evidently
untenable. For, in the first place, the fact related in Gen. six. 32 sqq. does
not warrant the assumption that Lot ever received the name of the " drinker,"
especially as the word used in Gen. xix. is not fine', hut npE>. Moreover, the
allusion to " all the sons of Lot," i.e. the Moabites and Ammonites, neither suits
the thoroughly synonymous parallelism in the saying of Balaam, nor corresponds
to the general character of his prophecies, which announced destruction pri-
marily only to those nations that rose up in hostility against Israel, viz. Moab,
Edom, and Amalek, whereas hitherto the Ammonites had not assumed either a
hostile or friendly attitude towards them. And lastly, all the nations doomed
to destruction are mentioned by name. Now the Ammonites were not a branch
of the Moabites by descent, nor was their territory enclosed within the Moab-
itish territory, so that it could be included, as Hofmann supposes, within the
" four corners of Moab."
PENT. — VOL. III. N
Digitizi
ed by Google
194 THE FOUBTH BOOK OF MOSES.
it, Moab is followed by " its southern neighbour Edom." — Ver. 18.
"And Edom becomes a possession, and Seir becomes a possession, its
enemies ; but Israel acquires power P Whose possession Edom and
Seir are to become, is not expressly stated ; but it is evident from the
context, and from V3?k (its enemies), which is not a genitive depen-
dent upon Seir, but is in apposition to Edom and Seir, just as Tit
in ver. 8 is in apposition to Ofii. Edom and Seir were his, i.e.
Israel's enemies ; therefore they were to be taken by the ruler who
was to arise out of Israel. Edom is the name of the people, Seir
of the country, just as in Gen. xxxii. 4 ; so that Seir is not to be
understood as relating to the prae-Edomitish population of the land,
which had been subjugated by the descendants of Esau, and had
lost all its independence a long time before. In Moses' days the
Israelites were not allowed to fight with the Edomites, even when
they refused to allow them to pass peaceably through their territory
(see chap. xx. 21), but were commanded to leave them in their
possessions as a brother nation (Deut. ii. 4, 5). In the future, how-
ever, their relation to one another was to be a very different one ;
because the hostility of Edom, already in existence, grew more and
more into obstinate and daring enmity, which broke up all the ties
of affection that Israel was to regard as holy, and thus brought
about the destruction of the Edomites. — The fulfilment of this
prophecy commenced with the subjugation of the Edomites by
David (2 Sam. viii. 14 ; 1 Kings xi. 15, 16 ; 1 Chron. xviii. 12, 13),
but it will not be completed till " the end of the days," when all
the enemies of God and His Church will be made the footstool of
Christ (Ps. ex. 1 sqq.). That David did not complete the subjuga-
tion of Edom is evident, on the one hand, from the fact that the
Edomites revolted again under Solomon, though without success
(1 Kings xi. 14 sqq.) ; that they shook off the yoke imposed upon
them under Joram (2 Kings viii. 20) ; and notwithstanding then-
defeat by Amaziah (2 Kings xiv. 7 ; 2 Chron. xxv. 11) and Uzziah
(2 Kings xiv. 22 ; 2 Chron. xxvi. 2), invaded Judah a second time
under Ahaz (2 Chron. xxviii. 17), and afterwards availed them-
selves of every opportunity to manifest their hostility to the king-
dom of Judah and the Jews generally, — as for example at the
conquest of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans (Ezek. xxxv. 15, xxxvi. 5 ;
Obad. 10 and 13), and in the wars between the Maccabees and
the Syrians (1 Mace. v. 3, 65 ; 2 Mace. x. 15, xii. 38 sqq.), — until
they were eventually conquered by John Hyrcanus in the year B.C.
129, and compelled to submit to circumcision, and incorporated in
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIV. 16-24. 195
the Jewish state (Josephus, Ant. xiii. 9, 1, xv. 7, 9 ; Wars of the
Jews, iv. 5, 5). But notwithstanding this, they got the government
over the Jews into their own hands through Antipater and Herod
(Josephus, Ant. xiv. 8, 5), and only disappeared from the stage of
history with the destruction of the Jewish state by the Romans.
On the other hand, the declarations of the prophets (Amos ix. 12 ;
Obad. 17 sqq.), which foretell, with an unmistakeable allusion to
this prophecy, the possession of the remnant of Edom by the king-
dom of Israel, and the announcements in Isa. xxxiv. and Ixiii. 1-6,
Jer. xlix. 7 sqq., Ezek. xxv. 12 sqq. and 35, comp. with Ps. cxxxvii.
7 and Lam. iv. 21, 22, prove still more clearly that Edom, as the
leading foe of the kingdom of God, will only be utterly destroyed
when the victory of the latter over the hostile power of the world
has been fully and finally secured. — Whilst Edom falls, Israel will
acquire power. 7*n new, to acquire ability or power (Deut. viii.
17, 18 ; Ruth iv. 11), not merely to show itself brave or strong. It
is rendered correctly by Onkelos, " prosperabitur in opibus ;" and
Jonathan, " prcevakbunt in opibus et possidebunt eos." — Ver. 19.
" And a ruler shall come out of Jacob, and destroy what is left out
of cities." The subject to "TV is indefinite, and to be supplied from
the verb itself. We have to think of the ruler foretold as star and
sceptre. The abbreviated form W is not used for the future <tt£,
but is jussive in its force. One out of Jacob shall rule. fVO is
employed in a collected and general sense, as in Ps. lxxii. 16. Out
of every city in which there is a remnant of Edom, it shall be
destroyed. T-ife> is equivalent to DttK HH*f (Amos ix. 12). The
explanation, " destroy the remnant out of the city, namely, out of
the holy city of Jerusalem" (Ewald and Baur), is forced, and can-
not be sustained from the parallelism.
Ver. 20. The second saying in this prophecy relates to the
Amalekites. Balaam sees them, not with the eyes of his body, but
in a state of ecstasy, like the star out of Jacob. " Beginning of the
heathen is Amalek, and its end is destruction." Amalek is called the
beginning of the nations, not "as belonging to the most distinguished
and foremost of the nations in age, power, and celebrity " (Knobel),
— for in all these respects this Bedouin tribe, which descended from
a grandson of Esau, was surpassed by many other nations, — but as
the first heathen nation which opened the conflict of the heathen
nations against Israel as the people of God (see at Ex. xvii. 8 sqq.).
As its beginning had been enmity against Israel, its end would be
"even to the perishing" ("i?K ng), i.e. reaching the position of one
Digitized by
Google
196 THE FOUBTH BOOK OF MOSES.
who was perishing, falling into destruction, which commenced under
Saul and was completed under Hezekiah (see vol. i. p. 324).
Vers. 21 and 22. The third saying relates to the Kenites, whose
origin is involved in obscurity (see at Gen. xv. 19), as there are no
other Kenites mentioned in the whole of the Old Testament, with
the exception of Gen. xv. 19, than the Kenites who went to Canaan
with Hobab the brother-in-law of Moses (chap. x. 29 sqq. : see Judg.
i. 16, iv. 11 ; 1 Sam. xv. 6, xxvii. 10, xxx. 29) ; so that there are
not sufficient grounds for the distinction between Canaanitish and
Midianitish Kenites, as Michcelis, Hengstenberg, and others suppose.
The hypothesis that Balaam is speaking of Canaanitish Kenites, or
of the Kenites as representatives of the Canaanites, is as unfounded
as the hypothesis that by the Kenites we are to understand the
Midianites, or that the Kenites mentioned here and in Gen. xv. 19
are a branch of the supposed aboriginal Amalekites (Etoald). The
saying concerning the Kenites runs thus : "Durable is thy dwelling-
place, and thy nest laid upon the rock; for should Kain be destroyed
until Asshur shall carry thee captivef" This saying "applies to
friends and not to foes of Israel " (v. Hofmann), so that it is per-
fectly applicable to the Kenites, who were friendly with Israel.
The antithetical association of the Amalekites and Kenites answers
perfectly to the attitude assumed at Horeb towards Israel, on the
one hand by the Amalekites, and on the other hand by the
Kenites, in the person of Jethro the leader of their tribe (see Ex.
xvii. 8 sqq., xviii., and vol. ii. p. 83). The dwelling-place of the
Kenites was of lasting duration, because its nest was laid upon a
rock (D^ is a passive participle, as in 2 Sam. xiii. 32, and Obad. 4).
This description of the dwelling-place of the Kenites cannot be
taken literally, because it cannot be shown that either the Kenites
or the Midianites dwelt in inaccessible mountains, as the Edomites
are said to have done in Obad. 3, 4; Jer. xlix. 16. The words are
to be interpreted figuratively, and in all probability the figure is
taken from the rocky mountains of Horeb, in the neighbourhood
of which the Kenites led a nomade life before their association
with Israel (see at Ex. iii. 1). As v. Hofmann correctly observes :
" Kain, which had left its inaccessible mountain home in Horeb,
enclosed as it was by the desert, to join a people who were only
wandering in search of a home, by that very act really placed its
rest upon a still safer rock." This is sustained in ver. 22 by the
statement that Kain would not be given up to destruction till Asshur
carried it away into captivity. &K "'S does not mean " nevertheless."
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIV. 15-24. 197
It signifies "unless" after a negative clause, whether the nega-
tion be expressed directly by *6, or indirectly by a question ; and
"only" where it is not preceded by either a direct or an indirect
negation, as in Gen. xl. 14; Job xlii. 8. The latter meaning,
however, is not applicable here, because it is unsuitable to the nD"*l)7
(until) which follows. Consequently OS can only be understood in
the sense of "is it that," as in 1 Kings i. 27, Isa. xxix. 16, Job
xxxi. 16, etc., and as introducing an indirect query in a negative
sense : " For is it (the case) that Kain shall fall into destruction
until . . . t"— equivalent to "Kain shall not be exterminated until
Asshur shall carry him away into captivity;" Kain will only be
overthrown by the Assyrian imperial power. Kain, the tribe-father,
is used poetically for the Kenite, the tribe of which he was the
founder. "i#3, to exterminate, the sense in which it frequently
occurs, as in Deut. xiii. 6, xvii. 7, etc. (cf. 2 Sam. iv. 11 ; 1 Kings
xxii. 47). — For the fulfilment of this prophecy we are not to look
merely to the fact that one branch of the Kenites, which separated
itself, according to Judg. iv. 11, from its comrades in the sputh of
Jndah, and settled in Naphtali near Kadesh, was probably carried
away into captivity by Tiglath-Pileser along with the population of
Galilee (2 Kings xv. 29) ; but the. name Asshur, as the name of
the first great kingdom of the world, which rose up from the east
against the theocracy, is employed, as we may clearly see from ver.
24, to designate all the powers of the world which took their rise
in Asshur, and proceeded forth from it (see also Ezra vi. 22, where
the Persian king is still called king of A sshur or Assyria). Balaam
did not foretell that this worldly power would oppress Israel also,
and lead it into captivity, because the oppression of the Israelites
was simply a transitory judgment, which served to refine the nation
of God and not to destroy it, and which was even appointed accord-
ing to the counsel of God to open and prepare the way for the
conquest of the kingdoms of the world by the kingdom of God.
To the Kenites only did the captivity become a judgment of
destruction; because, although on terms of friendship with the
people of Israel, and outwardly associated with them, yet, as is
clearly shown by 1 Sam. xv. 6, they never entered inwardly into
fellowship with Israel and Jehovah's covenant of grace, but sought
to maintain their own independence side by side with Israel, and
thus forfeited the blessing of God which rested upon Israel. 1
1 This simple but historically established interpretation completely removes
the objection, " that Balaam could no more foretell destruction to the friends of
Digitizi
ed by Google
198 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Vers. 23, 24. The fourth saying applies to Asshur, and is intro-
duced by an exclamation of woe : " Woe I who will live, when God
sets this ! And ships (come) from the side of Chittim, and press
Asshur, and press Eber, and lie also perishes." The words " Woe,
who will live," point to the fearfulness of the following judgment,
which went deep to the heart of the seer, because it would fall
upon the sons of his own people (see at chap. xxii. 5). The mean-
ing is, " Who will preserve his life in the universal catastrophe that
is coming?" (Hengstenberg.) toB>D, either "since the setting of it,"
equivalent to "from the time when God sets (determines) this"
(orav Or) ravra 6 ©eo?, quando faciei ista Deus; LXX., Vulg.), or
" on account of the setting of it," i.e. because God determines this.
OM5>, to set, applied to that which God establishes, ordains, or brings
to pass, as in Isa. xliv. 7 ; Hab. i. 12. The suffix in tot? i s not to
be referred to Asshur, as Knobel supposes, because the prophecy
relates not to Asshur " as the mighty power by which everything
was crushed and overthrown," but to a power that would come
from the far west and crush Asshur itself. The suffix refers rather
to the substance of the prophecy that follows, and is to be under-
stood in a neuter sense. ?N is "God," and not an abbreviation
of n?K, which is always written with the article in the Pentateuch
(i>Nn, Gen. xix. 8, 25, xxvi. 3, 4 ; Lev. xviii. 27 ; Deut. iv. 42,
vii. 22, xix. 11), and only occurs once without the article, viz. in
1 Chron. xx. 8. rWf, from '? (Isa. xxxiii. 21), signifies ships, like
D^X in the passage in Dan. xi. 30, which is founded upon the pro-
phecy before us. "PD, from the side, as in Ex. ii. 5, Deut. ii. 37,
etc. D'na is Cyprus with the capital Citium (see at Gen. x. i),
which is mentioned as intervening between Greece and Phoenicia,
and the principal station for the maritime commerce of Phoenicia,
so that all the fleets passing from the west to the east necessarily
took Cyprus in their way (Isa. xxiii. 1). The nations that would
come across the sea from the side of Cyprus to humble Asshur,
are not mentioned by name, because this lay beyond the range of
Balaam's vision. He simply gives utterance to the thought, "A
power comes from Chittim over the sea, to which Asshur and Eber,
the eastern and the western Shem, will both succumb " (v. Hofmann).
Eber neither refers to the Israelites merely as Hebrews (LXX.,
iBrael than to Israel itself," by which Kurtz would preclude the attempt to
refer this prophecy to the Kenites, who were in alliance with Israel. His further
objections to v. Hofmanri's view are either inconclusive, or at any rate do not
affect the explanation that we have given.
Digitizi
ed by Google
CHAP. XXIV. 15-24. 199
Vulg.), nor to the races beyond the Euphrates, as Onkelos and others
suppose, but, like "all the sons of Eber" in Gen. x. 21, to the
posterity of Abraham who descended from Eber through Peleg, and
also to the descendants of Eber through Joktan : so that Asshur,
as the representative of the Shemites who dwelt in the far east,
included Elam within itself ; whilst Eber, on the other hand, repre-
sented the western Shemites, the peoples that sprang from Arphaxad,
Lud, and Aram (Gen. x. 21). " And he also shall perish for ever:"
these words cannot relate to Asshur and Eber, for their fate is
already announced in the word 13? (afflict, press), but only to the
new western power that was to come over the sea, and to which the
others were to succumb. " Whatever powers might rise up in the
world of peoples, the heathen prophet of Jehovah sees them all fall,
one through another, and one after another; for at last he loses
in the distance the power to discern whence it is that the last which
he sees rise up is to receive its fatal blow " (v. Hofmann, p. 520).
The overthrow of this last power of the world, concerning which
the prophet Daniel was the first to receive and proclaim new reve-
lations, belongs to " the end of the days," in which the star out
of Jacob is to rise upon Israel as a " bright morning star " (Rev.
xxii. 16).
Now if according to this the fact is firmly established, that in this
last prophecy of Balaam, " the judgment of history even upon the
imperial powers of the West, and the final victory of the King of
the kingdom of God were proclaimed, though in fading outlines,
more than a thousand years before the events themselves," as
Tholuck has expressed it in his Propheten und ihre Weissagung ; the
announcement of the star out of Jacob, and the sceptre out of
Israel, i.e. of the King and Ruler of the kingdom of God, who was
to dash Moab to pieces and take possession of Edom, cannot have
received its complete fulfilment in the victories of David over these
enemies of Israel ; but will only be fully accomplished in the future
overthrow of all the enemies of the kingdom of God. By the " end
of days," both here and everywhere else, we are to understand the
Messianic era, and that not merely at its commencement, but in its
entire development, until the final completion of the kingdom of
God at the return of our Lord to judgment. In the " star out of
Jacob," Balaam beholds not David as the one king of Israel, but
the Messiah, in whom the royalty of Israel promised to the patriarchs
(Gen. xvii. 6, 16, xxxv. 11) attains its fullest realization. The star
and sceptre are symbols not of " Israel's royalty personified "
Digitized by
Google
200 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
(Hengstenberg), but of the real King in a concrete form, as He was
to arise out of Israel at a future day. It is true that Israel received
the promised King in David, who conquered and subjugated the
Moabites, Edomites, and other neighbouring nations that were
hostile to Israel. But in the person of David and his rule the
kingly government of Israel was only realized in its first and imper-
fect beginnings. Its completion was not attained till the coming
of the second David (Hos. iii. 5 ; Jer. xxx. 9 ; Ezek. xxxiv. 24,
xxxvii. 24, 25}, the Messiah Himself, who breaks in pieces all the
enemies of Israel, and founds an everlasting kingdom, to which all
the kingdoms and powers of this world are to be brought into
subjection (2 Sam vii. 12-16 ; Ps. ii., Ixxii., and ex.). 1
If, however, the star out of Jacob first rose upon the world in
Christ, the star which showed the wise men from the east the way
to the new-born " King of the Jews," and went before them, till
it stood above the manger at Bethlehem (Matt. ii. 1-11), is inti-
mately related to our prophecy. Only we must not understand the
allusion as being so direct, that Balaam beheld the very star which
appeared to the wise men, and made known to them the birth of the
Saviour of the world. The star of the wise men was rather an
embodiment of the star seen by Balaam, which announced to them
the fulfilment of Balaam's prophecy, — a visible sign by which God
revealed to them the fact, that the appearance of the star which
1 The application of the star out of Jacob to the Messiah is to be found even
in Onkelos ; and this interpretation was so widely spread among the Jews, that
the pseudo-Messiah who arose under Hadrian, and whom even R. Akiba acknow-
ledged, took the name of Bar Cochba (son of a star), in consequence of this
prophecy, from which the nickname of Bar Coziba (son of a lie) was afterwards
formed, when he had submitted to the Romans, with all his followers. In the
Christian Church also the Messianic explanation was the prevalent one, from the
time of Justin and Irenssus onwards (see the proofs in Calovii Bibl. ad h. I.),
although, according to a remark of Theodoret (qu. 44 ad Num.), there were some
who did not adopt it. The exclusive application of the passage to David was so
warmly defended, first of all by Grotius, and still more by Verschuir, that even
Hengstenberg and Tholuck gave up the Messianic interpretation. But they both
of them came back to it afterwards, the former in his " Balaam " and the second
edition of his Christology, and the latter in his treatise on " the Prophets." At
the present time the Messianic character of the prophecy is denied by none but
the supporters of the more vulgar rationalism, such as Knobel and others ;
whereas G. Baur (in his History of Old Testament Prophecy) has no doubt that
the prediction of the star out of Jacob points to the exalted and glorious King,
filled with the Holy Spirit, whom Isaiah (ch. ix. 5, xi. 1 sqq.) and Micah (v. 2)
expected as the royal founder of the theocracy. Reinke gives a complete history
of the interpretation of this passage in his Beitrage, iv. 186 eqq.
Digltizi
ed by Google
CHAP. XXIV. 16-24. 201
Balaam beheld in the far distant future had been realized at Beth-
lehem in the birth of Christ, tbe King of the Jews. — The " wise
men from the east," who had been made acquainted with the
revelations of God to Israel by the Jews of the diaspora, might
feel themselves specially attracted in their search for the salva-
tion of the world by the predictions of Balaam, from the fact
that this seer belonged to their own country, and came " out of the
mountains of the east" (ch. xxiii. 7) ; so that they made his say-
ings the centre of their expectations of salvation, and were also
conducted through them to the Saviour of all nations by means of
supernatural illumination. " God unfolded to their minds, which
were already filled with a longing for the ' star out of Jacob '
foretold by Balaam, the meaning of the star which proclaimed the
fulfilment of Balaam's prophecy ; He revealed to them, that is to say,
the fact that it announced the birth of the ' King of the Jews.'
And just as Balaam had joyously exclaimed, ' I see Him,' and
' I behold Him,' they also could say, ' We have seen His star ' "
(Hengstenberg).
If, in conclusion, we compare Balaam's prophecy of the star
that would come out of Jacob, and the sceptre that would rise out
of Israel, with the prediction of the patriarch Jacob, of the sceptre
that should not depart from Judah, till the Shiloh came whom the
nations would obey (Gen. xlix. 10), it is easy to observe that Balaam
not only foretold more clearly the attitude of Israel to the nations
of the world, and the victory of the kingdom of God over every
hostile kingdom of the world; but that he also proclaimed the
Bringer of P,gace expected by Jacob at the end of the days to be a
mighty ruler, whose sceptre would break in pieces and destroy all
the enemies of the nation of God. The tribes of Israel stood before
the mental eye of the patriarch in their full development into the
nation in which all the families of the earth were to be blessed.
From this point of view, the salvation that was to blossom in the
future for the children of Israel culminated in the peaceful king-
dom of the Shiloh, in whom the dominion of the victorious lion
out of Judah was to attain its fullest perfection. But the eye of
Balaam, the seer, which had been opened by the Spirit of God,
beheld the nation of Israel encamped, according to its tribes, in the
face of its foes, the nations of this world. They were endeavour-
ing to destroy Israel ; but according to the counsel of the Almighty
God and Lord of the whole world, in their warfare against the
nation that was blessed of Jehovah, they were to succumb one after
Digitized by
Google
202 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
the other, and be destroyed by the king that was to arise out of
Israel. This determinate counsel of the living God was to be
proclaimed by Balaam, the heathen seer out of Mesopotamia the
centre of the national development of the ancient world : and, first
of all, to the existing representatives of the nations of the world
that were hostile to Israel, that they might see what would at all
times tend to their peace — might see, that is to say, that in their
hostility to Israel they were rebelling against the Almighty God of
heaven and earth, and that they would assuredly perish in the con-
flict, since life and salvation were only to be found with the people
of Israel, whom God had blessed. And even though Balaam had
to make known the purpose of the Lord concerning His people
primarily, and in fact solely, to the Moabites and their neighbours,
who were like-minded with them, his announcement was also in-
tended for Israel itself, and was to be a pledge to the congregation
of Israel for all time of the certain fulfilment of the promises of
God ; and so to fill them with strength and courage, that in all their
conflicts with the powers of this world, they should rely upon the
Lord their God with the firmest confidence of faith, should strive
with unswerving fidelity after the end of their divine calling, and
should build up the kingdom of God on earth, which is to outlast
all the kingdoms of the world. — In what manner the Israelites be-
came acquainted with the prophecies of Balaam, so that Moses
could incorporate them into the Thorak, we are nowhere told, but
we can infer it with tolerable certainty from the subsequent fate of
Balaam himself.
Ver. 25. At the close of this announcement Balaam and Balak
departed from one another. " Balaam rose up, and went and turned
towards his place" (i.e. set out on the way to his house) ; " and king
Balak also went his way" lof'D? 3B* does not mean, " he returned
to his place," into his home beyond the Euphrates (equivalent to
tej?0"?K 3°B*) } but merely " he turned towards his place" (both here
and in Gen. xviii. 33). That he really returned home, is not implied
in the words themselves ; and the question, whether he did so, must
be determined from other circumstances. In the further course of
the history, we learn that Balaam went to the Midianites, and ad-
vised them to seduce the Israelites to unfaithfulness to Jehovah,
by tempting them to join in the worship of Peor (chap. xxxi. 16).
He was still with them at the time when the Israelites engaged in
the war of vengeance against that people, and was slain by the
Israelites along with the five princes of Midian (chap. xxxi. 8;
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXV. 1-8. 203
Josh. xiii. 22). At the time when he fell into the hands of the
Israelites, he no doubt made a full communication to the Israelitish
general, or to Phinehas, who accompanied the army as priest, con-
cerning his blessings and prophecies, probably in the hope of saving
his life ; though he failed to accomplish his end. 1
WHOREDOM OF ISRAEL, AND ZEAL OF PHINEHAS. — CHAP. XXV.
Vers. 1-5. The Lord had defended His people Israel from
Balaam's curse ; but the Israelites themselves, instead of keeping
the covenant of their God, fell into the snares of heathen seduc-
tion (vers. 1, 2). Whilst encamped at Shittim, in the steppes of
Moab, the people began to commit whoredom with the daughters of
Moab : they accepted the invitations of the latter to a sacrificial
festival of their gods, took part in their sacrificial meals, and even
worshipped the gods of the Moabites, and indulged in the licentious
"worship of BaaUPeor. As the princes of Midian, who were allied
to Moab, had been the advisers and assistants of the Moabitish king
in the attempt to destroy the Israelites by a curse of God ; so now,
after the failure of that plan, they were the soul of the new under-
taking to weaken Israel and render it harmless, by seducing it to
idolatry, and thus leading it into apostasy from its God. But it was
Balaam, as is afterwards casually observed in chap. xxxi. 16, who
first of all gave this advice. This is passed over here, because the
point of chief importance in relation to the object of the narrative,
was not Balaam's share in the proposal, but the carrying out of the
proposal itself. The daughters of Moab, however, also took part in
carrying it out, by forming friendly associations with the Israelites,
and then inviting them to their sacrificial festival. They only are
mentioned in vers. 1, 2, as being the daughters of the land. The
participation of the Midianites appears first of all in the shameless
licentiousness of Cozbi, the daughter of the Midianitish prince, from
which we not only see that the princes of Midian performed their
1 It is possible, however, as Hengstenberg imagines, that after Balaam's de-
parture from Balak, he took his way into the camp of the Israelites, and there
made known his prophecies to Moses or to the elders of Israel, in the hope of
obtaining from them the reward which Balak had withheld, and that it was not
till after his failure to obtain full satisfaction to his ambition and coretousness
here, that he went to the Midianites, to avenge himself upon the Israelites, by
the proposals that he made to them. The objections made by Kurtz to this
conjecture are not strong enough to prove that it is inadmissible, though the
possibility of the thing does not involve either its probability or its certainty.
Digitized by
Google
204 THE FOURTH 800E OF MOSES.
part, but obtain an explanation of the reason why the judgment
upon the crafty destroyers of Israel was to be executed upon the
Midianites. 1 Shittim, an abbreviation of Abel-Skittim (see at chap,
xxii. 1), to which the camp of the Israelites in the steppes of Moab
reached (chap, xxxiii. 49), is mentioned here instead of Arboth-
Modb, because it was at this northern point of the camp that the
Israelites came into contact with the Moabites, and that the latter
invited them to take part in their sacrificial meals ; and in Josh. ii. 1
and iii. 1, because it was from this spot that the Israelites com-
menced the journey to Canaan, as being the nearest to the place
where they were to pass through the Jordan. W, construed with
7S, as in Ezek. xvi. 28, signifies to incline to a person, to attach
one's self to him, so as to commit fornication. The word applies to
carnal and spiritual whoredom. The lust of the flesh induced the
Israelites to approach the daughters of Moab, and form acquaint-
ances and friendships with them, in consequence of which they were
invited by them " to the slain-offerings of their gods," i.e. to the
sacrificial festivals and sacrificial meals, in connection with which
they also " adored their gods," i.e. took part in the idolatrous worship
connected with the sacrificial festival. These sacrificial meals were
celebrated in honour of the Moabitish god Baal-Peor, so that the
Israelites joined themselves to him. *TO¥, in the Niphal, to bind
one's self to a person. Baal-Peor is the Baal of Peor, who was
worshipped in the city of Beth-Peor (Dent. iii. 29, iv. 46 ; see at
chap, xxiii. 28), a Moabitish Priapus, in honour of whom women
and virgins prostituted themselves. As the god of war, he was called
Chemosh (see at chap. xxi. 29). — Vers. 3-5. And the anger of the
Lord burned against the people, so that Jehovah commanded Moses
to fetch the heads of the people, i.e. to assemble them together, and
to " hang up" the men who had joined themselves to Baal-Peor
" before the Lord against the sun," that the anger of God might
turn away from Israel. The burning of the wrath of God, which
was to be turned away from the people by the punishment of the
i Consequently there is no discrepancy between vers. 1-5 and 6-18, to war-
rant the violent hypothesis of Knobel, that there are two different accounts
mixed together in this chapter, — an Elohistic account in vers. 6-18, of -which
the commencement has been dropped, and a Jehovistic account in vers. 1-6, of
which the latter part has been cut off. The particular points adduced in proof
of this fall to the ground, when the history is correctly explained ; and such
assertions as these, that the name Shittim and the allusion to the judges in
ver. 5, and to the wrath of Jehovah in vers. 8 and 4, are foreign to the Klobist,
are not proofs, but empty assumptions.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXV. 6-9. 205
guilty, as enjoined upon Moses, consisted, as we may see from vers.
8, 9, in a plague inflicted upon the nation, which carried off a great
number of the people, a sudden death, as in chap. xiv. 37, xvii.ll.
Pitfn, from J^, to be torn apart or torn away (Ges., Winer), refers
to the punishment of crucifixion, a mode of capital punishment
which was adopted by most of the nations of antiquity (see Winer,
bibl R. W. i. p. 680), and was carried out sometimes by driving a
stake into the body, and so impaling them {avcurKoKoiri^evv), the
mode practised by the Assyrians and Persians {Herod, iii. 159, and
TMyard's Nineveh and its Remains, vol. ii. p. 374, and plate on
p. 369), at other times by fastening them to a stake or nailing them
to a cross (avcurravpovv). In the instance before us, however, the
idolaters were not impaled or crucified alive, but, as we may see
from the word Win in ver. 5, and in accordance with the custom
frequently adopted by other nations (see Herzog's Encyclopaedia),
they were first of all put to death, and then impaled upon a stake
or fastened upon a cross, so that the impaling or crucifixion was
only an aggravation of the capital punishment, like the burning in
Lev. xx. 14, and the hanging (fwl) in Dent, xxi. 22. The render-
ing adopted by the LXX. and Vulgate is irapaZeip/funi^eiv, sus-
pendere, in this passage, and in 2 Sam. xxi. 6, 9, i^r]\id^eiv (to
expose to the sun), and crueifigere. n J l " |, ? ) for Jehovah, as satisfac-
tion for Him, i.e. to appease His wrath. . Dnitf (them) does not
refer to the heads of the nation, but to the guilty persons, upon
whom the heads of the nation were to pronounce sentence. — Ver. 5.
The judges were to put to death every one his men, i.e. such of the
evil-doers as belonged to his forum, according to the judicial
arrangements instituted in Ex. xviii. This command of Moses to
the judges was not carried out, however, because the matter took a
different turn.
Vers. 6-9. Whilst the heads of the people were deliberating on
the subject, and the whole congregation was assembled before the
tabernacle, weeping on account of the divine wrath, there came an
Israelite, a prince of the tribe of Simeon, who brought a Midian-
itish woman, the daughter of a Midianitish chief (ver. 14), to his
brethren, i.e. into the camp of the Israelites, before the eyes of
Moses and all the congregation, to commit adultery with her in his
tent. This shameless wickedness, in which the depth of the cor-
ruption that had penetrated into the congregation came to light,
inflamed the zeal of Phinehas, the son of Eleazar the high priest, to
such an extent, that he seized a spear, and rushing into the tent of
Digitized by
Google
206 THE FOUBTH BOOK OF MOSES.
the adulterer, pierced both of them through in the very act. n ?j?n,
lit. the arched, or arch, is applied here to the inner or hinder division
of the tent, the sleeping-room and women's room in the larger tents
of the upper classes. — Vers. 8, 9. Through this judgment, which
was executed by Phinehas with holy zeal upon the daring sinners,
the plague was restrained, so that it came to an end. The example
which Phinehas had made of these sinners was an act of interces-
sion, by which the high priest appeased the wrath of God, and
averted the judgment of destruction from the whole congregation
(" he was zealous for his God," ">??.% ver. 13). The thought upon
which this expression is founded is, that the punishment which
was inflicted as a purifying chastisement served as a "covering"
against the exterminating judgment (see Herzog's Cyclopaedia). 1 —
Ver. 9. Twenty-four thousand men were killed by this plague.
The Apostle Paul deviates from this statement in 1 Cor. x. 8, and
gives the number of those that fell as twenty-three thousand, pro-
bably from a traditional interpretation of the schools of the scribes,
according to which a thousand were deducted from the twenty-four
thousand who perished, as being the number of those who were
hanged by the judges, so that only twenty-three thousand would be
killed by the plague ; and it is to these alone that Paul refers.
Vers. 10-15. For this act of divine zeal the eternal possession
of the priesthood was promised to Phinehas and his posterity as
Jehovah's covenant of peace. ^i?3, by displaying my zeal in the
midst of them (viz. the Israelites). ^Wj? is not " zeal for me," but
" my zeal," the zeal of Jehovah with which Phinehas was filled,
and impelled to put the daring sinners to death. By doing this
he had averted destruction from the Israelites, and restrained the
working of Jehovah's zeal, which had manifested itself in the
plague. " I gave him my covenant of peace" (the suffix is attached
to the governing noun, as in Lev. vi. 3). rH? J7U, as in Gen. xvii.
2, to give, i.e. to fulfil the covenant, to grant what was promised in
the covenant. The covenant granted to Phinehas consisted in the
fact, that an " eternal priesthood " (i.e. the eternal possession of the
1 Upon this act of Phinehas, and the similar examples of Samuel (1 Sam. zt.
33) and Mattathias (1 Mace. ii. 24), the later Jews erected the so-called " zealot
right," jus zelotarum, according to which any one, even though not qualified bj
his official position, possessed the right, in cases of any daring contempt of the
theocratic institutions, or any daring violation of the honour of God, to proceed
with vengeance against the criminals. (See Salden, otia theol. pp. 609 sqq., and
Buddeus, dejure zelotarum apud Hebr. 1699, and in OelricK's collect. T. i. Diss.
5.) The stoning of Stephen furnishes an example of this.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVI. 207
priesthood) was secured to him, not for himself alone, but for his
descendants also, as a covenant, i.e. in a covenant, or irrevocable
form, since God never breaks a covenant that He has made. In
accordance with this promise, the high-priesthood which passed
from Eleazar to Phinehas (Judg. xx. 28) continued in his family,
with the exception of a brief interruption in Eli's days (see at 1
Sam. i.-iii. and xiv. 3), until the time of the last gradual dissolu-
tion of the Jewish state through the tyranny of Herod and his
successors (see my Areh&ologie, § 38). — In vers. 14, 15, the names
of the two daring sinners are given. The father of Cozbi, the
Midianitish princess, was named Zur, and is described here as
"head of the tribes (rriBN, see at Gen. xxv. 16) of a father's house
in Midian," i.e. as the head of several of the Midianitish tribes that
were descended from one tribe-father ; in chap. xxxi. 8, however,
he is described as a king, and classed among the five kings of
Midian who were slain by the Israelites.
Vers. 16—18. The Lord now commanded Moses to show hos-
tility ("TO) to the Midianites, and smite them, on account of the
stratagem which they had practised upon the Israelites by tempting
them to idolatry, "in order that the practical zeal of Phinehas
against sin, by which expiation had been made for the guilt, might
be adopted by all the nation " (Baumgarten). The inf. abs. ^">X,
instead of the imperative, as in Ex. xx. 8, etc. 'B "la" 5 ]"?^, in con-
sideration of Peor, and indeed, or especially, in consideration of
Cozbi. The repetition is emphatic. The wickedness of the Midian-
ites culminated in the shameless wantonness of Cozbi the Midian-
itish princess. " Their sister," i.e. one of the members of their
tribe. — The 19th verse belongs to the following chapter, and forms
the introduction to chap. xxvi. I. 1
MUSTEKING OF ISRAEL IN THE STEPPES OF MOAB. — CHAP. XXVI.
Before taking vengeance upon the Midianites, as they had
been commanded, the Israelites were to be mustered as the army of
Jehovah, by means of a fresh numbering, since the generation that
was mustered at Sinai (chap. i.-iv.) had died out in the wilderness,
with the sole exception of Caleb and Joshua (vers. 64, 65). On
this ground the command of God was issued, " after the plague,"
for a fresh census and muster. For with the plague the last of
those who came out of Egypt, and were not to enter Canaan, had
1 In the English version this division is adopted. — Tr.
Digitized by
Google
208 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
been swept away, and thus the sentence had been completely exe-
cuted. — The object of the fresh numbering, however, was not
merely to muster Israel for the war with the Midianites, and in the
approaching conquest of the promised land with the Canaanites
also, but was intended to serve at the same time as a preparation for
their settlement in Canaan, viz. for the division of the conquered
land among the tribes and families of Israel. For this reason
(chap, xxvi.) the families of the different tribes are enumerated
here, which was not the case in chap. i. ; and general instructions
are also given in vers. 52-56, with reference to the division of
Canaan. — The numbering was simply extended, as before, to the
male population of the age of 20 years and upwards, and was no
doubt carried out, like the previous census at Sinai, by Moses and
the high priest (Eleazar), with the assistance of the heads of the
tribes, although the latter are not expressly mentioned here. — The
names of the families correspond — with very few exceptions, which
have been already noticed in vol. i. pp. 372-3 — to the grandsons and
great-grandsons of Jacob mentioned in Gen. xlvi. — With regard to
the total number of the people, and the number of the different
tribes, compare the remarks at pp. 4 sqq.
Vers. 1-51. Mustering of the Twelve Tribes. — Vers. 1-4.
The command of God to Moses and Eleazar is the same as in chap,
i., ii., and iii., except that it does not enter so much into details.
— Ver. 3. " And Moses and Eleazar the priest spake with them"
(131 with the accusative, as in Gen. xxxvii. 4). The pronoun
refers to " the children of Israel," or more correctly, to the heads
of the nation as the representatives of the 'congregation, who were
to carry out the numbering. On the Arboth-Moab, see at chap,
xxii. 1. Only the leading point in their words is mentioned, viz.
" from twenty years old and upwards " (sc. shall ye take the num-
ber of the children of Israel), since it was very simple to supply
the words " take the sum " from ver. 2. 1 — The words from " the
1 This is, at all events, easier and simpler than the alterations of the text
which have been suggested for the purpose of removing the difficulty. Knobel
proposes to alter naTl into "Q"V1, and nbK^ into Ipa? : " Moses and Eleazar
arranged the children of Israel when they mustered them." But Vann does
not mean to arrange, but simply to drive in pairs, to subjugate (Ps. xviii. 48,
and xlvii. 4), — an expression which, as must be immediately apparent, is alto-
gether inapplicable to the arrangement of the people in families for the purpose
of taking a census.
'•-.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP XXVL 1-61. 209
children of Israel " in ver. 4 onwards form the introduction to the
enumeration of the different tribes (vers. 5 sqq.), and the verb WP
(were) must be supplied. u And the children of Israel, who went
forth out of Egypt, were Reuben," etc. — Vers. 5-11. The families
of Reuben tally with Gen. xlvi. 9, Ex. vi. 14, and 1 Chron. v. 3.
The plural ^S (sons), in ver. 8, where only one son is mentioned, is
to be explained from the fact, that several sons of this particular
son {i.e. grandsons) are mentioned afterwards. On Dat/ian and
Abiram, see at chap. x?i. 1 and 32 sqq. See also the remark made
here in vers. 10 b and 11, viz. that those who were destroyed with
the company of Korah were for a sign (M, here a warning) ; but
that the sons of Korah were not destroyed along with their father.
—Vers. 12-14. The Simeonites counted only five families, as Olwd
(Gen. xlvi. 10) left no family. Nemuel is called Jemuel there, as
yod and nun are often interchanged (cf. Ges. thes. pp. 833 and
,557); and Zerach is another name of the same signification for
Zohar {Zerach, the rising of the sun ; Zohar, candor, splendour). —
Vers. 15—18. The Gadites are the same as in Gen. xlvi. 16, except,
that Ozni is called Ezbon there. — Vers. 19-22. The sons and
families of Judah agree with Gen. xlvi. 12 (cf. Gen. xxxviii. 6
sqq.) ; also with 1 Chron. ii. 3-5. — Vers. 23-25. The families of
Issachar correspond to the sons mentioned in Gen. xlvi. 13, except
that the name Job occurs there instead of Jashub. The two names
have the same signification, as Job is derived from an Arabic word
which signifies to return. — Vers. 26 and 27. The families of
Zebulun correspond to the sons named in Gen. xlvi. 14. — Vers.
28-37. The descendants of Joseph were classified in two leading
families, according to his two sons Manasseh and Ephraim, who
were born before the removal of Israel to Egypt, and were raised
into founders of tribes in consequence of the patriarch Israel
having adopted them as his own sons (Gen. xlviii.). — Vers. 29-34.
Eight families descended from Manasseh : viz. one from his son
Machir, the second from Machir's son or Manasseh's grandson
Gilead, and the other six from the six sons of Gilead. The genea-
logical accounts in chap, xxvii. 1, xxxvi. 1, and Josh. xvii. 1 sqq.,
fully harmonize with this, except that Iezer (ver. 30) is called
Abiezer in Josh. xvii. 2 ; whereas only a part of the names men-
tioned here occur in the genealogical fragments in 1 Chron.
ii. 21-24, and vii. 14-29. In ver. 33, a son of Hepher, named
Zehphehad, is mentioned. He had no sons, but only daughters,
whose names are given here to prepare the way for the legal
PENT. — VOL. III. O
Digitized by
Google
210 , THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
regulations mentioned in chap, xxvii. and xxxvi., to which this fact
gave rise. — Vers. 35-37. There were four families descended from
Ephraim; three from his sons, and one from his grandson. Of
the descendants of Sutelah several successive links are given in
1 Chron. vii. 20 sqq. — Vers. 38-41. The children of Benjamin
formed seven families, five of whom were founded by his sons, and
two by grandsons. (On the differences which occur between the
names given here and those in Gen. xlvi. 21, see vol. i. pp. 372,
373.) Some of the sons and grandsons of Benjamin mentioned
here are also found in the genealogical fragments in 1 Chron.
vii. 6-18, and viii. 1 sqq. — Vers. 42 and 43. The descendants of
Dan formed only one family, named from a son of Dan, who is
called Shuham here, but Hushim in Gen. xlvi. 23; though this
family no doubt branched out into several smaller families, which
are not named here, simply because this list contains only the lead-
ing families into which the tribes were divided. — Vers. 44-47.
The families of Asher agree with the sons of Asher mentioned in
Gen. xlvi. 17 and 1 Chron. vii. 30, except that Ishuah is omitted
here, because he founded no family. — Vers. 48-50. The families
of Naphtali tally with the sons of Naphtali in Gen. xlvi. 24 and
1 Chron. vii. 30. — Ver. 51. The total number of the persons
mustered was 601,730.
Vers. 52-56. Instructions concerning the Distribution
of the Land. — In vers. 53, 54, the command is given to distribute
the land as an inheritance among the twelve tribes ("unto these"),
according to the number of the names (chap. i. 2-18), i.e. of the
persons counted by name in each of their families. To a numerous
tribe they were to make the inheritance great ; to the littleness, w.
to the tribes and families that contained only a few persons, they
were to make it small ; to every one according to the measure of its
mustered persons (? must be repeated before E*K). I n vers. 55, 56,
it is still further commanded that the distribution should take place
by lot. " According to the names of their paternal tribes shall they
(the children of Israel) receive it (the land) for an inheritance."
The meaning of these words can only be, that every tribe was to
receive a province of its own for an inheritance, which should be
called by its name for ever. The other regulation in ver. 56,
" according to the measure of ilie lot shall its inheritance (the in-
heritance of every tribe) be divided between the numerous and the
small (tribe)," is no doubt to be understood as signifying, that in
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVI. 57-62. 211
the division of the tribe territories, according t6 the comparative
sizes of the different tribes, they were to adhere to tbat portion of
land which fell to every tribe in the casting of the lots. The
magnitude and limits of the possessions of the different tribes could
not be determined by the lot according to the magnitude of the
tribes themselves: all that could possibly be determined was the
situation to be occupied by the tribe ; so that 22. JBechai is quite
correct in observing that " the casting of the 16t took place for the
more convenient distribution of the different portions, whether of
better or inferior condition, that there might be no occasion for
strife and covetousness," though the motive assigned is too partial
in its character. The lot was to determine the portion of every
tribe, not merely to prevent all occasion for dissatisfaction and
complaining, but in order that every tribe might receive with
gratitude the possession that fell to its lot as the inheritance
assigned it by God, the result of the lot being regarded by almost
all nations as determined by God Himself (cf. Prov. xvi. 33,
xviii. 18). On this ground not only was the lot resorted to by the
Greeks and Eomans in the distribution of conquered lands (see the
proofs in Clericus, Eosenmilller, and Knobel), but it is still employed
in the division of lands. (For further remarks, see at Josh. xiv. 1
sqq.)
Vers. 57-62. Mustering of the Levites. — The enumera-
tion of the different Levitical . families into which the three leading
families of Levi, that were founded by his three sons Gershon,
Kohath, and Merari, were divided, is not complete, but is broken
off in ver. 58 after the notice of five different families, for the
purpose of tracing once more the descent of Moses and Aaron, the
heads not of this tribe Only, but of the whole nation, and also of
giving the names of the sons of the latter (vers. 59-61). And after
this the whole is concluded with a notice of the total number of
those who were mustered of the tribe of Levi (ver. 62). — Of the
different families mentioned, IAbni belonged to Gershon (cf. chap,
iii. 21), Hebroni to Kohath (chap. iii. 27), Machli and Mushi to
Merari (chap. iii. 33), and Korchi, i.e. the family of Korah (accord-
ing to chap. xvi. 1 ; cf. Ex. vi. 21 and 24), to Kohath. Moses and
Aaron were descendants of Kohath (see at Ex. vi. 20 and ii. 1).
Some difficulty is caused by the relative clause, " whom (one) had
born to Levi in Egypt " (ver. 59), on account of the subject being
left indefinite. It cannot be Levi's wife, as Jarchi, Abenezra, and
Digitized by
Google
212 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
others suppose; for Jochebed, the mother of Moses, was not a
daughter of Levi in the strict sense of the word, but only a Levitess
or descendant of Levi, who lived about 300 years after Levi ; just
as her husband Amram was not actually the son of Amram, who
bore that name (Ex. vi. 18), but a later descendant of this older
Amram (see vol. i. pp. 469 sqq.). The missing subject must be
derived from the verb itself, viz. either rfl? 1 ? or ASK (her mother),
as in 1 Kings l. 6, another passage in which " his mother " is to be
supplied (cf . Ewald, § 294, b.). — Vers. 60, 61. Sons of Aaron : cf.
chap. iii. 2 and 4 ; Ex. vi. 23 ; Lev. x. 1, 2. — Ver. 62. The Levites
were not mustered along with the rest of the tribes of Israel,
because the mustering took place with especial reference to the
conquest of Canaan, and the Levites were not to receive any terri-
tory as a tribe (see at chap, xviii. 20). — Vers. 63-65. Concluding
formula with the remark in ver. 65, that the penal sentence which
God had pronounced in chap. xiv. 29 and 38 upon the generation
which came out of Egypt, had been completely carried out.
THE DAUGHTERS OF ZELOPHEHAD CLAIM TO INHERIT. THE
DEATH OP MOSES FORETOLD : CONSECRATION OP JOSHUA AS
HIS SUCCESSOR. — CHAP. XXVII.
Vers. 1-11. Claims op Zelopheaad's Daughters to an
Inheritance in the Promised Land. — Vers. 1-4. The divine
instructions which were given at the mustering of the tribes, to the
effect that the land was to be divided among the tribes in propor-
tion to the larger or smaller number of their families (chap. xxvL
52-56), induced the daughters of Zehphehad the Manassite of the
family of Gilead, the son of Machir, to appear before the princes of
the congregation, who were assembled with Moses and Eleazar at
the tabernacle, with a request that they would assign them an
inheritance in the family of the father, as he had died in the desert
without leaving any sons, and had not taken part in the rebellion
of the company of Korah, which might have occasioned his exclu-
sion from any participation in the promised land, but had simply
died " through his (own) sin," i.e. on account of such a sin as every
one commits, and such as all who died in the wilderness had com-
mitted as well as he. " Why should the name of our father be cut
off (cease) from the midst of his family?" This would have been
the case, for example, if no inheritance had been assigned him in
the land, because he left no son. In that case his family would have
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVII. 12-14. 213
become extinct, if his daughters had married into other families or
tribes. On the other hand, if his daughters received a possession
of their own among the brethren of their father, the name of their
father would be preserved by it, since they could then marry hus-
bands who would enter upon their landed property, and their father's
name and possession would be perpetuated through their children.
This wish on the part of the daughters was founded upon an as-
sumption which rested no doubt upon an ancient custom, namely,
that in the case of marriages where the wives had brought landed
property as their dowry, the sons who inherited the maternal pro-
perty were received through this inheritance into the family of their
mother, i.e. of their grandfather on the mother's side. We have an
example of this in the case of Jarha, who belonged to the pre-
Mosaic times (1 Chron. ii. 34, 35). In all probability this took
place in every instance in which daughters received a portion of
the paternal possessions as their dowry, even though there might
be sons alive. This would explain the introduction of Jair among
the Manassites in chap, xxxii. 41, Deut. iii. 14. His father Segub
was the son of Hezron of the tribe of Judah, but his mother was
the daughter of Machir the Manassite (1 Chron. ii. 21, 22). We
find another similar instance in Ezra ii. 61 and Neh. vii. 63, where
the sons of a priest who had married one of the daughters of Bar-
zillai the rich Gileadite, are called sons of Barzillai. — Vers. 5-7.
This question of right (rnishpat) Moses brought before God, and
received instructions in reply to give the daughters of Zelophehad
an inheritance among the brethren of their father, as they had
spoken right. Further instructions were added afterwards in chap,
xxxvi. in relation to the marriage of heiresses. — Vers. 8-11. On
this occasion God issued a general law of inheritance, which was to
apply to all cases as " a statute of judgment " (or right), i.e. a statute
determining right. If any one died without leaving a son, his
landed property was to pass to his daughter (or daughters) ; in
default of daughters, to his brothers ; in the absence of brothers, to
his paternal uncles ; and if there were none of them, to his next of
kin. — On the intention of this law, see my Archaeol. § 142 (ii. pp.
212, 213); and on the law of inheritance generally, see J. Selden, de
success, ad leges Hebr. in bona defunctorum, Fkft. a. 0. 1695.
Vers. 12-14. The Death of Moses foretold. — After these
instructions concerning the division of the land, the Lord announced
to Moses his approaching end. From the mountains of Abarim
Digitized by
Google
214 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
he was to see the land which the Israelites would receive, and then
like Aaron to he gathered to his people, because like him he also
had sinned at the water of strife at Kadesh. This announcement
was made, " that he might go forward to his death with the fullest
consciousness, and might set his house in order, that is to say, might
finish as much as he could while still alive, and provide as much
as possible what would make up after his death for the absence of
his own person, upon which the whole house of Israel was now so
dependent " (Baumgarten). The fulfilment of this announcement
is described in Deut. xxxii. 48-52. The particular spot upon the
mountains of Abarim from which Moses saw the land of Canaan, is
also minutely described there. It was Mount Nebo, upon which he
also died. The mountains of Abarim (cf. chap, xxxiii. 47) are the
mountain range forming the Moabitish table-land, which slope off
into the steppes of Moab. It is upon this range, the northern por-
tion of which opposite to Jericho bore the name of Pisgah, that we
are to look for Mount Nebo, which is sometimes described as one of
the mountains of Abarim (Dent, xxxii. 49), and at other times as
the top of Pisgah (Deut. iii. 27, xxxiv. 1 ; see at chap. xxi. 20).
Nebo is not to be identified with Jebel Attarus, but to be sought
for much farther to the north, since, according to Eusebius (s. v.
'Afiapei/j.), it was opposite to Jericho, between Livias, which was in
the valley of the Jordan nearly opposite to Jericho, and Heshbon;
consequently very near to the point which is marked as the " Heights
of Nebo " on Van de Velde's map. The prospect from the heights
of Nebo must have been a very extensive one. According to Burch-
hardt (Syr. ii. pp. 106-7), " even the city of Heshbon (Hhuzban)
itself stood upon so commanding an eminence, that the view extended
at least thirty English miles in all directions, and towards the south
probably as far as sixty miles." On the expression, " gathered unto
thy people," see at Gen. xxv. 8, and on Aaron's death see Num.
xx. 28. Dn' 1 "!? I^K? : " as ye transgressed My commandment." By
the double use of l^K? (quomodo, "as"), the death of Aaron, and
also that of Moses, are placed in a definite relation to the sin of
these two heads of Israel. As they both sinned at Kadesh against
the commandment of the Lord, so they were both of them to die
without entering the land of Canaan. On the sin, see at chap. xx.
12, 13, and on the desert of Zin, at chap. xiii. 21.
Vers. 15-23. Consecration op Joshua as the Successor
op Moses. — Vers. 15-17. The announcement thus made to
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVII. 15-23. 215
Moses led him to entreat the Lord to appoint a leader of His
people, that the congregation might not be like a flock without a
shepherd. As " God of the spirits of all flesh," i.e. as the giver of
life and breath to all creatures (see at chap. xvi. 22), he asks
Jehovah to appoint a man over the congregation, who should go
out and in before them, and should lead them out and in, i.e. pre-
side over and direct them in all their affairs. Rtal TlKS (" go out,"
and " go in ") is a description of the conduct of men in every-day
life (Deut. xxviii. 6, xxxi. 2 ; Josh. xiv. 11). KXn tWfin (" lead
out," and " bring in ") signifies the superintendence of the affairs
of the nation, and is founded upon the figure of a shepherd. — Vers.
18-21. The Lord then appointed Joshua to this office as a man
" who had spirit." Wi (spirit) does not mean " insight and wis-
dom" (Knobet), but the higher power inspired by God into the soul,
which quickens the moral and religious life, and determines its
development; in this case, therefore, it was the spiritual endow-
ment requisite for the office he was called to fill. Moses was to
consecrate him for entering upon this office by the laying on of
hands, or, as is more fully explained in vers. 19 and 20, he was to
set him before Eleazar the high priest and the congregation, to
command (rnx) him, i.e. instruct him with regard to his office before
their eyes, and to lay of his eminence (nin) upon him, i.e. to trans-
fer a portion of his own dignity and majesty to him by the imposi-
tion of hands, that the whole congregation might hearken to him,
or trust to his guidance. The object to VIQ& (hearken) must be
supplied from the context, viz. 1vK (to him), as Deut. xxxiv. 9
clearly shows. The ft? (of) in ver. 20 is partitive, as in Gen. iv. 4,
etc. The eminence and authority of Moses were not to be entirely
transferred to Joshua, for they were bound up with his own person
alone (cf. chap. xii. 6-8), but only so much of it as he needed for
the discharge of the duties of his office. Joshua was to be neither
the lawgiver nor the absolute governor of Israel, but to be placed
under the judgment of the Urim, with which Eleazar was entrusted,
so far as the supreme decision of the affairs of Israel was concerned.
This is the meaning of ver. 21 : u Eleazar shall ask to him (for
him) the judgment of the Urim before Jehovah? Urim is an abbre-
viation for Urim and Thummim (Ex. xxviii. 30), and denotes the
means with which the high priest was entrusted of ascertaining the
divine will and counsel in all the important business of the congre-
gation. " After his mouth" (i.e. according to the decision of the
i priest, by virtue of the right of Urim and Thummim entrusted
Digitized by
Google
216 THE FOUBTH BOOK OF MOSES.
to him), Joshua and the whole congregation were to go out and in,
i.e. to regulate their conduct and decide upon their undertakings.
" All the congregation,"' in distinction from "all the children of
Israel," denotes the whole body of heads of the people, or the col-
lege of elders, which represented the congregation and administered
its affairs. — Vers. 22, 23. Execution of the divine command.
OBDER OF THE DAILY AND FESTAL OFFERINGS OF THE
CONGREGATION. CHAP. XXVIII. AND XXIX.
When Israel was prepared for the conquest of the promised
land by the fresh numbering and mustering of its men, and by the
appointment of Joshua as commander, its relation to the Lord was
regulated by a law which determined the sacrifices through which it
was to maintain its fellowship with its God from day to day, and serve
Him as His people (chap, xxviii. and xxix.). Through this order
of sacrifice, the object of which was to form and sanctify the whole
life of the congregation into a continuous worship, the sacrificial
and festal laws already given in Ex. xxiii. 14-17, xxix. 38-42,
xxxi. 12-17, Lev. xxiii., and Num. xxv. 1-12, were completed and
arranged into a united and well-ordered whole. " It was very
fitting that this law should be issued a short time before the ad-
vance into Canaan ; for it was there first that the Israelites were
in a position to carry out the sacrificial worship in all its full
extent, and to observe all the sacrificial and festal laws " (Knobel).
The law commences with the daily morning and evening burnt-
offering (vers. 3-8), which was instituted at Sinai at the dedication
of the altar. It is not merely for the sake of completeness that it
is introduced here, or for the purpose of including all the national
sacrifices that were to be offered during the whole year in one
general survey ; but also for an internal reason, viz. that the daily
sacrifice was also to be offered on the Sabbaths and feast-days, to
accompany the general and special festal sacrifices, and to form the
common substratum for the whole of these. Then follow in vera.
9-15 the sacrifices to be offered on the Sabbath and at the new
moon ; and in ver. 16-chap. xxix. 38 the general sacrifices for the
different yearly feasts, which were to be added to the sacrifices that
were peculiar to each particular festival, having been appointed at
the time of its first institution, and being specially adapted to give
expression to its specific character, so that, at the yearly feasts, the
congregation had to offer their different kinds of sacrifices : (a) the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVIII. XXIX 217
daily morning and evening sacrifice ; (b) the general sacrifices that
were offered on every feast-day ; and (c) the festal sacrifices that
were peculiar to each particular feast. This cumulative arrange-
ment is to be explained from the significance of the daily and of
the festal sacrifices. In the daily burnt-offering the congregation
of Israel, as a congregation of Jehovah, was to sanctify its life,
body, soul, and spirit, to the Lord its God ; and on the Lord's feast-
days it was to give expression to this sanctification in an intensified
form. This stronger practical exhibition of the sanctification of the
life was embodied in the worship by the elevation and graduation
of the daily sacrifice, through the addition of a second and much
more considerable burnt-offering, meat-offering, and drink-offering.
The graduation was regulated by the significance of the festivals.
On the Sabbaths the daily sacrifice was doubled, by the presenta-
tion of a burnt-offering consisting of two lambs. On the other
feast-days it was increased by a burnt-offering composed of oxen,
rams, and yearling lambs, which was always preceded by a sin-
offering. — As the seventh day of the week, being a Sabbath, was
distinguished above the other days of the week, as a day that was
sanctified to the Lord in a higher degree than the rest, by an
enlarged burnt-qffering, meat-offering, and drink-offering ; so the
seventh month, being a Sabbath-month, was raised above the other
months of the year, and sanctified as a festal month, by the fact
that, in addition to the ordinary new moon sacrifices of two bullocks,
one ram, and seven yearling lambs, a special festal sacrifice was
also offered, consisting of one bullock, one ram, and seven yearling
lambs (chap. xxix. 2), which was also repeated on the day of atone-
ment, and at the close of the feast of Tabernacles (chap. xxix. 8, 36) ;
and also that the feast of Tabernacles, which fell in this month, was
to be celebrated by a much larger number of burnt-offerings, as
the largest and holiest feast of the congregation of Israel. 1
1 KnobeVs remarks as to the difference in the sacrifices are not only erro-
neous, but likely to mislead, and tending to obscure and distort the actual facts. •
" On those feast-days," he says, " which were intended as a general festival to
Jehovah, viz. the sabbatical portion of the seventh new moon, the day of atone-
ment, and the closing day of the yearly feasts, the sacrifices consisted of one
bullock, one ram, and seven yearling lambs (chap. xxix. 2, 8, 36) ; whereas at
the older festivals which had a reference to nature, such as the new moons, the
days of unleavened bread, and the feast of Weeks, they consisted of two bullocks,
one ram, and seven yearling lambs (chap, xxviii. 11, 19, 24, 27 ; xxix. 6), and
at the feast of Tabernacles of even a larger number, especially of bullocks (chap.
Mix. 12 sqq.). In the last, Jehovah was especially honoured, as having poured
Digitized by
Google
218 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
All the feasts of the whole year, for example, formed a cycle
of feast-days, arranged according to the number seven, which had
its starting-point and centre in the Sabbath, and was regulated
according to the division of time established at the creation, into
weeks, months, years, and periods of years, ascending from the
weekly Sabbath to the monthly Sabbath, the sabbatical year, and
the year of jubilee. In this cycle of holy periods, regulated as it
was by the number seven, and ever expanding into larger and
larger circles, there was embodied the whole revolution of annually
recurring festivals, established to commemorate the mighty works
of the Lord for the preservation and inspiration of His people.
And this was done in the following manner : in the first place, the
number of yearly feasts amounted to exactly seven, of which the
two leading feasts (Mazzoth and the feast of labernacles) lasted
seven days ; in the second place, in all the feasts, some of which
were of only one day's duration, whilst others lasted seven days,
there were only seven days that were to be observed with sabbatical
rest and a holy meeting ; and in the third place, the seven feasts
were formed into two large festal circles, each of which consisted of
an introductory feast, the main feast of seven days, and a closing
feast of one day. The first of these festal circles was commemo-
rative of the elevation of Israel into the nation of God, and its
subsequent preservation. It commenced on the 14th Abib (Nisan)
with the Passover, which was appointed to commemorate the de-
liverance of Israel from the destroying angel who smote the first-
born of Egypt, as the introductory festival. It culminated in the
seven days' feast of unleavened bread, as the feast of the deliver-
ance of Israel from bondage, and its elevation into the nation of
oat His blessing upon nature, and granted a plentiful harvest to the cultivation
of the soil. The ox was the beast of agriculture." It was not the so-called
" older festivals which had reference to nature " that were distinguished by a
larger number of sacrificial animals, above those feast-days which were intended
as general festivals to Jehovah, but the feasts of the seventh month alone.
Thus the seventh new moon's day was celebrated by a double new moon's
sacrifice, viz. with three bullocks, two rams, and fourteen yearling lambs ; the
feast of atonement, as the introductory festival of the feast of Tabernacles, by a
special festal sacrifice, whilst the day of Passover, which corresponded to it in
the first festal cycle, as the introductory festival of the feast of unleavened
bread, had no general festal sacrifices ; and, lastly, the feast of Tabernacles, not
only by a very considerable increase in the number of the- festal sacrifices on
every one of the seven days, but also by the additiem of an eighth day, as the
octave of the feast, and a festal sacrifice answering to those of the first and
seventh days of this month.
Digltizi
ed by Google
CHAP. XXVIII. 219
God ; and closed with the feast of Weeks, Pentecost, or the feast of
Harvest, which was kept seven weeks after the offering of the sheaf
of first-fruits, on the second day of Mazzoth. This festal circle
contained only three days that were to he kept with sabbatical rest
and a holy meeting (viz. the first and seventh days of Mazzoth and
the day of Pentecost). The second festal circle fell entirely in the
seventh month, and its main object was to inspire the Israelites in
their enjoyment of the blessings of their God : for this reason it was
celebrated by the presentation of a large number of burnt-offerings.
This festal circle opened with the day of atonement, which was
appointed for the tenth, day of the seventh month, as the intro-
ductory feast, culminated in the seven days' feast of Tabernacles,
and closed with the eighth day, which was added to the seven feast-
days as the octave of this festive circle, or the solemn close of all
the feasts of the year. This also included only three days that
were to be commemorated with sabbatical rest and a holy meeting
(the 10th, 15th, and 22d of the month) ; but to these we have to
add the day of trumpets, with which the month commenced, which
was also a Sabbath of rest with a holy meeting ; and this completes
the seven days of rest (see my Archceologie, i. § 76).
Chap, xxviii. Ver. 2 contains the general instruction to offer to
the Lord His sacrificial gift " at the time appointed by Him." On
eorban, see at Lev. i. 2 (vol. ii. p. 282, comp. with p. 271) ; on " the
bread of Jehovah" at Lev. iii. 11; on the " sacrifice made by fire," and
" a sweet savour," at Lev. i. 9 ; and on " moed," at Lev. xxiii. 2, 4. —
Vers. 3-8. The daily sacrifice : as it had already been instituted at
Sinai (Ex. xxix. 38-42). — Ver. 7. " In the sanctuary," i.e. irepl rbv
^tofutv (round about the altar), as Josephus paraphrases it (Ant. iii.
10) ; not " with (in) holy vessels," as Jonathan and others interpret
it. " Pour out a drink-offering, as "Dt? for Jehovah." Shecar does not
mean intoxicating drink here (see at Lev. x. 9), but strong drink, in
distinction from water as simple drink. The drink-offering con-
sisted of wine only (see at chap. xv. 5 sqq.) ; and hence Onkelos
paraphrases it, " of old wine." — Vers. 9, 10. The Sabbath-offering,
which was to be added to the daily sacrifice (<>y, upon it), consisted
of two yearling lambs as a burnt-offering, with the corresponding
meat-offering and drink-offering, according to the general rule laid
down in chap. xv. 3 sqq., and is appointed here for the first time ;
whereas the sabbatical feast had already been instituted at Ex. xx.
8-11 and Lev. xxiii. 3. " The burnt-offering of the Sabbath on its
Sabbath" i.e. as often as the Sabbath occurred, every Sabbath. —
Digitizi
ed by Google
220 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Vers. 11-15. At the beginnings of the month, i.e. at the new
moons, a larger burnt-offering was to be added to the daily or con-
tinual burnt-offering, consisting of two bullocks (young oxen), one
ram, and seven yearling lambs, with the corresponding meat and
drink-offerings, as the " month's burnt-offering in its (i.e. every)
month with regard to the months of the year," i.e. corresponding
to them. To this there was also to be added a sin-offering of a
shaggy goat (see at Lev. iv. 23). The custom of distinguishing
the beginnings of the months or new moon's days by a peculiar
festal sacrifice, without their being, strictly speaking, festal days,
with sabbatical rest and a holy meeting, 1 arose from the relation in
which the month stood to the single day. " If the congregation
was to sanctify its life and labour to the Lord every day by a burnt-
offering, it could not well be omitted at the commencement of the
larger division of time formed by the month ; on the contrary, it was
only right that the commencement of a new month should be sanc-
tified by a special sacrifice. Whilst, then, a burnt-offering, in which
the idea of expiation was subordinate to that of consecrating sur-
render to the Lord, was sufficient for the single day ; for the whole
month it was necessary that, in consideration of the sins that had
been committed in the course of the past month, and had remained
without expiation, a special sin-offering should be offered for their
expiation, in order that, upon the ground of the forgiveness and
reconciliation with God which had been thereby obtained, the lives
of the people might be sanctified afresh to the Lord in the burnt-
offering. This significance of the new moon sacrifice was still
further intensified by the fact, that during the presentation of the
sacrifice the priests sounded the silver trumpets, in order that it
might be to the congregation for a memorial before God (chap. x.
10). The trumpet blast was intended to bring before God the
prayers of the congregation embodied in the sacrifice, that God
might remember them in mercy, granting them the forgiveness of
their sins and power for sanctification, and quickening them again
in the fellowship of His saving grace" (see my Archceologie, i.
1 In later times, however, the new moon grew more and more into a feast-
day, trade was suspended (Amos viii. 5), the pious Israelite Bought instruction
from the prophets (2 Kings iv. 23), many families and households presented
yearly thank-offerings (1 Sam. xx. 6, 29), and at a still later period the most
devout abstained from fasting (Judith viii. 6) ; consequently it is frequently
referred to by the prophets as a feast resembling the Sabbath (Isa. i. 13 ; Hos.
ii. 13 ; Ezek. xlvi. 1).
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIX. 221
p. 369). — Vers. 16-25. The same number of sacrifices as at the
■new moon were to be offered on every one of the seven days of the
feast of unleavened bread (MazzoiK), from the 15th to the 21st
of the month, whereas there was no general festal offering on the
day of the Passover, or the 14th of the month (Ex. xii. 3-14). With
regard to the feast of Mazzoth, the rule is repeated from Ex. xii.
15-20 and Lev. xxiii. 6-8, that on the first and seventh day there
was to be a Sabbath rest and holy meeting. — Vers. 23, 24. The
festal sacrifices of the seven days were to be prepared " in addition
to the morning burnt-offering, which served as the continual burnt-,
offering." This implies that the festal sacrifices commanded were to
be prepared and offered every day after the morning sacrifice.—
Vers. 26-31. The same number of sacrifices is appointed for the
day of the first-fruits, i.e. for the feast of Weeks or Harvest feast (cf.
Lev. xxiii. 15-22). The festal burnt-offering and sin-offering of
this one' day was independent of the supplementary burnt-offering
and sin-offering of the wave-loaves appointed in Lev. xxiii. 18, and
was to be offered before these and after the daily morning sacrifice.
Chap. xxix. 1-6. The festal sacrifice for the new moon of the
seventh month consisted of a burnt-offering of one bullock, one ram,
and seven yearling lambs, with the corresponding meat-offerings
and drink-offerings, and a sin-offering of a he-goat, " besides" (i.e.
in addition to) the monthly and daily burnt-offering, meat-offering,
and drink-offering. Consequently the sacrifices presented on the
seventh new moon's day were, (1) a yearling lamb in the morning
and evening, with their meat-offering and drink-offering; (2) in
the morning, after the daily sacrifice, the ordinary new moon's
sacrifice, consisting of two bullocks, one ram, and seven yearling
lambs, with their corresponding meat-offerings and drink-offerings
(see at ver. 11) ; (3) the sin-offering of the he-goat, together with
the burnt-offering of one bullock, one turn, and seven yearling
lambs, with their proper meat-offerings and drink-offerings, the
meaning of which has been pointed out at Lev. xxiii. 23 sqq. — Vers.
7-11. On the day of atonement, on the tenth of the seventh month,
a similar festal sacrifice was to be offered to the one presented on
the seventh new moon's day (a burnt-offering and sin-offering), in
addition to the sin-offering of atonement prescribed at Lev. xvi.,
and the daily burnt-offerings. For a more minute description of
this festival, see at Lev. xvi. and xxiii. 26-32. — Vers. 12-34. The
feast of Tabernacles, the special regulations for the celebration of
which are contained in Lev. xxiii. 34-36 and 39-43, was distin-
Digitizi
ed by Google
222 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
gtdshed above all the other feasts of the year by the great number
of burnt-offerings, which raised it into the greatest festival of joy.
On the seven feast-days, the first of which was to be celebrated
with sabbatical rest and a holy meeting, there were to be offered, in
addition to the daily burnt-offering, every day a he-goat for a sin-
offering, and seventy oxen in all for a burnt-offering during the
seven days, as well as every day two rams and fourteen yearling
lambs, with the requisite meat-offerings and drink-offerings. Whilst,
therefore, the number of rams and lambs was double the number
offered at the Passover and feast of Pentecost, the number of oxen
was fivefold ; for, instead of fourteen, there were seventy offered
during the seven days. This multiplication of the oxen was distri-
buted in such a way, that instead of there being ten offered every
day, there were thirteen on the first day, twelve on the second, and
so on, deducting one every day, so that on the seventh day there
were exactly seven offered ; the arrangement being probably made
for the purpose of securing the holy number seven for this last day,
and indicating at the same time, through the gradual diminution in
the number of sacrificial oxen, the gradual decrease in the festal
character of the seven festal days. The reason for this multiplication
in the number of burnt-offerings is to be sought for in the nature
of the feast itself. Their living in booths had already visibly re-
presented to the people the defence and blessing of their God ; and
the foliage of these booths pointed out the glorious advantages of
the inheritance received from the Lord. But this festival followed
the completion of the ingathering of the fruits of the orchard and
vineyard, and therefore was still more adapted, on account of the
rich harvest of splendid and costly fruits which their inheritance
had yielded, and which they were about to enjoy in peace now that
the labour of agriculture was over, to fill their hearts with the
greatest joy and gratitude towards the Lord and Giver of them all,
and to make this festival a speaking representation of the blessed-
ness of the people of God when resting from their labours. This
blessedness which the Lord had prepared for His people, was also
expressed in the numerous burnt-offerings that were sacrificed on
every one of the seven days, and in which the congregation presented
itself soul and body to the Lord, upon the basis of a sin-offering, as
a living and holy sacrifice, to be more and more sanctified, trans-
formed, and perfected by the fire of His holy love (see my Archaol
i. p. 41 6). — Vers. 35-38. The eighth day was to be azereth, a closing
feast, and only belonged to the feast of Tabernacles so far as the
Digitized by
Google
chap. xxx. 223
Sabbath rest and holy meeting of the seventh feast-day were trans-
ferred to it; whilst, so far as its sacrifices were concerned, it resembled
the seventh new moon's day and the day of atonement, and was
thus shown to be the octave or close of the second festal circle (see
at Lev. xxiii. 36). — Ver. 39. The sacrifices already mentioned were
to be presented to the Lord on the part of the congregation, in
addition to the burnt-offerings, meat-offerings, drink-offerings, and
peace-offerings which individuals or families might desire to offer
either spontaneously or in consequence of vows. On the vowing of
burnt-offerings and peace-offerings, see chap. xv. 3, 8 ; Lev. xxii.
18, 21. — Ver. 40 forms the conclusion of the list of sacrifices in
chap, xxviii. and xxix.
INSTRUCTIONS AS TO THE FORCE OP VOWS. — CHAP. XXX.
The rules by which vows were to be legally regulated, so far as
their objects and their discharge were concerned, has been already
laid down in Lev. xxvii. ; but the chapter before us contains in-
structions with reference to the force of vows and renunciations.
These are so far in place in connection' with the general rules of
sacrifice, that vows related for the most part to the presentation
of sacrifices ; and even vows of renunciation partook of the character
of worship. The instructions in question were addressed (ver. 1) to
" the heads of the tribes," because they entered into the sphere of
civil rights, namely, into that of family life. — Ver. 2. At the head
there stands the general rule, <l If any one vow a vow to Jehovah, or
swear an oath, to bind his soul to abstinence, he shall not break his
word ; he shall do according to all that has gone out of his mouth:"
i.e. he shall keep or fulfil the vow, and the promise of abstinence, in
perfect accordance with his word. ,m fn is a positive vow, or promise
to give or sanctify any part of one's property to the Lord. IBS,
from "IDK, to bind or fetter, the negative vow, or vow of abstinence.
iE>M"?JJ "IBS "tDK; to take an abstinence upon his soul. In what
such abstinence consisted is not explained, because it was well
understood from traditional customs ; in all probability it consisted
chiefly in fasting and other similar abstinence from lawful things.
The Nazarite's vow, which is generally reckoned among the vows of
abstinence, is called neder in chap. vi. 2 sqq., not issar, because it
consisted not merely in abstinence from the fruit of the vine, but
also in the positive act of permitting the hair to grow freely in
honour of the Lord. The expression " swear an oath" (ver. 2 ; cf.
Digitized by
Google
224 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
ver. 13) shows that, as a rule, they bound themselves to abstinence
by an oath. The inf. constr., J>?Bfy is used here, as in other places,
for the inf. aba. (cf. Ges. § 131, 4, note 2). ?£, from 7?n, for ->nj,
as in Ezek. xxxix. 7 (cf. Ges. § 67, note 8), to desecrate (his word),
i.e. to leave it unfulfilled or break it. — Vers. 3-15 cbntain the rules
relating to positive and negative vows made by a woman, and four
different examples are given. The first case (vers. 3-5) is that of
a woman in her youth, while still unmarried, and living in her
father's house. If she made a vow of performance or abstinence,
and her father heard of it and remained silent, it was to stand, i.e.
to remain in force. But if her father held her back when he heard
of it, i.e. forbade her fulfilling it, it was not to stand or remain
in force, and Jehovah would forgive her because of her father's
refusal. Obedience to a father stood higher than a self-imposed
religious service. — The second case (vers. 6-8) was that of a vow of
performance or abstinence, made by a woman before her marriage,
and brought along with her (£v& " up° n herself") into her marriage.
In such a case the husband had to decide as to its validity, in the
same way as the father before her marriage. In the day when he
heard of it he could hold back his wife, i.e. dissolve her vow ; but
if he did not do this at once, he could not hinder its fulfilment
afterwards. ^OBb NB3D, gossip of her lips, that which is uttered
thoughtlessly or without reflection (cf. Lev. v. 4). This expression 1
implies that vows of abstinence were often made by unmarried
women without thought or reflection. — The third case (ver. 9) was
that of a vow made by a widow or divorced woman. Such a vow
had full force, because the woman was not dependent upon a
husband. — The fourth case (vers. 10-12) was that of a vow made
by a wife in her married state. Such a vow was to remain in force
if her husband remained silent when he heard of it, and did not
restrain her. On the other hand, it was to have no force if her
husband dissolved it at once. After this there follows the general
statement (vers. 13-16), that a husband could establish or dissolve
every vow of performance or abstinence made by his wife. If,
however, he remained silent " from day to day," he confirmed it by
his silence ; and if afterwards he should declare it void, he was to
bear his wife's iniquity. W^ the sin which the wife would have
had to bear if she had broken the vow of her own accord. This
consisted either in a sin-offering to expiate her sin (Lev. v. 4 sqq.) ;
or if this was omitted, in the punishment which God suspended over
the sin (Lev. v. 1). — Ver. 16, concluding formula.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXI. 1-12. 225
WAR OF REVENGE AGAINST THE MIDIANITES. — CHAP. XXXI.
Vers. 1-12. The Campaign. — After the people of Israel had
been mustered as the army of Jehovah, and their future relation
to the Lord had been firmly established by the order of sacrifice
that was given to them immediately afterwards, the Lord com-
manded Moses to carry out that hostility to the Midianites which
had already been commanded in chap. xxv. 16—18. Moses was to
revenge (i.e. to execute) the revenge of the children of Israel upon
the Midianites, and then to be gathered to his people, i.e. to die, as
had already been revealed to him (chap, xxvii. 13). " The revenge
of the children of Israel " was revenge for the wickedness which
the tribes of the Midianites who dwelt on the east of Moab (see at
chap. xxii. 4) had practised upon the Israelites, by seducing them
to the idolatrous worship of Baal Peor. This revenge is called the
"revenge of Jehovah" inver. 3, because the seduction had violated
the divinity and honour of Jehovah. The daughters of Moab had
also taken part in the seduction (chap. xxv. 1, 2) ; but they had
done so at the instigation of the Midianites (see p. 203), and not of
their own accord, and therefore the Midianites only were to atone
for the wickedness. — Vers. 3-6. To carry out this revenge, Moses
had 1000 men of each tribe delivered 0" , OB , J see at ver. 16) from
the families (alaphim, see chap. i. 16) of the tribes, and equipped
for war ; and these he sent to the army (into the war) along with
Phinehas the son of Eleazar the high priest, who carried the holy
vessels, viz. the alarm-trumpets, in his hand. Phinehas was attached
to the army, not as the leader of the soldiers, but as the high priest
with the holy trumpets (chap. x. 9), because the war was a holy
war of the congregation against the enemies of themselves and
their God. Phinehas had so distinguished himself by the zeal
which he had displayed against the idolaters (chap. xxv. 7), that it
was impossible to find any other man in all the priesthood to attach
to the army, who would equal him in holy zeal, or be equally
qualified to inspire the army with zeal for the holy conflict.
"The holy vessels" cannot mean the ark of the covenant on
account of the plural, which would be inapplicable to it ; nor the
Urim and Thummim, because Phinehas was not yet high priest,
and the expressien v3 would also be unsuitable to these. The
allusion can only be to the trumpets mentioned immediately after-
wards, the \ before rriiV'xn being the \ explic., " and in fact." Phi-
nehas took these in his hand, because the Lord had assigned them
PENT. — VOL. III. P
Digitized by
Google
226 THE FOURTH BOOK OF HOSES.
to His congregation, to bring them into remembrance before Him
in time of war, and to ensure His aid (chap. x. 9). — Vers. 7-10.
Of the campaign itself, the results are all that is recorded. No
doubt it terminated with a great battle, in which the Midianites
were taken unawares and completely routed. As it was a war of
vengeance of Jehovah, the victors slew all the males, i.e. all the
adult males, as the sequel shows, without quarter ; and " upon those
that were slain," i.e. in addition to them, the five Midianitish kings
and Balaam, who first advised the Midianites, according to ver. 16,
to tempt the Israelites to idolatry. The five kings were chiefs of
the larger or more powerful of the Midianitish tribes, as Zur is
expressly said to have been in chap. xxv. 15. In Josh. xiii. 21
they are called " vassals of Sihon," because Sihon had subjugated
them and made them tributary when he first conquered the land.
The women and children of the Midianites were led away prisoners;
and their cattle (behemah, beasts of draft and burden, as in Ex.
xx. 10), their flocks, and their goods taken away as spoil. The
towns in their dwellings, and all their villages (tiroth, tent-villages,
as in Gen. xxv. 16), were burnt down. The expression " towns in
their dwellings " leads to the conclusion that the towns were not
the property of the Midianites themselves, who were a nomad
people, but that they originally belonged in all probability to the
Moabites, and had been taken possession of by the Amorites under
Sihon. This is confirmed by Josh. xiii. 21, according to which
these five Midianitish vassals of Sihon dwelt in the land, i.e. in
the kingdom of Sihon. This also serves to explain why the con-
quest of their country is not mentioned in the account before us,
although it is stated in Joshua (l.c), that it was allotted to the
Reubenites with the kingdom of Sihon. — Vers. 11, 12. All this
booty (shalal, booty in goods), and all the prey in man and beast
(malkoack), was brought by the conquerors to Moses and Eleazar
and the congregation, into the camp in the steppes of Moab. In
ver. 12, , ?B' applies to the women and children who were taken
prisoners, rrtp?D to the cattle taken as booty, and 7>p to the rest
of the prey.
Vers. 13-18. Treatment of the Prisoners. — When Moses went
out to the front of the camp, with Eleazar and the princes of the
congregation to meet the returning warriors, he>was angry with
the commanders, because they had left all the women alive, since
it was they who had been the cause, at Balaam's instigation, of the
falling away of the Israelites from Jehovah to worship Peor ; and
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXI. 19-24. 227
he commanded all the male children to be slain, and every woman
who had lain with a man, and only the young girls who had
hitherto had no connection with a man to be left alive. 7|nn ^pB,
lit. the appointed persons, i.e. the officers of the army, who were
then divided into princes (captains) over thousands and hundreds.
— " Which came from the .battle" i.e. who had returned. The
question in ver. 15, "Have ye left all the women alive?" is an
expression of dissatisfaction, and reproof for their having done
this. ?VO"lDD? . . . Vn, " they have become to the Israelites to work
unfaithfulness towards Jehovah," i.e. they have induced them to
commit an act of unfaithfulness towards Jehovah. The word ">DD,
which only occurs in this chapter, viz. in vers. 5 and 16, appears to
be used in the sense of giving, delivering, and then, like jro, doing,
making, effecting. On the fact itself, see chap. xxv. 6 sqq. The
object of the command to put all the male children to death, was
to exterminate the whole nation, as it could not be perpetuated in
the women. Of the female sex, all were to be put to death who
had known the lying with a man, and therefore might possibly
have been engaged in the licentious worship of Peor (chap. xxv. 2),
to preserve the congregation from all contamination from that
abominable idolatry.
Vers. 19-24. Purification of the Warriors, the Prisoners, and
the Booty. — Moses commanded the men of war to remain for seven
days outside the camp of the congregation, to carry out upon the
third and seventh day the legal purification of such persons and
things as had been rendered unclean through contact with dead
bodies. Every one who had slain a soul (person), or touched one
who had been slain, was to be purified, whether he were a warrior
or a prisoner. And so also were all the clothes, articles of leather,
materials of goats' hair, and all wooden things. — Vers. 21-24. To
this end Eleazar, whose duty it was as high priest to see that the
laws of purification were properly observed, issued fuller instruc-
tions with reference to the purification of the different articles, in
accordance with the law in chap. xix. nori7B? D^Kan, those who
came to the war, i.e. who went into the battle (see at chap. x. 9).
" The ordinance of the law :" as in chap. xix. 2. The metal (gold,
silver, copper, tin, lead), all that usually comes into the fire, i.e.
that will bear the fire, was to be drawn through the fire, that it
might become clean, and was then to be sprinkled with water of
purification (chap. xix. 9); but everything that would not bear
the fire was to be drawn through water. — The washing of clothes
Digitized by
Google
228 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
on the seventh day was according to the rule laid down in chap.
xix. 19.
- Vers. 25-47. Distribution of the Booty. — God directed Moses,
with Eleazar and the heads of the fathers' houses ("fathers" for
"fathers' houses:" see at Ex. vi. 14) of the congregation, to take
' the whole of the booty in men and cattle, and divide it into two
halves : one for the men of war (norpen 'fe'Bfo, those who grasped at
war, who engaged in war), the other for the congregation, and to
levy a tribute upon it (MD=; HMD, computatio, a certain amount : see
Ex. xii. 4) for Jehovah. Of the half that came to the warriors, one
person and one head of cattle were to be handed over to Eleazar the
priest out of every 500 {i.e. one-fifth per cent.), as a heave-offering
for Jehovah; and of the other half that was set apart for the
children of Israel, i.e. for the congregation, one out of every fifty
(i.e. 2 per cent.) was to be taken for the Levites. tHK, laid hold of,
i.e. snatched out of the whole number during the process of counting;
not seized or touched by the lot, as in 1 Chron. xxiv. 6, as there
was no reason for resorting to the lot in this instance. The division
of the booty into two equal halves, one of which was given to the
warriors, and the other to the congregation that had taken no part in
the war, was perfectly reasonable and just. As the 12,000 warriors
had been chosen out of the whole congregation to carry on the war
on their behalf, the congregation itself could properly lay claim to its
share of the booty. But as the 12,000 had had all the trouble, hard-
ships, and dangers of the war, they could very properly reckon upon
some reward for their service ; and this was granted them by their
receiving quite as much as the whole of the congregation which
had taken no part in the war, — in fact, more, because the warriors
only gave one-fifth per cent, of their share as a thank-offering for
the victory that had been granted them, whilst those who remained
at home had to give 2 per cent, of their share to Jehovah for
the benefit of the priests and Levites. The arrangement, however,
was only made for this particular case, and not as a law for all
times, although it was a general rule that those who remained at
home received a share of the booty brought back by the warriors
(cf . Josh. xxii. 8 ; 1 Sam. xxx. 24, 25 ; 2 Mace. viii. 28, 30).—
Vers. 31 sqq. The booty, viz. " the rest of the booty, which the
men of war had taken," i.e. all the persons taken prisoners that had
not been put to death, and all the cattle taken as booty that had
not been consumed during the march home, amounted to 675,000
head of small cattle, 72,000 oxen, 61,000 asses, and 32,000 maidens.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXI. 48-54. v 229
Each half, therefore, consisted of 337,500 head of small cattle,
36,000 oxen, 30,500 asses, and 16,000 maidens (vers. 36 and 43-46).
Of the one half the priests received 675 head of small cattle, 72
oxen, 61 asses, and 32 maidens for Jehovah; and these Moses
handed over to Eleazar, in all probability for the maintenance of
the priests, in the same manner as the tithes (chap, xviii. 26-28,
and Lev. xxvii. 30-33), ho that they might put the cattle into their
own flocks (chap. xxxv. 3), and slay oxen or sheep as they required
them, whilst they sold the asses, and made slaves of the girls ; and
not in the character of a vow, in which case the clean animals
would have had to be sacrificed, and the unclean animals, as well
as the human beings, to be redeemed (Lev. xxvii. 2-13). Of the
other half, the Levites received the fiftieth part (vers. 43-47), that
is to say, 6750 head of small cattle, 720 oxen, 610 asses, and 320
girls. The Wrrvno ("the half," etc.), in ver. 42, is resumed in
ver. 47, and the enumeration of the component parts of this half in
vers. 43-46 is to be regarded as parenthetical.
Vers. 48-54. Sacred Oblations of the Officers. — When the officers
reviewed the men of war who were " in their hand," i.e. who had
fonght the battle under their command, and found not a single man
missing,, they felt constrained to give a practical expression to their
gratitude for this miraculous preservation of the whole of the men,
by presenting a sacrificial gift to Jehovah ; they therefore brought
all the golden articles that they had received as booty, and offered
them to the Lord " for the expiation of their souls " (see at Lev.
i. 4), namely, with the feeling that they were not worthy of any
such grace, and not " because they had done wrong in failing to
destroy all the enemies of Jehovah" (Knobel). This gift, which
was offered as a heave-offering for Jehovah, consisted of the follow-
ing articles of gold : 'HV?^, " arm-rings" according to 2 Sam. i. 10
(LXX. yeKiZ&va ; Suidas : yeKiZovai Kocrfwl nrepl roil? fHpayiovas,
mkovvrai Be fipaytakia) ; "TOL bands, generally armlets (Gen. xxiv.
22, etc.) ; W3D, signet-rings ; yiV, hoops, — according to Ezek. xvi.
12, ear-rings; and KKS, gold balls (Ex. xxxv. 22). They amounted
in all to 16,750 shekels ; and the men of war had received their
own booty in addition to this. This gift, presented on the part of
the officers, was brought into the tabernacle " as a memorial of the
children of Israel .before Jehovah" (cf. Ex. xxx. 16); that is to
say, it was placed in the treasury of the sanctuary.
The fact that the Israelites did not lose a single man in the
battle, is certainly a striking proof of the protection of God ; but it
Digitized by
Google
230 THE FOUBTH BOOK OF MOSES.
is not so marvellous as to furnish any good ground for calling in
question the correctness of the narrative. 1 The Midianites were
a nomad tribe, who lived by rearing flocks and herds, and therefore
were not a warlike people. Moreover, they were probably attacked
quite unawares, and being unprepared, were completely routed and
cut down without quarter. The quantity of booty brought home is
also not so great as to appear incredible. Judging from the 32,000
females who had never lain with a man, the tribes governed by the
five kings may have numbered about 130,000 or 150,000, and there-
fore not have contained much more than 35,000 fighting men, who
might easily have been surprised by 12,000 brave warriors, and
entirely' destroyed. Aud again, there is nothing in the statement
that 675,000 sheep and goats, 72,000 oxen, and 61,000 asses were
taken as booty from these tribes, to astonish any one who has formed
correct notions of the wealth of nomad tribes in flocks and herds.
The only thing that could appear surprising is, that there are no
camels mentioned. But it is questionable, in the first place, whether
the Midianites were in the habit of rearing camels ; and, in the
second place, if they did possess them, it is still questionable whether
the Israelitish army took them away, and did not rather put to death
all that they found, as being of no value to the Israelites in their
existing circumstances. Lastly, the quantity of jewellery seized as
booty is quite in harmony with the well-known love of nomads, and
even of barbarous tribes, for ornaments of this kind ; and the pecu-
liar liking of the Midianites for such things is confirmed by the
account in Judg. viii. 26, according to which Gideon took as much
as 1700 shekels in weight of golden rings from the Midianites alone,
beside ornaments of other kinds. If we take the golden shekel at
10 thalers (30 shillings : see vol. ii. p. 250), the value of the orna-
ments taken by the officers under Moses would be about 167,500
thalers (L.25,125). It is quite possible that the kings and other
chiefs, together with their wives, may have possessed as much as
this.
1 RosenmiiUer has cited an example from Tacitus (Ann. ziii. 39), of the
Romans having slaughtered all the foe without losing a single man on the cap-
ture of a Parthian castle ; and another from Strdbo (xvi. 1128), of a battle in
which 1000 Arabs were slain, and only 2 Romans. And H&vernick mentions a
similar account from the life of Saladin in his Introduction (i. 2, p. 452).
Digitized by
Google
chap. xxxn. 1-6. 231
DIVISION OF THE CONQUERED LAND BEYOND THE JORDAN AMONG
THE TRIBES OP REUBEN, GAD, AND HALF-MANASSEH. CHAP.
XXXII. 1
Vers. 1-5. The Eeubenites and Gadites, who had very large
flocks and herds, petitioned Moses, Eleazar, and the princes of the
congregation, to give them the conquered land of Gilead for a pos-
session, as a land that was peculiarly adapted for flocks, and not to
make them pass over the Jordan. 1ND Dixy, ." very strong," is an
apposition introduced at the close of the sentence to give emphasis
to the 3"i. The land which they wished for, they called the " land
of JaSzer (see chap. xxi. 32), and the land of Gilead? They put
Jaezer first, probably because this district was especially rich in
excellent pasture land. Gilead was the land to the south and north
of the Jabbok (see at Deut. in. 10), the modern provinces of Belka
in the south between the Jabbok and the Arnon, and Jebel Ajlun
to the north of the Jabbok, as far as the Mandhur. Ancient Gilead
still shows numerous traces of great fertility even in its present
desolation, covered over as it is with hundreds of ruins of old towns
and hamlets. Belka is mountainous towards the north, but in the
south as far as the Arnon it is for the most part table-land ; and in
the mountains, as Buckingham says, "we find on every hand a
pleasant shade from fine oaks and wild pistachio-trees, whilst the
whole landscape has more of a European character. The pasturage
1 This chapter is also cut in pieces by Knobel: vers. 1, 2, 16-19, 24, 28-80,
and 33-38, being assigned to the Elohist ; and the remainder, viz. vers. 3-5,
6-15, 20-23, 25-27, 31, 32, and 39-42, to the Jehovist. But as the supposed
Holistic portions are fragmentary, inasmuch as it is assumed, for example, in
ver. 19, that the tribes of Reuben and Gad had already asked for the land of
the Jordan and been promised it by Moses, whereas there is nothing of the kind
stated in vers. 1 and 2, the Blohistic account is said to have been handed down
in a fragmentary state. The main ground for this violent hypothesis is the fancy
of the critic, that the tribes mentioned could not have been so shameless as to
trish to remain on the eastern side of the Jordan, and leave the conquest of
Canaan to the other tribes, and that the willingness to help their brethren to
conquer Canaan which they afterwards express in vers. 16 sqq., is irreconcilable
with their previous refusal to do this, — arguments which need no refutation
for an unprejudiced reader of the Bible who is acquainted with the selfishness
of the natural heart. The arguments founded upon the language employed are
also all weak. Because there are words in vers. 1 and 29, which the critics
pronounce to be Jehovistic, they must proceed, both here and elsewhere, to
remove all that offends them with their critical scissors, in order that they may
uphold the full force of their dicta I
Digitized by
Google
232 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
iii Belka is much better than it is anywhere else throughout the
whole of southern Syria, so that the Bedouins say, < You can find
no country like Belka.' The oxen and sheep of this district are con-
sidered the very best" (see v. Eaumer, Pal. p. 82). The mountains
of Gilead on both sides of the Jabbok are covered for the most part
with glorious forests of oak. " Jebel Ajlun" says Robinson (Pal.
App. 162), "presents the most charming rural scenery that I have
seen in Syria. A continued forest of noble trees, chiefly the ever-
green oak (Sindian), covers a large part of it, while the ground
beneath is covered with luxuriant grass, which we found a foot or
more in height, and decked with a rich variety of flowers" (see v.
Haunter, ut sup.). This also applies to the ancient Basan, which
included the modern plains of Jaulan and Hauran, that were also
covered over with ruins of former towns and hamlets. The plain
of Hauran, though perfectly treeless, is for all that very fertile, rich
in corn, and covered in some places with such luxuriant grass that
horses have great difficulty in making their way through it ; for
which reason it is a favourite resort of the Bedouins {Burckhardt,
p. 393). " The whole of Hauran," says Sitter {Erdkunde, xv. pp.
988, 989), " stretches out as a splendid, boundless plain, between
Hermon on the west, Jebel Hauran on the east, and Jebel Ajlun
to the south ; but there is not a single river in which there is water
throughout the whole of the summer. It is covered, however, with
a large number of villages, every one* of which has its cisterns, its
ponds, or its birket ; and these are filled in the rainy season, and by
the winter torrents from the snowy Jebel Hauran. Wherever the
soil, which is everywhere black, deep, dark brown, or ochre-coloured,
and remarkably fertile, is properly cultivated, you find illimitable
corn-fields, and chiefly golden fields of wheat, which furnish Syria
in all directions with its principal food. By far the larger part of
this plain, which was a luxuriant garden in the time of the Romans,
is now uncultivated, waste, and without inhabitants, and therefore
furnishes the Bedouins of the neighbourhood with the desired para-
dise for themselves and their flocks." On its western slope Jebel
Hauran is covered with splendid forests of oak, and rich in meadow
land for flocks {Burckhardt, pp. 152, 169, 170, 173, 358 ; Wetstein,
Reiseber. pp. 39 sqq. and 88). On the nature of the soil of Hauran,
see at Deut. iii. 4. The plain of Jaulan appears in the distance
like the continuation of Hauran {Robinson, App. 162) ; it has much
bush-land in it, but the climate is not so healthy as in Hauran
(Seetzen, i. pp. 353, 130, 131). " In general, Hauran, Jaulan, el
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXII. 6-16. 233
Botthin, el Belka, and Ejlnn, are the paradise of nomads, and in all
their wanderings eastwards they find no pasture like it" {Seetzen, i.
p. 364). tf pD, a locality, or district, njpo DipD = ropo jn« ( ver .
4), a district adapted for grazing. In ver. 3 the country is more
distinctly defined by the introduction of the names of a number of
important' towns, whilst the clause " the country which the Lord
smote before the congregation of Israel," in which the defeat of
Sihon is referred to,, describes it as one that was without a ruler,
and therefore could easily be taken possession of. For more minute
remarks as to the towns themselves, see at vers. 34 sqq. On the
construction ns }fp, see at Gen. iv. 18. — The words, " let us not go
over the Jordan" may be understood as expressing nothing more
than the desire of the speakers not to receive their inheritance on
the western side of the Jordan, without their having any intention
of withdrawing their help from the other tribes in connection with
the conquest of Canaan, according to their subsequent declaration
(vers. 16 sqq.) ; but they may also be understood as expressing a
wish to settle at once in the land to the east of the Jordan, and
leave the other tribes to conquer Canaan alone. Moses understood
them in the latter sense (vers. 6 sqq.), and it is probable that this
was their meaning, as, when Moses reproved them, the speakers did
not reply that they had not cherished the intention attributed to
them, but simply restricted themselves to the promise of co-opera-
tion in the conquest of Canaan. But even in this sense their
request did not manifest " a shamelessness that would hardly be
historically true" (Knobel). It may very well be explained from
the opinion which they cherished, and which is perfectly intelligible
after the rapid and easy defeat of the two mighty kings of the
Amorites, Sihon and Og, that the remaining tribes were quite
strong enough to conquer the land of Canaan on the west of the
Jordan. But for all that, the request of the Keubenites and Gadites
did indicate an utter want of brotherly feeling, and complete in-
difference to the common interests of the whole nation, so that they
thoroughly deserved the reproof which they received from Moses.
Vers. 6-15. Moses first of all blames their want of brotherly
feeling : " Shall your brethren go into the war, and ye sit here t"
He then calls their attention to the fact, that by their disinclina-
tion they would take away the courage and inclination of the other
tribes to cross over the Jordan and conquer the land, and would
bring the wrath of God upon Israel even more than their fathers
who were sent from Kadesh to spy out the land, and who led away
Digitized by
Google
234 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
the heart of the people into rebellion through their unfavourable
account of the inhabitants of Canaan, and brought so severe a
judgment upon the congregation. JO STTIK *W?, to hold away the
heart, i.e. render a person averse to anything. The Keri fltMB, as
in ver. 9, is unquestionably to be preferred to the Kal pK«n, in
the Kethib of ver. 7. — In vers. 8-13, Moses reminds them of -the
occurrences described in chap. xiii. and xiv. On the expression,
"wholly followed Jehovah" cf. chap. xiv. 24. The words, "He drove
them about in the desert" caused them to wander backwards and for-
wards in it for forty years, point back to chap. xiv. 33-35. — Ver.
14. " Behold, ye rise up instead of your fathers" i.e. ye take their
place, " an increase (tV&Vf, from nan ; equivalent to a brood) of
sinners, to augment yet the burning of ilie wrath of Jehovah against
Israel" TV 1BD, to add to, or increase. — Ver. 15. " If ye draw back
behind Him," i.e. resist the fulfilment of the will of God, to bring
Israel to Canaan, " He will leave it (Israel) still longer in the desert,
and ye prepare destruction for all this nation."
Vers. 16-27. The persons thus reproved came near to Moses,
and replied, " We will build sheep-folds here for our flocks, and
towns for our children; but we will equip ourselves hastily (D'??,
part. pass, hasting) before the children of Israel, till we bring them
to their place" (i.e. to Canaan). Jfcfcf rrYj?, folds or pens for flocks,
that were built of stones piled up one upon another (1 Sam. xxiv.
4). 1 By the building of towns, we are to understand the rebuilding
and fortification of them. *)?, the children, including the women,
and such other defenceless members of the family as were in need
of protection (see at Ex. xii. 37). When their families were
secured in fortified towns against the inhabitants of the land, the
men who could bear arms would not return to their houses till the
children of Israel, i.e. the rest of the tribes, had all received their
inheritance : for they did not wish for an inheritance on the other
side of Jordan and farther on, if QS) their inheritance was assigned
them on this side Jordan towards the east. The application of the
expression ft"|»n 13JJD to the land on the east of the Jordan, as well
as to that on the west, points to a time when the Israelites had not
1 According to Wetstein (Reiseber. p. 29), it is a regular custom with the
nomads in Leja, to surround every place, where they pitch their tents, with a
Sira, i.e. with an enclosure of stones about the height of a man, that the flocks
may not be scattered in the night, and that they may know at once, from the
noise made by the falling of the smaller stones which are laid at the top, if a
wolf attempts to enter the enclosure during the night.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXII. 16-27. 235
yet obtained a firm footing in Canaan. At that time the land to
the west of the river could very naturally be spoken of as " beyond
the Jordan" from the subjective stand-point of the historian, who
was then on the east of the river ; whereas, according to the ob-
jective and geographical usage, the land " beyond Jordan" signifies
the country to the east of the river. But in order to prevent mis-
understanding, in this particular instance the expression P15 "I3JJ is
defined more precisely as fn^j 1 ?, " towards the east," when it is in-
tended to apply to the land on the east of the Jordan. — Vers. 20-24.
Upon this declaration 'Moses absolves them from all guilt, and pro-
mises them the desired land for a possession, on condition that they
fulfil their promise; but he reminds them again of the sin that
they will commit, and will have to atone for, if their promise is not
fulfilled, and closes with the admonition to build towns for their
families and pens for their flocks, and to do what they have pro-
mised. Upon this they promise again (vers. 25-27), through their
spokesman (as the singular "ION'5 in ver. 25, and the suffix in tfwt
in ver. 27, clearly show), that they will fulfil his command. The
use of the expression u before Jehovah," in the words, " go armed
before Jehovah to war," in vers. 20 and 21, maybe explained from
the fact, that in the war which they waged at the command of their
God, the Israelites were the army of Jehovah, with Jehovah in the
midst. Hence the ark of the covenant was taken into the war, as
the vehicle and substratum of the presence of Jehovah ; whereas it
remained behind in the camp, when the people wanted to press
forward into Canaan of their own accord (chap. xiv. 44). But if
this is the meaning of the expression " before Jehovah," we may
easily understand why the Beubenites and Gadites do not make use
of it in ver. 17, namely, because they only promise to go equipped
"before the children of Israel," i.e. to help their brethren to
conquer Canaan. In ver. 32 they also adopt the expression, after
hearing it from the mouth of Moses (ver. 20). 1 D?i?3, innocent,
" free from guilt before Jehovah and before Israel." By drawing
back from participation in the war against the Canaanites, they
would not only sin against Jehovah, who had promised Canaan to
all Israel, and commanded them to take it, but also against Israel
1 This completely sets aside the supposed discrepancy which Knobel adduces
in support of his fragmentary hypothesis, viz. that the Elohist writes " before
Israel" in vers. 17 and 29, when the Jehovist would write " before Jehovah,"— a
statement which is not even correct ; since we find " before Jehovah" in ver. 29,
which Knobel is obliged to erase from the text in order to establish his assertion.
Digitized by
Google
236 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
itself, i.e. against the rest of the tribes, as is more fully stated in
vers. 7-15. In ver. 226, " before Jehovah" signifies according to
the judgment of Jehovah, with divine approval. DarjNtsn yrw, " ye
will know your sin," which will overtake (K??) OT smite yon, i.e. ye
will have to make atonement for them.
Vers. 28-33. Moses thereupon commanded Eleazar, Joshua,
and the heads of the tribes of Israel, i.e. the persons entrusted in
chap, xxxiv. 17 sqq. with the division of the land of Canaan, to
give the Gadites and Reubenites the land of Gilead for a possession,
after the conquest of Canaan, if they should go along with them
across the Jordan equipped for battle. But if they should not do
this, they were to be made possessors (i.e. to be settled ; tnita in a
passive sense, whereas in Gen. xxxiv. 10, xlvii. 27, it is reflective,
to fix oneself firmly, to settle) in the land of Canaan along with the
other tribes. In the latter case, therefore, they were not only to
receive no possession in the land to the east of the Jordan, but were
to be compelled to go over the Jordan with their wives and children,
and to receive an inheritance there for the purpose of preventing a
schism of the nation. — Ver. 31. The Gadites and Reubenites re-
peated their promise once more (ver. 25), and added still further
(ver. 32) : " We will pass over armed before Jehovah into the land
of Canaan, and let our inheritance be with us (i.e. remain to us)
beyond the Jordan." — Ver. 33. Moses then gave to the sons of Gad
and Reuben, and the half-tribe of Manasseh, the kingdom of Sihon
king of the Amorites, and Og king of Bashan, namely, " the land
according to its towns, in (its) districts, (namely) the towns of the land
round about," i.e. the whole of the land with its towns and the dis-
tricts belonging to them, or surrounding the towns. It appears
strange that the half-tribe of Manasseh is included here for the
first time at the close of the negotiations, whereas it is not men-
tioned at all in connection with the negotiations themselves. This
striking fact may easily be explained, however, on the supposition
that it was by the two tribes of Reuben and Gad alone that the
request was made for the land of Gilead as a possession ; but that
when Moses granted this request, he did not overlook the fact, that
some of the families of Manasseh had conquered various portions of
Gilead and Bashan (ver. 39), and therefore gave these families, at
the same time, the districts which they had conquered, for their
inheritance, that the whole of the conquered land mjght be distri-
buted at once. As 0. v. Gerlach observes, " the participation of
this half-tribe in the possession is accounted for in ver. 39." Moses
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXII. 34-86. 237
restricted himself, however, to a general conveyance of the land
that had been taken on the east of the Jordan to these two and a
half tribes for their inheritance, without sharing it amongst them,
or fixing the boundaries of the territory of each particular tribe.
That was left to the representatives of the nation mentioned inver.
28, and was probably not carried out till the return of the fighting
men belonging to these tribes, who went with the others over the
Jordan. In the verses which follow, we find only those towns
mentioned which were fortified by the tribes of Gad and Reuben,
and in which they constructed sheep-folds (vers. 34-38), and the
districts which the families of Manasseh had taken and received as
their possession (vers. 39-42).
Vers. 34-36. The Gadites built, i.e. restored and fortified, the
following places. Dibon, also called Dibon Gad, an hour's journey to
the north of the central Arnon (see p. 149). Ataroth, probably pre-
served in the extensive ruins of Attarus, on Jebel Attarus, between
el Korriath (Kureyat) and Mkaur, i.e. Machaerus (see Seetzen, ii.
p. 342). Aroer, not the Aroer before Kabbah, which was allotted
to the Gadites (Josh. xiii. 25), as v. Raumer supposes ; but the
Aroer of Reuben in the centre of the valley of the Arnon (Josh.
xii. 2, xiii. 9, 16), which is still to be seen in the ruins of Araayr,
on the edge of the lofty rocky wall which bounds the Modjeb
(Burckhardt, p. 633). Atroth Shophan: only mentioned here;
situation unknown. Jaezer : probably to be sought for in the ruins
of es Szir, to the west of Amman (see at chap. xxi. 32). Jogbehah :
only mentioned again in Judg. viii. 11, and preserved in the ruins
of Jebeiha, about two hours to the north-west of Amman ^Burck-
hardt, p. 618 ; Robinson, App. p. 168). Beih-Nimrah, contracted
into Nimrab (ver. 3), according to Josh. xiii. 27, in the valley of
the Jordan, and according to the Onomast. (s. v. Brj6vaj3pdv) Beih-
amnaram, five Roman miles to the north of Libia* (Bethharam),
now to be seen in the ruins of Nimrein or Nemrin, where the Wady
Shaib enters the Jordan (Burckhardt, pp. 609, 661 ; Robinson, ii.
P- 279), in a site abounding in water and pasturage (Seetzen, ii.
PP- 318, 716). Beth-Haran, or Beth-Haram (Josh. xiii. 27) : Beih-
ramphtlia, according to Josephus, Ant. xviii. 2, 1, which was called
Julias, in honour of the wife of Augustus. According to the Ono-
mast. it was called Beth-Ramtha by the Syrians (NOB"] rMJ, the form
of the Aramsean stat. emphat.'), and was named Livias by Herod
Antipas, in honour of Livia, the wife of Augustus. It has been
preserved in the ruins of Rameh, not far from the mouth of the
Digitized by
Google
238 THE FOUETH BOOK OF MOSES.
Wady Hesban (Burckhardt, p. 661, and Robinson, ii. 305). The
words 'U1 "ixao ny in ver. 36 are governed by u?n in ver. 34 :
" they built them as fortified cities and folds for flocks," i.e. they
fortified them, and built folds in them.
Vers. 37 and 38. The Reubenites built Heshbon, the capital of
king Sihon (see chap. xxi. 16), which was allotted to the tribe of
Reuben (Josh. xiii. 17), but relinquished to the Gadites, because it
was situated upon the border of their territory, and given up by
them to the Levites (Josh. xxi. 39 ; 1 Chron. vi. 66). It stood almost
in the centre between the Arnon and Jabbok, opposite to Jericho,
and, according to the Onomast., twenty Roman miles from the
Jordan, where the ruins of a large town of about a mile in circum-
ference are still to be seen, with deep bricked wells, and a large
reservoir, bearing the ancient name of Hesban or Husban (Seetzen ;
Burckhardt, p. 623 ; Robinson, Pal. ii. 278 ; cf. v. Raumer, Pal. p.
262 ; and Ritter's Erdkunde, xv. p. 1176). — Elealeh : half-an-hour's
journey to the north-east of Heshbon, now called el Aal, i.e. the
height, upon the top of a hill, from which you can see the whole of
southern Belka ; it is now in ruins with many cisterns, pieces of
wall, and foundations of houses (Burckhardt, p. 623). — Kirjathaitn,
probably to the south-west of Medeba, where the ruins of el Teym
are now to be found (see at Gen. xiv. 5). Nebo, on Mount Nebo
(see at chap, xxvii. 12). The Onomast. places the town eight
Roman miles to the south of Heshbon, whilst the mountain is six
Roman miles to the west of that town. Baal-Meon, called Beon
in ver. 3, Beih-Meon in Jer. xlviii. 23, and more fully Beth-Baal-
Meon in Josh. xiii. 17, is probably to be found, not in the ruins of
Maein discovered by Seetzen and Legh, an hour's journey to the
south-west of Tueme (Teim), and the same distance to the north of
Habbis, on the north-east of Jebel Attarus, and nine Roman miles
to the south of Heshbon, as most of the modern commentators
from Rosenmuller to Knobel suppose ; but in the ruins of Myun,
mentioned by Burckhardt (p. 624), three-quarters of an hour to
the south-east of Heshbon, where we find it marked upon Kiepert's
and Van de Velde's maps. 1 Shibmah (ver. 3, Shebam), which was
only 500 paces from Heshbon, according to Jerome (on Isa. xiv. 8),
1 Although Baal-Meon is unquestionably identified with Maein in the Onom.
(see v. Raumer, Pal. p. 259), 1 Chron. v. 8 is decidedly at variance with this.
It is stated there that " Bela dwelt in Aroer, and even unto Nebo and Baal-
Meon," a statement which places Baal-Meon in the neighbourhood of Nebo,
like the passage before us, and is irreconcilable with the supposition that it was
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXII. 87, 88. 239
has apparently disappeared, without leaving a trace behind. 1 Thus
all the places built by the Reubenites were but a short distance
from Heshbon, and surrounded this capital ; whereas those built by
the Gadites were some of them to the south of it, on the Arnon, and
others to the north, towards Rabbath-Ammon. It is perfectly obvi-
ous from this, that the restoration of these towns took place before
the distribution of the land among these tribes, without any regard
to their possession afterwards. In the distribution, therefore, the
southernmost of the towns built by the Gadites, viz. Aroer, Dibon,
and Ataroth, fell to the tribe of Reuben ; and Heshbon, which
was built by the Reubenites, fell to the tribe of Gad. The words
DB> n'SMD, " changed of name," are governed by U3: " they built the
towns with an alteration of their names," mutatis nominibus (for 33D,
in the sense of changing, see Zech. xiv. 10). There is not sufficient
ground for altering the text, DS? into "W (Knobet), according to the
irepiKvicXeofieva'i of the LXX., or the irepiTeret^ur/iivtK of Symtna-
chus. The Masoretic text is to be found' not only in the Chaldee,
the Syriac, the Vulgate, and the Saadic versions, but also in the '
Samaritan. The expression itself, too, cannot be justly described
as " awkward," nor is it a valid objection that the naming is men-
tioned afterwards ; for altering the name of a town and giving it
a new name are not tautological. The insertion of the words,
"their names being changed," before Shibmah, is an indication
that the latter place did not receive any other name. Moreover,
the new names which the builders gave to these towns did not con-
tinue in use long, but were soon pressed out by the old ones again.
"And they called by names the names of the towns:" this is a
identical with Matin in the neighbourhood of Attarus. In the case of Seetzen,
however, the identification of Matin with Baal-Meon is connected with the sup-
position, which is now generally regarded as erroneous, namely, that Nebo is the
same as the Jebel Attarus. (See, on the other hand, Hengstenberg, Balaam ;
and Ritter's Erdkwde, xv. pp. 1187 sqq.)
1 The difference in the forms Shibmah, Baal-Meon (ver. 38), and Beth-Nimrah
(ver. 86), instead of Shebam, Beon, and Nimrah (ver. 3), is rendered useless as a
proof that ver. 3 is Jehovistic, and vers. 36-38 Elohistic, from the simple fact
that Baal-Meon itself is a contraction of Beth-Baal-Meon (Josh. xiii. 17). If
the Elohist could write this name fully in one place and abbreviated in another,
he could just as well contract it still further, and by exchanging the labials call
it Beon ; and so also he could no doubt omit the Beth in the case of Nimrah, and
nse the masculine form Shebam in the place of Shibmah. The contraction of the
lames in ver. 3 is especially connected with the fact, that diplomatic exactness
was not required for an historical account, but that the abbreviated forms in
wmmon use were quite sufficient.
Digitizi
ed by Google
240 THE FOUETH BOOK OF MOSES.
roundabout way of saying, they called the towns by (other, or
new) names : cf. 1 Chron. vi. 50.
Vers. 39-42. Moses gave the Manassites the land which was
conquered by them ; in fact, the whole of the kingdom of Bashan,
including not only the province of Bashan, but the northern half of
Gilead (see at chap. xxi. 33, 34). Of this the sons of Machir re-
ceived GKlead, the modern Jebel Ajlun, between the Jabbok (Zerka)
and the Mandhur (Hieromax, Jarmuk), because they had taken it
and driven out the Amorites and destroyed them (see Deut. iii. 13).
The imperfects in ver. 39 are to be understood in the sense of plu-
perfects, the different parts being linked together by 1 consec. accord-
ing to the simple style of the Semitic historical writings explained
in the note on Gen. ii. 19, and the leading thought being preceded
by the clauses which explain it, instead of their being logically
subordinated to it. " The sons of Machir went to Gilead and took
it ... . and Moses gave" etc., instead of " Moses gave Gilead to
the sons of Machir, who had gone thither and taken it . . . ." The
words aa 3E?i, " Machir dwelt therein (in Gilead)," do not point to
a later period than the time of Moses, but simply state that the
Machirites took possession of Gilead. As soon as Moses had given
them the conquered land for their possession, they no doubt brought
their families, like the Gadites and Reubenites, and settled them in
fortified towns, that they might dwell there in safety, whilst the
fighting men helped the other tribes to conquer Canaan. 3tt^ signi-
fies not merely " to dwell," but literally to place oneself, or settle
down (e.g. Gen. xxxvi. 8, etc.), and is even applied to the temporary
sojourn of the Israelites in particular encampments (chap. xx. 1).
— Machir (ver. 40) : for the sons of Machir, or Machirites (chap,
xxvi. 29). But as Gilead does not mean the whole of the land with
this name, but only the northern half, so the sons of Machir are not
the whole of his posterity, but simply those who formed the family
of Machirites which bore its father's name (chap. xxvi. 29), i.e. the
seven fathers' houses or divisions of the family, the heads of which
are named in 1 Chron. v. 24. The other descendants of Machir
through Gilead, who formed the six families of Gilead mentioned
in chap. xxvi. 29-33, and Josh. xvii. 2, received their inheritance
in Canaan proper (Josh. xvii.). — Ver. 41. The family of Manasseh
named after Machir included " Jair the son (i.e. descendant) of
Manasseh." Jair, that is to say, was the grandson of a daughter
of Machir the son of Manasseh, and therefore a great-grandson of
Manasseh on the mother's side. His father Segub was the son of
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXHI 1-49. 241
Hezron of the tribe of Judah, who had married a daughter of
Manasseh (1 Chron. ii. 21, 22) ; so that Jair, or rather Segub, had
gone over with his descendants into the maternal tribe, contrary to
the ordinary rule, and probably because Machir had portioned his
daughter with a rich dowry like an heiress. Jair took possession
of the whole of the province of Argob in Bashan, i.e. in the plain of
Jaulan and Hauran (Deut. iii. 4 and 14), and gave the conquered
towns the name of Havvoth Jair, i.e. Jair's-lives (see at Deut. iii. 14).
— Ver. 42. Nobah, whose family is never referred to, but who pro-
bably belonged, like Jair, to one of the families of Machirites, took
the town of Kenath and its daughters, i.e. the smaller towns depen-
dent upon it (see chap. xxi. 25), and gave it his own name Nobali.
The name has not been preserved, and is not to be sought, as
Kurtz supposes, in the village of Nowa (Newe), in Jotan, which is
mentioned by Burekhardt (p. 443), and was once a town of half
an hour's journey in circumference. For Kenath, which is only
mentioned again in 1 Chron. ii. 23 as having been taken from the
Israelites by Gesur and Aram, is KdvaOa, which Josephus (de bell.
Jud. i. 19, 2) and Ptolemy speak of as belonging to Coelesyria, and
Pliny (h. n. 5, 16) to Decapolis, and which was situated, according
to Jerome, "in the region of Trachonitis, near to Bostra." The
ruins are very extensive even now, being no less than 2£ or 3 miles
in circumference, and containing magnificent remains of palaces
from the times of Trajan and Hadrian. It is on the western slope
of Jebel Hauran, and is only inhabited by a few families of Druses.
The present name is Kanuat. (For descriptions, see Seetzen, i. pp.
78 sqq. ; Burekhardt, pp. 157 sqq. ; cf. Ritter, Erdk.)
list- of Israel's encampments. — chap, xxxiii. 1-49.
As the Israelites had ended their wanderings through the
desert, when they arrived in the steppes of Moab by the Jordan
opposite to Jericho (chap. xxii. 1), and as they began to take
possession when the conquered land beyond Jordan was portioned
out (chap, xxxii.), the history of the desert wandering closes with
a list of the stations which they had left behind them. This list
was written out by Moses " at the command of Jehovah " (ver. 2),
as a permanent memorial for after ages, as every station which
Israel left behind on the journey from Egypt to Canaan " through
the great and terrible desert," was a memorial of the grace' and
faithfulness with which the Lord led His people safely "in the
PENT. — VOL. III. Q
Digitized by
Google
242 THE FOURTH BOOK OP MOSES.
desert land and In the waste howling wilderness, and kept him
as the apple of His eye, as an eagle fluttereth over her young,
spreadeth abroad her wings, taketh them, beareth them on her
wings " (Ex. xix. 4 ; Deut. xxxii. 10 sqq.).
Vers. 1-15. The first and second verses form the heading:
" These are the marches of the children of Israel, which they marched
out" i.e. the marches which they made from one place to another,
on going ont of Egypt. P&D does not mean a station, but the
breaking up of a camp, and then a train, or march (see at Ex.
xii. 37, and Gen. xiii. 3). B^taM? (see Ex. vii. 4). 1*3, under the
guidance, as in chap. iv. 28, and Ex. xxxviii. 21. DfVVDD? Drrowto,
" their goings out (properly, their places of departure) according to
their marches" is really equivalent to the clause which follows:
" their marches according to their places of departure" The march
of the people is not described by the stations, or places of en-
campment, but by the particular spots from which they set out
Hence the constant repetition of the word WW, " and they broke
vp." In vers. 3-5, the departure is described according to Ex.
xii. 17, 37-41. On the judgments of Jehovah upon the gods of
Egypt, see at Ex. xii. 12. "With an high hand:" as in Ex.
xiv. 8. — The places of encampment from Succoth to the desert
of Sinai (vers. 5-15) agree with those in the historical account,
except that the stations at the Red Sea (ver. 10) and those at
Dophkah and Alush (vers. 13 and 14) are passed over there. For
Raemses, see at Ex. xii. 37. Succoth and Eiham (Ex. xiii. 20).
Pihahiroth (Ex. xiv. 2). " The wilderness " (ver. 8) is the desert
of Shur, according to Ex. xv. 22. Marah, see Ex. xv. 23. EUm
(Ex. xv. 27). For the Red Sea and the wilderness of Sin, see Ex.
xvi. 1. For Dophkah, Alush, and Rephidim, see Ex. xvii. 1 ; and
for the wilderness of Sinai, Ex. xix. 2.
In vers. 16—36 there follow twenty-one names of places where
the Israelites encamped from the time that they left the wilderness
of Sinai till they encamped in the wilderness of Zin, i.e. Kadesh.
The description of the latter as " the wilderness of Zin, which is
Kadesh," which agrees almost word for word with Num. xx. 1,
and still more the agreement of the places mentioned in vers.
37-49, as the encampments of Israel after leaving Kadesh till their
arrival in the steppes of Moab, with the march of the people in the
fortieth year as described in chap. xx. 22-xxii. 1, put it beyond all
doubt that the encampment in the wilderness of Zin, i.e. Kadesh
(ver. 36), is to be understood as referring to the second arrival in
Digitized by
Google
chap. xxxm. 1-49. 243
Kadesh after the expiration of the thirty-eight years of wandering
in the desert to which the congregation had been condemned.
Consequently the twenty-one names in vers. 16-36 contain not
only the places of encampment at which the Israelites encamped in
the second year of their march from Sinai to the desert of Paran
at Kadesh, whence the spies were despatched into Canaan, but
also those in which they encamped for a longer period during the
thirty-eight years of punishment in the wilderness. This view
is still further confirmed by the fact that the two first of the sta-
tions named after the departure from the wilderness of Sinai, viz.
Kibroth-hattaavak and Hazeroth, agree with those named in the
historical account in chap. xi. 34 and 35. Now if, according to
chap. xii. 16, when the people left Hazeroth, they encamped in the
desert of Paran, and despatched the spies thence out of the desert
of Zin (chap. xiii. 21), who returned to the congregation after
forty days u into the desert of Paran to Kadesh " (chap. xiii. 26),
it is as natural as it well can be to seek for this place of encamp-
ment in the desert of Paran or Zin at Kadesh under the name of
Rithmah, which follows Hazeroth in the present list (ver. 18).
This natural supposition reaches the highest degree of probability,
from the fact that, in the historical account, the place of en-
campment, from which the sending out of the spies look place, is
described in so indefinite a manner as the u desert of Paran" since
this name does not belong to a small desert, just capable of holding
the camp of the Israelites, but embraces the whole of the large
desert plateau which stretches from the central mountains of
Horeb in the south to the mountains of the Amorites, which really
form part of Canaan, and contains no less than 400 (? 10,000
English) square miles (see pp. 57-8). In this desert the Israelites
could only pitch their camp in one particular spot, which is called
Rithmah in the list before us ; whereas in the historical account the
passage is described, according to what the Israelites performed
and experienced in this encampment, as near to the southern
border of Canaan, and is thus pointed out with sufficient clearness
for the purpose of the historical account. To this we may add the
coincidence of the name Rithmah with the Wady Abu Retemat,
which is not very far to the south of Kadesh, " a wide plain with
shrubs and retem," i.e. broom (Robinson, i. p. 279), in the neigh-
bourhood of whichi an( i behind the chalk formation which bounds
it towards the east, there is a copious spring of sweet water called
Ain el Kudeirdi. This spot was well adapted for a place of en-
Digitized by
Google
244 THE FOUETH BOOK OP MOSES.
campment for Israel, which was so numerous that it might easily
stretch into the desert of Zin, and as far as Kadesh.
The seventeen places of encampment, therefore, that are men-
tioned in vers. 19-36 between Rithmah and Kadesh, are the places
at which Israel set up camps during the thirty-seven years of their
wandering about in the desert, from their return from Kadesh into
the " desert of the way to the Bed Sea " (chap. xiv. 25), till the
reassembling of the whole congregation in the desert of Zin at
Kadesh (chap. xx. I). 1 Of all the seventeen places not a single
one is known, or can be pointed out with certainty, except 1'Jzion-
geber. Only the four mentioned in vers. 30-33, Moseroth, Bene-
Jaakan, Hor-hdgidgad, and Jotbathah, are referred to again, viz. in
Deut. x. 6, 7, where Moses refers to the divine protection enjoyed
by the Israelites in their wandering in the desert, in these words :
" And the children of Israel took their journey from Beeroth-bene-
Jaakan to Mo sera; there Aaron died, and there he was buried. . . .
From thence they journeyed unto Gudgodah, and from Gudgodah
to Jotbathah, a land of water-brooks." Of the identity of the places
mentioned in the two passages there can be no doubt whatever.
Bene Jaakan is simply an abbreviation of Beeroih-bene-Jaakan,
wells of the children of Jaakan. Now if the children of Jaakan
were the same as the Ilorite family of Jakan mentioned in Gen.
1 The different hypotheses for reducing the journey of the Israelites to a
few years, have been refuted by Kurtz (iii. § 41) in the most conclusive manner
possible, and in some respects more elaborately than was actually necessary.
Nevertheless Knobel has made a fresh attempt, in the interest of his fragmentary
hypothesis, to explain the twenty-one places of encampment given in vers.
16-87 as twenty-one marches made by Israel from Sinai till their first arrival
at Kadesh. As the whole distance from Sinai to Kadesh by the straight road
through the desert consists of only an eleven days' journey, Knobel endeavours
to bring his twenty-one marches into harmony with this statement, by reckon-
ing only five hours to each march, and postulating a few detours in addition,
in which the people occupied about a hundred hours or more. The objection
which might be raised to this, namely, that the Israelites made much longer
marches than these on their way from Egypt to Sinai, he tries to set aside by
supposing that the Israelites left their flocks behind them in Egypt, and pro-
cured fresh ones from the Bedouins at Sinai. But this assertion is so arbitrary
and baseless an idea, that it is not worth while to waste a single word upon the
subject (see Ex. xii. 38). The reduction of the places of encampment to simple
marches is proved to be at variance with the text by the express statement in
chap. x. 33, that when the Israelites left the wilderness of Sinai they went a
three days' journey, until the cloud showed them a resting-place. For it is per-
fectly evident from this, that the march from one place to another cannot be
understood without further ground as being simply a day's inarch of five hours.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXIII. 1-49. 245
xxxvi. 27, — and the reading J$£ for fiW in 1 Ohron. i. 42 seems to
favour this, — the wells of Jaakan would have to be sought for on
the mountains that bound the Ardbah on either the east or west.
Gvdgodah is only a slightly altered and abbreviated form of Hor-
hagidgad, the cave of Gidgad or Gvdgodah ; and lastly, Moseroth
is simply the plural form of Mosera. But notwithstanding the
identity of these four places, the two passages relate to different
journeys. Deut. x. 6 and 7 refers to the march in the fortieth
year, when the Israelites went from Kadesh through the Wady
Murreh into the Arabah to Mount Hor, and encamped in the
Arabah first of all at the wells of the children, and then at Mosera,
where Aaron died upon Mount Hor, which was in the neighbour-
hood, and whence they travelled still farther southwards to Gvd-
godah and Jotbathah. In the historical account in chap. xx. and
xxi. the three places of encampment, Bene-Jaahan, Gvdgodah, and
Jotbathah, are not mentioned, because nothing worthy of note
occnrred there. Gvdgodah was perhaps the place of encampment
mentioned in chap. xxi. 4, the name of which is not given, where
the people were punished with fiery serpents ; and Jotbathah is
probably to be placed before Zalmonah (ver. 41). The clause, " a
land of water-brooks " (Deut. x. 7), points to a spot in or near the
southern part of the Arabah, where some *ady, or valley with a
stream flowing through it, opened into the Arabah from either the
eastern or western mountains, and formed a green oasis through
its copious supply of water in the midst of the arid steppe. But
the Israelites had encamped at the very same places once before,
namely, during their thirty-seven years of wandering, in which the
people, after returning from Kadesh to the Bed Sea through the
centre of the great desert of et Tih, after wandering about for
some time in the broad desert plateau, went through the Wady el
Jerafeh into the Arabah as far as the eastern border of it on the
slopes of Mount Hor, and there encamped at Mosera (Moseroth)
somewhere near Ain et Taiyibeh (on Robinson's map), and then
crossed over to Bene-Jaakan, which was probably on the western
border of the Arabah, somewhere near Ain el Gliamr (Robinson),
and then turning southwards passed along the Wady el Jeib by
Hor-gidgad (Gudgodah), Jotbathah, and Abronah to Eziongeber on
the Bed Sea ; for there can be no doubt whatever that the Ezion-
geber in vers. 35, 36, and that in Deut. ii. 8, are one and the same
town, viz. the well-known port at the northern extremity of the
Elanitic Gulf, where the Israelites in the time of Solomon and
Digitized by
Google
246 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Jehoshaphat' built a fleet to sail to Ophir (1 Kings ix. 26, xxii. 49).
It was not far from Elaih (i.e. Akaba), and is supposed to have been
" the large and beautiful town of Asziun" which formerly stood, ac-
cording to Makrizi, near to Aila, where there were many dates, fields,
and fruit-trees, though it has now long since entirely disappeared.
Consequently the Israelites passed twice through a portion of
the Arabah in a southerly direction towards the Red Sea, the
second time from Wady Murreh by Mount Hor, to go round the
land of Edom, not quite to the head of the gulf, but only to the
Wady el Ithm, through which they crossed to the eastern side of
Edomitis (p. 142) ; the first time during the thirty-seven years of
wandering from Wady el Jerafeh to Moseroth and Bene Jaakan,
and thence to Eziongeber. — Ver. 36. " And they removed from Ezion-
geber, and encamped in the desert of Zin, that is Kadesh : " the re-
turn to Kadesh towards the end of the thirty-ninth year is referred
to here. The fact that no places of encampment are given between
Eziongeber and Kadesh, is not to be attributed to the u plan of the
author, to avoid mentioning the same places of encampment a second
time," for any such plan is a mere conjecture ; but it may be simply
and perfectly explained from the fact, that on this return route
— which the whole of the people, with their wives, children, and
flocks, could accomplish without any very great exertion in tea or
fourteen days, as the distance from Aila to Kadesh through the
desert of Paran is only about a forty hours' journey upon camels,
and Robinson travelled from Akabah to the Wady Retemath, near
Kadesh, in four days and a half — no formal camp was pitched at all,
probably because the time of penal wandering came to an end at
Eziongeber, and the time had arrived when the congregation was to
assemble again at Kadesh, and set out thence upon its journey*to
Canaan. — Hence the eleven names given in vers. 19—30, between
Rithmah and Moseroth, can only refer to those stations at which the
congregation pitched their camp for a longer or shorter period
during the thirty-seven years of punishment, on their slow return
from Kadesh to the Red Sea, and previous to their entering the
Arabah and encamping at Moseroth.
This number of stations, which is very small for thirty-seven
years (only seventeen from Rithmah or Kadesh to Eziongeber), is
a sufficient proof that the congregation of Israel was not constantly
wandering about during the whole of that time, but may have
remained in many of the places of encampment, probably those
which furnished an abundant supply of water and pasturage, not
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXHL 1-49. 247
only for weeks and months, but even for years, the people scattering
themselves in all directions round about the place where the taber-
nacle was set up, and making use of such means of support as the
desert afforded, and assembling together again when this was all
gone, for the purpose of travelling farther and seeking somewhere
else a suitable spot for a fresh encampment. Moreover, the words
of Deut. i. 46, " ye abode in Kadesh many days," when compared
with chap. ii. 1, " then we turned, and took our journey into the
wilderness of the way to the Red Sea," show most distinctly, that
after the sentence passed upon the people in Kadesh (chap, xiv.), they
did not begin to travel back at once, but remained for a considerable
time in Kadesh before going southwards into the desert. With
regard to the direction which they took, all that can be said, so long
as none of the places of encampment mentioned in vers. 19-29 are
discovered, is that they made their way by a very circuitous route,
and with many a wide detour, to Eziongeber, on the Red. Sea. 1
Vers. 37-49. The places of encampment on the journey of the
fortieth year from Kadesh to Mount Hor, and round Edom and
Moab into the steppes of Moab, have been discussed at chap. xx.
and xxi. On Mount Hor, and Aaron's death there, see at chap. xx.
22. For the remark in ver. 40 concerning the Canaanites of Arad,
1 We agree so far, therefore, with the view adopted by Fries, and followed
by Kurtz (History of Old Covenant, iii. 806-7) and Schultz (Deut. pp. 153-4),
that we regard the stations given in vers. 19-35, between Rithmah and Ezion-
geber, as referring to the journeys of Israel, after its condemnation in Kadesh,
during the thirty-Beven years of its wandering about in the desert. But we do
not regard the view which these writers have formed of the marches themselves
as being well founded, or in accordance with the text, — namely, that the people
of Israel did not really come a second time in full procession from the south to
Kadesh, but that they had never left Kadesh entirely, inasmuch as when the
nation was rejected in Kadesh, the people divided themselves into larger and
smaller groups, and that portion which was estranged from Moses, or rather
from the Lord, remained in Kadesh even after the rest were scattered about ;
so that, in a certain sense, Kadesh formed the standing encampment and
meeting-place of the congregation even during the thirty-seven years. Accord-
ing to this view, the removals and encampments mentioned in vers. 19-36 do
not describe the marches of the whole nation, but are to be understood as the
circuit made by the headquarters during the thirty-seven years, with Moses at
the head and the sanctuary in the midst {Kurtz), or else as showing " that Moses
and Aaron, with the sanctuary and the tribe of Levi, altered their resting-place,
say from year to year, thus securing to every part of the nation in turn the
nearness of the sanctuary, in accordance with the signals appointed by God
(Num. x. 11, 12), and thus passed over the space between Kadesh and Ezion-
geber within the first eighteen years, and then, by a similar change of place,
Digitized by
Google
248 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
see at chap. xxi. 1. On Zalmonah, Phunon, and Oboth, see at chap.
xxi. 10 ; on Ijje Abarim, at chap. xxi. 11 ; on Dibon Gad, Almon
Diblathaim, and the mountains of Abarim, before Nebo, chap. xxi.
16-20 (see p. 149). On Arboth Moab, see at chap. xxii. 1.
INSTRUCTIONS CONCERNING THE CONQUEST AND DISTRIBUTION OF
CANAAN. — CHAP. XXXIII. 60-CHAP. XXXVI. 13.
These instructions, with which the eyes of the Israelites were
directed to the end of all their wandering, viz. the possession of the
promised land, are arranged in two sections by longer introduc-
tory formulas (chap, xxxiii. 50 and xxxv. 1). The former contains
the divine commands (a) with regard to the extermination of the
Oanaanites and their idolatry, and the division of the land among
the tribes of Israel (chap, xxxiii. 50—56) ; (b) concerning the boun-
daries of Canaan (chap, xxxiv. 1—15) ; (c) concerning the men who
were to divide the land (chap, xxxiv. 16-29). The second contains
commands (a) respecting the towns to be given up to the Levites
(chap. xxxv. 1-8) ; (b) as to the setting apart of cities of refuge
gradually drew near to Kadesh during the remaining eighteen or nineteen years,
and at length in the last year summoned the whole nation -(all the congrega-
tion) to assemble together at this meeting-place." Now we cannot admit that
in this view " we find all the different and scattered statements of the Penta-
teuch explained and rendered intelligible." In the first place, it does not do
justice even to the list of stations ; for if the constantly repeated expression,
" and they (the children of Israel-, ver. 1) removed . . . and encamped," denote
the removal and encamping of the whole congregation in vers. 3-18 and 87-49,
it is certainly at variance with the text to explain the same words jn vers. 19-36
as signifying the removal and encamping of the headquarters only, or of Moses,
with Aaron and the Levites, and the tabernacle. Again, in all the laws that
were given and the events that are described as occurring between the first halt
of the congregation in Kadesh (chap. xiii. and xiv.) and their return thither at
the commencement of the fortieth year (chap, xx.), the presence of the whole
congregation is taken for granted. The sacrificial laws in chajp. xv., which
Moses was to address to the children of Israel (ver. 1), were given to " the whole
congregation" (cf. vers. 24, 25, 26). The man who gathered wood on the
Sabbath was taken out of the camp and stoned by "all the congregation"
(chap. xv. 86). " All the congregation " took part in the rebellion of the
company of Korah (chap. xvi. 19, xvii. 6, 21 sqq.): It is true this occurrence
is supposed by Kurtz to have taken place " during the halt in Kadesh," but the
reasons given are by no means conclusive (p. 105). Besides, if we assign every-
thing that is related in chap, xv.-xix. to the time when the whole congregation
abode in Kadesh, this deprives the hypothesis of its chief support in Deut. i. 46,
" and ye abode in Kadesh a long time, according to the days that ye abode."
For in that case the long abode in Kadesh would include the period of the lain
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXIII. 50-56. 249
for unintentional manslayers, and the course to be adopted in rela-
tion to such manslayers (chap. xxxv. 9—34) ; and (c) a law concern-
ing the marrying of heiresses within their own tribes (chap, xxxvi.).
— The careful dovetailing of all these legal regulations by separate
introductory formulas, is a distinct proof that the section chap.
xxxiii. 50-56 is not to be regarded, as Baumgarten, Knobel, and
others suppose, in accordance with the traditional division of the
chapters, as an appendix or admonitory conclusion to the list of
stations, but as the general legal foundation for the more minute
instructions in chap, xxxiv.-xxxvi.
Chap, xxxiii.' 50-56. Command to exterminate the Ca-
NAANITES, AND DIVIDE THEIR LAND AMONG THE FAMILIES OP
Israel. — Vers. 51-53. When the Israelites passed through the
Jordan into the land of Canaan, they were to exterminate all the
inhabitants of the land, and to destroy all the memorials of their
idolatry ; to take possession of the land and dwell therein, for Jeho-
vah had given it to them for a possession. E^n, to take posses-
sion of (vers. 53, etc.), then to drive out of their possession, to
and incidents recorded in chap, xv.°-xix., and yet, after all, "the whole con-
gregation " went away. In no case, in fact, can the words be understood as
signifying that a portion of the nation remained there during the thirty-seven
years. Nor can this be inferred in any way from the fact that their departure
is not expressly mentioned ; for, at all events, the statement in chap. xx. 1,
"and the children of Israel, the whole congregation, came into the desert of
Zin," presupposes that they had gone away. And the " inconceivable idea, that
in the last year of their wanderings,, when it was their express intention to cross
the Jordan and enter Canaan from the east, they should have gone up from
Eziongeber to the southern boundary of Canaan, which they had left thirty-
seven years before, merely to come back again to the neighbourhood of Ezion-
geber, after failing in their negotiations with the king of Edom, which they
might have carried on from some place much farther south, and to take the
road from that point to the country on the east of the Jordan after all" {Fries),
loses all the surprising character which it apparently has, if we only give up the
assumption upon which it is founded, but which has no support whatever in the
biblical history, viz. that during the thirty-seven years of their wandering in
the desert, Moses was acquainted with the fact that the Israelites were to enter
Canaan from the east, or at any rate that he had formed this plan for some
time. If, on the contrary, when the Lord rejected the murmuring nation (chap,
xiv. 26), He decided nothing with reference to the way by which the generation
that would grow up in the desert was to enter Canaan, — and it was not till after
the return to Kadesh that Moses was informed by God that they were to advance
nto Canaan from the east and not from the south, — it was perfectly natural that
when the time of punishment had expired, the Israelites should assemble in
Kadeeh again, and start from that point upon their journey onward.
Digitized by
Google
250 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
exterminate (ver. 52 ; cf. chap. xiv. 12, etc.). On ver. 52, see Ex.
xxxiv. 13. n'?^?, an idol of stone (cf. Lev. xxvi. 1). rtJBD TOX,
idols cast from brass. Massecah, see at Ex. xxxii. 4. JBamoth, altars
of the Canaanites upon high places (see Lev. xxvi. 30). — Ver.
54. The command to divide the land by lot among the families is
partly a verbal repetition of chap. xxvi. 53-56. 'U1 \h tW "iBfe"^:
literally, "into that, whither the lot comes out to him, shall be
to him" (i.e. to each family) ; in other words, it is to receive that
portion of land to which the lot that comes out of the urn shall
point it. " According to the tribes of your fathers :" see at chap.
xxvi. 55. — The command closes in vers. 55, 56, with the threat,
that if they did not exterminate the Canaanites, not only would
such as were left become " thorns in their eyes and stings in their
sides," i.e. inflict the most painful injuries upon them, and make
war upon them in the land ; but Jehovah would also do the very
same things to the Israelites that He had intended to do to the
Canaanites, i.e. drive them out of the land and destroy them. This
threat is repeated by Joshua in his last address to the assembled
congregation (Josh, xxiii. 13).
Chap, xxxiv. 1-15. Boundaries of the Land op Canaan.
— Ver. 2. " When ye come into the land of Canaan, this shall be the
land which will fall to you as an inheritance, the land of Canaan
according to its boundaries :" i.e. ye shall receive the land of Canaan
for an inheritance, within the following limits. — Vers. 3-5. The
southern boundary is the same as that given in Josh. xv. 2-4 as the
boundary of the territory of the tribe of Judah. We have first the
general description, a The south side shall be to you from the desert
of Zin on the sides of Edom onwards" i.e. the land was to extend
towards the south as far as the desert of Zin on the sides of Edom.
TPV) " on the sides," differs in this respect from "n?) " ° n & e
side" (Ex. ii. 5 ; Josh. xv. 46 ; 2 Sam. xv. 2), that the 'latter is
used to designate contact at a single point or along a short line ; the
former, contact for a long distance or throughout the whole extent
(= irb, Deut. ii. 37). " On the sides of Edom" signifies, there-
fore, that the desert of Zin stretched along the side of Edom, and
Canaan was separated from Edom by the desert of Zin. From
this it follows still further, that Edom in this passage is not the
mountains of Edom, which had their western boundary on the
Arabah, but the country to the south of the desert of Zin or Wady
Murreh (see p. 87), viz. the mountain land of the Azazimeh, which
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXIV. 1-15. 251
still bears the name of Seir or Serr among the Arabs (see Seetzen
and Rowland in Bitter's Erdk. xiv. pp. 840 and 1087). The state-
ment in Josh. xv. 1 also agrees with this, viz. that Judah's inherit-
ance was " to the territory of Edom, the desert of Zin towards the
south," according to which the desert of Zin was also to divide the
territory of Edom from that of the tribe of Judah (see the remarks
■on chap. xiv. 45). With ver. 36 the more minute description of
the southern boundary line commences : " The south border shall be
from the end of the Salt Sea eastward," i.e. start from " the tongue
which turns to the south" (Josh. xv. 2), from the southern point of
the Dead Sea, where there is now a salt marsh with the salt moun-
tain at the south-west border of the lake. " And turn to the south
side (333.0) of the ascent of Akrabbim" (ascensus scorpionum), i.e.
hardly "the steep pass of es Sufah, 1434 feet in height, which
leads in a south-westerly direction from the Dead Sea along the
northern side of Wady Fikreh, a wady three-quarters of an hour's
journey in breadth, and over which the road from Petra to Hesh-
bon passes," 1 as Knobel maintains ; for the expression 303 (turn), in
ver. 4, according to which the southern border turned at the height
of Akrabbim, that is to say, did not go any farther in the direc- ,
tion from N.E. to S.W. than from the southern extremity of the
Salt Sea to this point, and was then continued in a straight line
from east to west, is not at all applicable to the position of this pass,
since there would be no bend whatever in the boundary line at the
pass of es Sufah, if it ran from the Arabah through Wady Fikreh,
and so across to Kadesh. The " height of Akrabbim" from which
the country round was afterwards called Akrabattine, Akrabatene
(1 Mace. v. 3 ; Josephus, Ant. xii. 8, 1),* is most probably the lofty
row of " white cliffs" of sixty or eighty feet in height, which run
obliquely across the Arabah at a distance of about eight miles below
the Dead Sea and, as seen from the south-west point of the Dead
Sea, appear to shut in the Ghor, and which form the dividing line
between the two sides of the great valley, which is called el Ghor
on one side, and el Araba on the other (Robinson, ii. 489, 494,
502). Consequently it was not the Wady Fikreh, but a wady
1 See Robinson, vol. ii. pp. 587, 591 ; and v. Schubert, ii. pp. 448, 447 sqq.
* It must be distinguished, however, from the Akrdbatta mentioned by
Josephus in his Wars of the Jews (iii. 3, 5), the modern Akrabeh in central
Palestine (Rob. Bibl. Res. p. 296), and from the toparohy Akrabattene mentioned
in Josephus (Wars of the Jews, ii. 12, 4 ; 20, 4 ; 22, 2), which was named after
this place.
Digitized by
Google
252 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
which opened into the Arabah somewhat farther to the south, pos-
sibly the southern branch of the Wady Murreh itself, which formed
the actual boundary. "And shall pass over to Zin" (i.e. the desert
of Zin, the great Wady Murreh, see at chap. xiv. 21), "and tit
going forth shall be to the south of Kadesh-Barnea," at the western
extremity of the desert of Zin (see at chap. xx. 16). From this
point the boundary went farther out (*£) " t° Hazar-Addar, and
over O^V) to Azmon." According to Josh. xv. 3, 4, it went to the
south of Kadesh-Barnea over (1?^) to Hezron, and ascended (TO)
to Addar, and then turned to Karkaa, and went over to Azmon.
Consequently Hazar-Addar corresponds to Hezron and Addar (in
Joshua) ; probably the two places were so close to each other that
they could be joined together. Neither of them has been discovered
yet.i This also applies to Karkaa and Azmon. The latter name
reminds us of the Bedouin tribe Azazimeh, inhabiting the moun-
tains in the southern part of the desert of Zin (Robinson, i. pp. 274,
283, 287 ; Seetzen, iii. pp. 45, 47). Azmon is probably to be sought
for near the Wady el Ain, to the west of the Hebron road, and not
far from its entrance into the Wady el Arish ; for this is " the
'river (brook) of Egypt," to which the boundary turned from Azmon,
and through which it had " its outgoings at the sea," i.e. terminated
at the Mediterranean Sea. The "brook of Egypt," therefore, is
frequently spoken of as the southern boundary of the land of Israel
(1 Kings viii. 65, 2 Kings xxiv. 7, 2 Chron. vii. 8, and Isa.
xxvii. 12, where the LXX\ express the name by 'PivoKopovpdj.
Hence the southern boundary ran, throughout its whole length,
from the Arabah on the east to the Mediterranean on the west,
along valleys which form a natural division, and constitute more or
less the boundary line between the desert and the cultivated land. 1
Ver. 6. "The western boundary was to be "the great sea and its
territory," i.e. the Mediterranean Sea with its territory or coast (cf
Deut. iii. 16, 17 ; Josh. xiii. 23, 27, xv. 47).
1 On the lofty mountains of Madara, where the Wady Murreh is divided
into two wadys (Fikreh and Murreh) which run to the Arabah, v. Schubert ob-
served "some mimosen -trees," with which, as he expresses it, "the vegetation
of Arabia took leave of us, as it were, as they were the last that we saw on ooi
road." And Dieterid (ReiseUlder, ii. pp. 156-7) describes the mountain ridge
at Nakb es Su/ah as " the boundary line between the yellow desert and green
steppes," and observes still further, that on the other side of the mountain («•
northwards) the plain spread out before him in its fresh green dress. " Tk«
desert journey was over, the empire of death now lay behind us, and a ne»
life blew towards us from fields covered with green." — In the same way the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXIV. 1-15. 253
Vers. 7-9. The northern boundary cannot be determined with
certainty. " From the great sea, mark out to you ('AW, from ntjn
s= nin, to mark or point out), i.e. fix, Mount Hor as the boundary" —
from thence u to come to Ilamath; and let the goings forth of the
boundary be to Zedad. And the boundary shall go out to Ziphron,
and its goings out be at Hazar-enan" Of all these places, Hamath,
the modern Hamah, or the Epiphania of the Greeks and Romans on
the Orontes (see at chap. xiii. 21, and Gen. x. 18), is the only one
whose situation is well known ; but the geographical description of
the northern boundary of the land of Israel non ta? (chap. xiii. 21 ;
Josh. xiii. 5 ; Judg. iii. 3 ; 1 Bangs viii. 65 ; 2 Kings xiv. 25 ; 1
Chron. xiii. 5 ; 2 Chron. vii. 8 ; Amos vi. 14 ; Ezek. xlvii. 15, 20,
xlviii. 1) is so indefinite, that the boundary line cannot be deter-
mined with exactness. For no proof can be needed in the present
day that non t£b cannot mean "to Hamath" (Ges. thes. i. p. 185;
Studer on Judg. iii. 3, and Baur on Amos vi. 2), in such a sense
as would make the town of Hamath the border town, and K3 a
country between Kadesh and the Hebron road, which has become better known
to us through the descriptions of travellers, is described as a natural boundary.
Seetzen, in his account of his journey from Hebron to Sinai (iii. p. 47), observes
that the mountains of Tih commence at the Wady el Ain (fountain-valley),
which takes its name from a fountain that waters thirty date-palms and a few
small corn-fields (i.e. Ain el Kuderat, in Robinson, i. p. 280), and describes the
country to the south of the small flat Wady el Kdeis (el Kideise), in which many
tamarisks grew (i.e. no doubt a wady that comes from Kadesh, from which it
derives its name), as a " most dreadful wilderness, which spreads out to an
immeasurable extent in all directions, without trees, shrubs, or a single spot
of green" (p. 50), although the next day he " found as an unexpected rarity
another small field of barley, which might have been an acre in extent" (pp.
52, 53). Robinson (i. pp. 280 sqq.) also found, upon the route from Sinai to
Hebron, more vegetation in the desert between the Wady el Kusaimeh and el Ain
than anywhere else before throughout his entire journey ; and after passing the
Wady el Ain to the west of Kadesh, he " came upon a broad tract of tolerably
fertile soil, capable of tillage, and apparently once tilled." Across the whole of
this tract of land there were long ranges of low stone walls visible (called " el
Muzeiriat," " little plantations," by the Arabs), which had probably served at
some former time as boundary walls between the cultivated fields. A little
farther to the north the Wady es Serdm opens into an extended plain, which
looked almost like a meadow with its bushes, grass, and small patches of wheat
and barley. A few Azazimeh Arabs fed their camels and flocks here. . The land
all round became more open, and showed broad valleys that were capable of
cultivation, and were separated by low and gradually sloping hills. The grass
became more frequent in the valleys, and herbs were found upon the hills.
" We heard (he says at p. 283) this morning for the first time the songs of
many birds, and among them the lark."
Digitized by
Google
254 THE FOURTH BOOK OF HOSES.
perfectly superfluous pleonasm. In all the passages mentioned,
ffamath refers, not to the town of that name (Epiphania on the
Orontes), but to the kingdom of ffamath, which was named after
its capital, as is proved beyond all doubt by 2 Chron. viii. 4, where
Solomon is said to have built store cities " in Hamath." The city
of Hamath never belonged to the kingdom of Israel, not even under
David and Solomon, and was not reconquered by Jeroboam II., as
Baur supposes (see my Commentary on the Books of Kings, and
Thenius on 2 Kings xiv. 25). How far the territory of the king-
dom of Hamath extended towards the south in the time of Moses,
and how much of it was conquered by Solomon (2 Chron. viii. 4),
we are nowhere informed. We simply learn from 2 Kings xxv. 21,
that Riblah (whether the same Riblah as is mentioned in ver. 11
as a town upon the eastern boundary, is very doubtful) was situ-
ated in the land of Hamath in the time of the Chaldeans. Now
if this Riblah has been preserved in the modern Ribleh, a miserable
village on the Orontes, in the northern part of the Bekaa, ten or
twelve hours' journey to the south-west of Hums, and fourteen
hours to the north of Baalbek {Robinson, iii. p. 461, App. 176, and
Bibl. Researches, p. 544), the land of Canaan would have reached
a little farther northwards, and almost to Hums (Emesa). Knobel
moves the boundary still farther to the north. He supposes Mount
Hor to be Mons Casius, to the south-west of Antioch, on the Orontes,
and agrees with Robinson (iii. 461) in identifying Zedad, in the
large village of Zadad {Sudud in Rob.), which is inhabited ex-
clusively by Syriac Christians, who still speak Syriac according to
Seetzen (i. 32 and 279), a town containing about 3000 inhabitants
( Wetstein, Reiseber. p. 88), to the south-east of Hums, on the east
of the road from Damascus to Hunes, a short day's journey to the
north of Nebk, and four (or, according to Van de VeldJs memoir,
from ten to twelve) hours' journey to the south of Hasya {Robinson,
iii. p. 461 ; Ritter, Erdk. xvii. pp. 1443-4). Ziphron, which was
situated upon the border of the territory of Hamath and Damascus,
if it is the same as the one mentioned in Ezek. xlvii. 16, is supposed
by Knobel and Wetstein (p. 88) to be preserved in the ruins of
Zifran, which in all probability have never been visited by any
European, fourteen hours to the north-east of Damascus, near to
the road from Palmyra. Lastly, Hazar-enan (equivalent to foun-
tain-court) is supposed to be the station called Centum Putea (Jloxma
in Ptol. v. 15, 24), mentioned in the Tabul. Peuting. x. 3, on the
road from Apamia to Palmyra, twenty-seven miles, or about eleven
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXIV. 1-16. 255
hours, to the north-west of Palmyra. — But we may say with cer-
tainty that all these conclusions are incorrect, because they are
irreconcilable with the eastern boundary described in vers. 10, 11.
For example, according to vers. 10, 11, the Israelites were to draw
(fix) the eastern boundary " from Hazar-enan to Shepham," which,
as Knobel observes, " cannot be determined with exactness, but was
farther south than Hazar-enan, as it was a point on the eastern
boundary which is traced here from north to south, and also farther
west, as we may infer from the allusion to liiblah, probably at the
northern end of Antilibanus" (?). From Shepham the boundary
was u to go down to Riblah" which Knobel finds in the Ribleh men-
tioned above. Now, if we endeavour to fix the situation of these
places according to the latest and most trustworthy maps, the in-
correctness of the conclusions referred to becomes at once apparent.
From Zadad (Sudad) to Zifran, the line of the northern boundary
would not have gone from west to east, but from north to south,
or rather towards the south-west, and from Zifran to Centum Putea
still more decidedly in a south-westerly direction. Consequently
the northern boundary would have described a complete semicircle,
commencing in the north-west and terminating in the south-east.
But if even in itself this appears very incredible, it becomes per-
fectly impossible when we take the eastern boundary into considera-
tion. For if this went down to the south-west from Hazar-enan
to Shepliam according to KnobeVs conclusions, instead of going
down (ver. 11) from Shepham to Riblah, it would have gone up
six or seven geographical miles from south to north, and then have
gone down again from north to south along the eastern coast of the
Lake of Gennesareth. Now it is impossible that Moses should have
fixed such a boundary to the land of Israel on the north-east, and
equally impossible that a later Hebrew, acquainted with the geo-
graphy of his country, should have described it in this way.
If, in order to obtain a more accurate view of the extent of the
land towards the north and north-east, we compare the statements
of the book of Joshua concerning the conquered land with the
districts which still remained to be taken at the time of the distri-
bution ; Joshua had taken the land " from the bald mountain which
ascends towards Seir," i.e. probably the northern ridge of the Azazi-
m*h mountains, with its white masses of chalk (Fries, ut sup. p. 76 ;
see also at Josh. xi. 17), " to Baal-Gad, in the valley of Lebanon,
below Mount Herman" (Josh. xi. 17 ; cf. chap. xii. 7). But Baal-
Gad in the valley (nyi??) of Lebanon is not Heliopolis (now Baal-
Digitized by
Google
256 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
beh in the Beicaa, or Ccelesyria), as many, from Iken and /. D.
Michaelis down to Knobel, suppose ; for " the Behaa is not under
the Herman," and " there is no proof, or even probability, that
Joshua's conquests reached so far, or that Baalbek was ever regarded
as the northern boundary of Palestine, nor even that the adjoining
portion of Anti-Lebanon was ever called Hermon" {Robinson, Bibli-
cal Researches, p. 409). Baal-Gad, which is called Baal-Hermon in
Judg. iii. 3 and 1 Chron. v. 23, was the later Paneas or Ccesarea
Philippi, the modern Banias, at the foot of the Hermon (cf. v.
Eaumer, Pal. p. 245 ; Rob. Bibl. Res. pp. 408-9, Pal. iii. 'pp. 347
sqq.). This is placed beyond all doubt by 1 Chron. v. 23, according
to which the Manassites, who were increasing in numbers, dwelt
" from Bashan to Baal-Hermon, and Senir, and the mountains of
Hermon," since this statement proves that Baal-Hermon was be-
tween Bashan and the mountains of Hermon. In harmony with
this, the following places in the north of Canaan are mentioned in
Josh. xiii. 4, 5, and Judg. iii. 3, as being left unconquered by
Joshua : — (1.) " All the land of the Canaanites {i.e. of the Phoeni-
cians wh« dwelt on the coast), and the cave of the Sidonians to
Aphek;" '"^VD, probably the spelunca inexpugnabilis in territom
S/idoniensi, quae vulgo dicitur cavea de Tyrum (Wilh. Tyr. six.
11), the present Mughr Jezzin, i.e. caves of Jezzin, to the east of
Sidon upon Lebanon {Ritter, Erdk. xvii. pp. 99, 100) ; and Aphek,
probably the modern Afka, to the north-east of Beirut {Robinson,
Bibl. Res.). (2.) "The land of the Giblites" i.e. the territory of
Bybhs, and " all Lebanon towards the east, from Baal-Gad below
Hermon, till you come to Hamath," i.e. not Antikbanus, bnt
Lebanon, which lies to the east of the land of the Giblites. The
land of the Giblites, or territory of Gebal, which is cited here as
the' northernmost district of the unconquered land, so that its
northern boundary must have coincided with the northern boundary
of Canaan, can hardly have extended to the latitude of Tripoli,
but probably only reached to the cedar grove at Bjerreh, in the
neighbourhood of which the highest peaks of the Lebanon are
found. The territory of the tribes of Asher and Naphtali (Josh.
xix. 24—39) did not reach farther up than this. From all these
accounts, we must not push the northern boundary of Canaan as
far as the Eleutherus, Nahr el Kebir, but must draw it farther to
the south, across the northern portion of the Lebanon ; so that we
may look for Hazar-enan (fountain-court), which is mentioned as
the end of the northern boundary, and the starting-point of the
Digitizi
ed by Google
CHAP. XXXIV. 1-15. 257
eastern, near the fountain of Lebweh. This fountain forms the
water-shed in the Bekaa, between the Orontes, which flows to the
north, and the Leontes, which flows to the south (cf . Robinson, Bibl.
Res. p. 531), and is not only a very large fountain of the finest
clear water, springing at different points from underneath a broad
piece of coarse gravel, which lies to the west of a vein of limestone,
but the whole of the soil is of such a character, that " you have
only to dig in the gravel, to get as many springs as you please."
The quantity of water which is found here is probably even greater
than that at the Anjar. In addition to the four principal streams,
there are three or four smaller ones (Robinson, Bibl. Res. p. 532), so
that this place might be called, with perfect justice, by the name of
fountain-court. The probability of this conjecture is also consider-
ably increased by the fact, that the Ain, mentioned in ver. 11 as a
point upon the eastern boundary, can also be identified without any
difficulty (see at ver. 11).
Vers. 10-12. The Eastern Boundary. — If we endeavour to trace
the upper line of the eastern boundary from the fountain-place just
mentioned, it ran from Hazar-enan to Shepham, the site of. which
is unknown, and " from Shepham it was to go down to Riblah, on
the east of Ain" (the fountain). The article n»"in, and still more
the precise description, " to the east of Ain, the fountain, or fountain
locality" (Knobel), show plainly that this Riblah is to be distin-
guished from the Riblah in the land of Hamath (2 Kings xxiii. 33,
xxv. 21 ; Jer. xxxix. 9, lii. 27), with which it is mostly identified.
Ain is supposed to be " the great fountain of Neba Anjar, at the
foot of Antilibanus, which is often called Birket Anjar, on account
of its taking its rise in a small reservoir or pool " (Robinson, Bibl.
Res. p. 498), and near to which Mej-dd-Anjar is to be seen, con-
sisting of a the ruins of the walls and towers of a fortified town, or
rather of a large citadel " (Robinson, p. 496 ; cf. Ritter, xvii. pp.
181 sqq.). 1 From this point the boundary went farther down, and
pressed (•ITO) " upon the shoulder of the lake of Chinnereih towards
the east," i.e. upon the north-east shore of the Sea of Galilee (see
Josh. xix. 35). Hence it ran down along the Jordan to the Salt
Sea (Dead Sea). According to these statements, therefore, the
eastern boundary went from Bekaa along the western slopes of
1 Knobel regards Ain as the source of the Orontes, i.e. Neba Lebweh, and
yet, notwithstanding this, identifies Riblah with the village of Ribleh mentioned
above. But can this Ribleh, which is at least eight hours to the north of Neba
Lebweh, be described as on the east of Ain, i.e. Neba Lebweh t
PENT. — VOL. III. B
Digitized by
Google
258 THE FOUBTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Antilibanus, over or past Rasbeya and Banyas, at the foot of
Hermon, along the edge of the mountains which bound the Huleh
basin towards the east, down to the north-east corner of the Sea of
Galilee ; so that Hermon itself (Jebel es Sheikh) did not belong to
the land of Israel. — Vers. 13-15. This land, according to the boun-
daries thus described, the Israelites were to distribute by lot (chap,
xxvi. 56), to give it to the nine tribes and a half, as the tribes of
Reuben, Gad, and half Manasseh had already received their inherit-
ance on the other side of the Jordan (chap, xxxii. 33 sqq.).
Vers. 16-29. List op the Men appointed to distribute
the Land. — In addition to Eleazar and Joshua, the former of
whom was to stand at the head as high priest, in accordance with the
divine appointment in chap, xxvii. 21, and the latter to occupy the
second place as commander of the army, a prince was selected from
each of the ten tribes who were interested in the distribution, as
Reuben and Gad had nothing to do with it. Of these princes,
namely heads of fathers' honses of the tribes (Josh. xiv. 1), not
heads of tribes (see at chap. xiii. 2), Caleb, who is well known from
chap, xiii., is the only one whose name is known. The others axe
not mentioned anywhere else. The list of tribes, in the enumeration
of their princes, corresponds, with some exceptions, to the situation
of the territory which the tribes received in Canaan, reckoning from
south to north, and deviates considerably from the order in which
the lots came out for the different tribes, as described in Josh.
15-19. 'TO in the Kal, in vers. 17 and 18, signifies to give for an
inheritance, just as in Ex. xxxiv. 8, to put into possession. There
is not sufficient ground for altering the Kal into Piel, especially as
the Piel in ver. 29 is construed with the accusative of the person, and
with the thing governed by 3 ; whereas in ver. 17 the Kal is construed
with the person governed by $>, and the accusative of the thing.
Chap. xxxv. 1-8. Appointment op Towns for the Levites.
— As the Levites were to receive no inheritance of their own, i.e.
no separate tribe-territory, in the land of Canaan (chap, xviii. 20
and 23), Moses commanded the children of Israel, i.e. the rest of
the tribes, in accordance with the divine instructions, to give (vacate)
towns to the Levites to dwell in of the inheritance that fell to them
for a possession, with pasturage by the cities round about them for
their cattle. " Towns to dwell in," i.e. not the whole of the towns
as their own property, but as many houses in the towns as sufficed
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXV. 1-8.
259
for the necessities of the Levites as their hereditary possession,
which could be redeemed, if sold at any time, and which reverted
to them without compensation in the year of jubilee, even if not
redeemed before (Lev. xxv. 32, 33) ; but any portion of the towns
which was not taken possession of by them, together with the fields
and villages, continued the property of those tribes to which they
had been assigned by lot (cf. Josh. xxi. 12, and my commentary on
this passage : also Bahr, Symbolic, ii. p. 50 ; Ewald, Gesoh. ii. p»
403). They were also to give them Bni? (from KH3, to drive, drive
out), pasturage or fields, to feed their flocks upon, all round the
cities ; and according to Lev. xxv. 34, this was not to be sold, but
to remain the eternal possession of the Levites. DFipna?, for their
oxen and beasts of burden, and Q^crh, for their (remaining) pos-
sessions in flocks (sheep and goats), which are generally described in
other cases as mikneh, in distinction from behemali (e.g. chap, xxxii.
26 ; Gen. xxxiv. 23, xxxvi. G). DTWTWj and for all their animals,
is merely a generalizing summary signifying all the animals which
they possessed. — Ver. 4. The pasture lands of the different towns
were to measure "from tlie town wall outwards a thousand cubits
round about" i.e. on each of the four sides. " And measure from
without the city, the east side 2000 cubits, and the south side 2000
cubits, and the west side 2000 cubits, and the north side 2000 cubits,
and the city in the middle" i.e. so that the town stood in the middle
of the measured lines, and the space which they occupied was not
included in the 2000 cubits. The meaning of these instructions,
which have caused great perplexity to commentators, and have
latterly been explained by Saalschutz (Mos. R. pp. 100, 101) in a
Fig. a.
Fig. 6.
1000 c. 1000 c
1000 c
900 c: 1000 c.
s.
•N
::::□:::
!
marvellously erroneous manner, was correctly expounded by J. D.
MkhaeUs in the notes to his translation. We must picture the towns
Digitized by
Google
260 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
and the surrounding fields as squares, the pasturage as stretching
1000 cubits from the city wall in every direction, as the accompany-
ing figures show, and the length of each outer side as 2000 cubits,
apart from the length of the city wall : so that, if the town itself
occupied a square of 1000 cubits (see fig. a), the outer side of the
town fields would measure 2000 + 1000 cubits in every direction ;
but if each side of the city wall was only 500 cubits long (see
fig. b), the outer side of the town fields would measure 2000 + 500
cubits in every direction. — Vers. 6-8. Of these cities which were
given up to the Levites, six were to serve as cities of refuge (see at
ve*r. 12) for manslayers, and in addition to these ( Q $ 7JJ, over upon
them) the Israelites were to give of their possessions forty-two others,
that is to say, forty-eight in all ; and they were to do this, giving
much from every tribe that had much, and little from the one
which had little (chap. xxvi. 54). With the accusatives B" 1 "!^ J*5
and *)V && AN (ver. 6), the writer has already in his mind the verbs
«nn and ^JfOPi of ver. 8, where he takes up the object again in the
word D^V^. According to Josh, xxi., the Levites received nine
cities in tbe territory of Judah and Simeon, four in the territory of
each of the, other tribes, with the exception of Naphtali, in which
there were only three, that is to say, ten in the land to the east of
the Jordan, and thirty-eight in Canaan proper, of which the thirteen
given up by Judah, Simeon, and Benjamin were assigned to the
families of the priests, and the other thirty-five to the three Levi-
tical families. This distribution of the Levites among all the tribes
— by which the curse of division and dispersion in Israel, which
had been pronounced upon Levi in Jacob's blessing (Gen. xlix. 7),
was changed into a blessing both for the Levites themselves and
also for all Israel — was in perfect accordance with the election and
destination of this tribe. Called out of the whole nation to be the
peculiar possession of Jehovah, to watch over His covenant, and
teach Israel His rights and His law (Deut. xxxiii. 9, 10 ; Lev. x. 11 ;
Deut. xxxi. 9—13), the Levites were to form and set forth among
all the tribes the e/cXcyj; of the nation of Jehovah's possession, and
by their walk as well as by their calling to remind the Israelites
continually of their own divine calling ; to foster and preserve the
law and testimony of the Lord in Israel, and to awaken and spread
the fear of God and piety among all the tribes. Whilst their
distribution among all the tribes corresponded to this appointment,
the fact that they were not scattered in all the towns and villages
of the other tribes, but were congregated together in separate towns
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXV. 9-84. 261
among the different tribes, preserved them from the disadvantages
of standing alone, and defended them from the danger of moral
and spiritual declension. Lastly, in the number forty-eight, the
quadrupling of the number of the tribes (twelve) is unmistakeable.
Now, as the number four is the seal of the kingdom of God in the
world, the idea of the kingdom of God is also represented in the
four times twelve towns (cf. Bdhr, Symbolik, ii. pp. 50, 51).
Vers. 9-34. Selection and Appointment of Cities of
Refuge fob unpremeditated Manslayeks. — Vers. 10, 11.
When the Israelites had come into the land of Canaan, they were
to choose towns conveniently situated as cities of refuge, to which
the manslayer, who had slain a person (nepliesh) by accident (fUJB'a :
see at Lev. iv. 2), might flee, ^p 1 ?, from rn|?, to hit, occurrit, as
well as aecidit, signifies here to give or make, i.e. to choose some-
thing suitable (Dietrich), but not " to build or complete" (Knobet),
in the sense of n"i|>, as the only meaning which this word has is
eontignare, to join with beams or rafters ; and this is obviously un-
suitable here. Through these directions, which are repeated and
still further expanded in Deut. xix. 1—13, God fulfilled the promise
which He gave in Ex. xxi. 13 : that He would appoint a place for
the man who should unintentionally slay his neighbour, to which
he might flee from the avenger of blood. — Vers. 12-15. These
towns were to serve for a refuge from the avenger of blood, that
the manslayer might not die before he had taken his trial in the
presence of the congregation. The number of cities was fixed at
six, three on the other side of the Jordan, and three on this side in
the land of Canaan, to which both the children of Israel, and also
the foreigners and settlers who were dwelling among them, might
flee. In Deut. xix. 3 sqq., Moses advises the congregation to pre-
pare (P?D) the way to these cities, and to divide the territory of the
land which Jehovah would give them into three parts (&)&), i.e.
to set apart a free city in every third of the land, that every man-
slayer might flee thither, i.e. might be able to reach the free city
without being detained by length of distance or badness of road,
lest, as is added in ver. 6, the avenger of blood pursue the slayer
while his heart is hot (&W, imperf. Kal of 0?n), and overtake him
because the way is long, and slay him (t^W nan, as in Gen. xxxvii. 21),
whereas he was not worthy of death (i.e. there was no just ground
for putting him to death), " because he had not done it out of
hatred." The three cities of refuge on the other side were selected *
Digitized by
Google
262 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
by Moses himself (Deut. iv. 41-43) ; the three in Canaan were not
appointed till the land was distributed among the nine tribes and a
half (Josh. xx. 7). Levitical or priests' towns were selected for all
six, not only because it was to the priests and Levites that they
would first of all look for an administration of justice (Schultz on
Deut. xix. 3), but also on the ground that these cities were the
property of Jehovah, in a higher sense than the rest of the land,
and for this reason answered the idea of cities of refuge, where the
manslayer, when once received, was placed under the protection of
divine grace, better than any other places possibly could.
The establishment of cities of refuge presupposed the custom
and right of revenge. The custom itself goes back to the very
earliest times of the human race (Gen. iv. 15, 24, xxvii. 45) ; it
prevailed among the Israelites, as well as the other nations of anti-
quity, and still continues among the Arabs in unlimited force (cf.
Niebuhr, Arab. pp. 32 sqq. ; Burckhardt, Beduinen, 119, 251 sqq.).
" Revenge of blood prevailed almost everywhere, so long as there
was no national life generated, or it was still in the- first stages of its
development ; and consequently the expiation of any personal viola-
tion of justice was left to private revenge, and more especially to
family zeal" (Oehler in Herzog's B. Cycl., where the proofs may be
seen). The warrant for this was the principle of retribution, the
jus talionis, which lay at the foundation of the divine order of the
world in general, and the Mosaic law in particular, and which was
sanctioned by God, so far as murder was concerned, even in the
time of Noah, by the command, " Whoso sheddeth man's blood,"
etc. (Gen. ix. 5, 6). This warrant, however, or rather obligation to
avenge murder, was subordinated to the essential principle of the
theocracy, under the Mosaic law. Whilst God Himself would
avenge the blood that was shed, not only upon men, but upon
animals also (Gen. ix. 5), and commanded blood-revenge, He with-
drew the execution of it from subjective caprice, and restricted it
to cases of premeditated slaying or murder, by appointing cities of
refuge, which were to protect the manslayer from the avenger, until
he took his trial before the congregation. «?i, redeemer, is " that
. particular relative whose special duty it was to restore the violated
family integrity, who had to redeem not only landed property that
had been alienated from the family (Lev. xxv. 25 sqq.), or a mem-
ber of the family that had fallen into slavery (Lev. xxv. 47 sqq.),
but also the blood that had been taken away from the family by
murder" {Oehler). In the latter respect he was called tnn ?w,
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXY. 9-84. 263
(vers. 19, 21, 24 sqq. ; Dent. xix. 6, 12). From 2 Sam. xiv. 7,
we may see that it was the duty of the whole family to take care
that blood-revenge was carried out. The performance of the duty
itself, however, was probably regulated by the closeness of the rela-
tionship, and corresponded to the duty of redeeming from bondage
(Lev. xxv. 49), and to the right of inheritance (chap, xxvii. 8
sqq.). What standing before the congregation was to consist of,
is defined more fully in what follows (vers. 24, 25). If we com-
pare with this Josh. xx. 4 sqq., the manslayer, who fled from the
avenger of blood into a free city, was to stand before the gates
of the city, and state his cause before the elders. They were
then to receive him into the city, and give him a place that he
might dwell among them, and were not to deliver him up to the
avenger of blood till he had stood before the congregation for judg-
ment. Consequently, if the slayer of a man presented himself with
the request to be received, the elders of the free city had to make
a provisional inquiry into his case, to decide whether they should
grant him protection in the city ; and then if the avenger of blood
appeared, they were not to deliver up the person whom they had
received, but to hand him over, on the charge of the avenger of
blood, to the congregation to whom he belonged, or among whom
the act had taken place, that they might investigate the case, and
judge whether the deed itself was wilful or accidental.
Special instructions are given in vers. 16-28, with reference to
the judicial procedure. First of all (vers. 16-21), with regard to
qualified slaying or murder. If any person has struck another
with an iron instrument (an axe, hatchet, hammer, etc.), or " with a
stone of the hand, from which one dies," i.e. with a stone which filled
the hand, — a large stone, therefore, with which it was possible to
kill, — or " with a wooden instrument of the hand, from which one dies,"
ie. with a thick club, or a large, strong wooden instrument, and he
then died (so that he died in consequence), he was a murderer, who
was to be put to death. " For the suspicion would rest upon any
one who had used an instrument, that endangered life and therefore
was not generally used in striking, that he had intended to take
life away" (Knobel). — Ver. 19. The avenger of blood could put
him to death, when he hit upon him, i.e. whenever and wherever
he met with him. — Ver. 20. And so also the man who hit another
in hatred, or threw at him by lying in wait, or struck him with the
hand in enmity, so that he died. And if a murderer of this kind
fled into a free city, the elders of his city were to have him fetched
Digitizi
ed by Google
264 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
out and delivered up to the avenger of blood (Deut. xix. 11, 12).
Then follow, in vers. 22-28, the proceedings to be taken with an
unintentional manslayer, viz. if any one hit another " in the mo-
ment," i.e. suddenly, unawares (chap. vi. 9), without enmity, or by
throwing anything upon him, without lying in wait, or by letting a
stone, by which a man might be killed, fall upon him without seeing
him, so that he died in consequence, but without being his enemy,
or watching to ao him harm. In using the expression jatpoa, the
writer had probably T??? still in his mind ; but he dropped this
word, and wrote 7Bn in the form of a fresh sentence. The thing
intended is explained still more clearly in Deut. xix. 4, 5. Instead
of ynsa, we find there njn 733, without knowing, unintentionally.
The words, " without being his enemy," are paraphrased there by,
" without hating him from yesterday and the day before yesterday "
(i.e. previously), and are explained by an example taken from the
life : " WJien a man goeth into the wood with his neighbour to hew
wood, and his hand fetcheth a stroke with the axe to cut down the tree,
and the iron slippeth (<W Niphal of «W) from the wood (handle), and
lighteth upon his neighbour." — Vers. 24, 25. In such a case as this,
the congregation was to judge between the slayer and the avenger
of blood, according to the judgments before them. They were to
rescue the innocent man from the avenger of blood, to bring him
back to his (i.e. the nearest) city of refuge to which he had fled,
that he might dwell there till the death of the high priest, who had
been anointed with the holy oil. — Vers. 26-28. If he left the city
of refuge before this, and the avenger of blood got hold of him, and
slew him outside the borders (precincts) of the city, it was not to be
reckoned to him as blood (&<& !"«, like OW b r«, Ex. xxii. 1). But
after the death of the high priest he might return " into the land of his
possession," i.e. his hereditary "possession (cf. Lev. xxvii. 22), se. with-
out the avenger of blood being allowed to pursue him any longer.
In these regulations " all the rigour of the divine justice is mani-
fested in the most beautiful concord with Hi3 compassionate mercy.
Through the destruction of life, even when not wilful, human
blood had been shed, and demanded expiation. Yet this expiation
did not consist in the death of the offender himself, because he had
not sinned wilfully." Hence an asylum was provided for him in
the free city, to which he might escape, and where he would lie
concealed. This sojourn in the free city was not to be regarded as
banishment, although separation from house, home, and family was
certainly a punishment ; but it was a concealment under " the pro-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXV. 9-84. 265
tection of the mercy of God, which opened places of escape in the
cities of refuge from the carnal ardour of the avenger of Hood,
where the slayer remained concealed until his sin was expiated by
the death of the high priest." For the fact, that the death of the
high priest was hereby regarded as expiatory, as many of the Rab-
bins, fathers, and earlier commentators maintain (see my Comm.
on Joshua, p. 448), is unmistakeably evident from the addition
of the clause, " who has been anointed with the holy oil," which
would appear unmeaning and superfluous on any other view. This
clause points to the inward connection between the return of the
slayer and the death of the high priest. " The anointing with the
holy oil was a symbol of the communication of the Holy Ghost, by
which the high priest was empowered to act as mediator and repre-
sentative of the nation before God, so that he alone could carry out
the yearly and general expiation for the whole nation, on the great
day of atonement. But as his life and work acquired a representa-
tive signification through this anointing with the Holy Ghost, his
death might also be regarded as a death for the sins of the people,
by virtue of the Holy Ghost imparted to him, through which the
unintentional manslayer received the benefits of the propitiation for
his sin before God, so that he could return cleansed to his native
town, without further exposure to the vengeance of the avenger of
blood" (Comm. on Joshua, p. 448). But inasmuch as, according
to this view, the death of the high priest had the same result in a
certain sense, in relation to his time of office, as his function on the
day of atonement had had every year, " the death of the earthly high
priest became thereby a type of that of the heavenly One, who,
through the eternal (holy) Spirit, offered Himself without spot to
God, that we might be redeemed from our transgressions, and re-
ceive the promised eternal inheritance (Heb. ix. 14, 15). Just as
the blood of Christ wrought out eternal redemption, only because
through the eternal Spirit He offered Himself without spot to God,
so the death of the high priest of the Old Testament secured the
complete deliverance of the manslayer from his sin, only because he
had been anointed with the holy oil, the symbol of the Holy Ghost "
(p. 449).
If, therefore, the confinement of the unintentional manslayer in
the city of refuge was neither an ordinary exile nor merely a means
of rescuing him from the revenge of the enraged goel, but an ap-
pointment of the just and merciful God for the expiation of human
blood even though not wilfully shed, that, whilst there was no vio-
Digitized by
Google
266 THE FOURTH BOOK OF HOSES.
lation of judicial righteousness, a barrier might be set to the un-
righteousness of family revenge ; it was necessary to guard against
any such abuse of this gracious provision of the righteous God, as
that into which the heathen right of asylum had degenerated. 1
The instructions which follow in vers. 29-34 were intended to
secure this object. In ver. 29, there is first of all the general
law, that these instructions (those given in vers. 11-28) were to be
for a-statute of judgment (see chap, xxvii. 11) for all future ages
(" throughout your generations," see Ex. xii. 14, 20). Then, in
ver. 30, a just judgment is enforced in the treatment of murder.
" Whoso killeth any person (these words are construed absolutely),
at the mouth (the testimony) of witnesses shall the murderer be put to
death ; and one witness shall not answer (give evidence) against a per-
son to die ; " i.«. if the taking of life were in question, capital punish-
ment was not to be inflicted upon the testimony of one person only,
but upon that of a plurality of witnesses. One witness could not
only be more easily mistaken than several, but would be more likely
to be partial than several persons who were unanimous in bearing
witness to one and the same thing. The number of witnesses was
afterwards fixed at two witnesses, at least, in the case of capital
crimes (Deut. xvii. 6), and two or three in the case of every crime
(Deut. xix. 15 ; cf. John viii. 17, 2 Cor. xiii. 1, Heb. x. 28).—
Lastly (vers. 31 sqq.), the command is given not to take redemption
money, either for the life of the murderer, who was a wicked man
to die, i.e. deserving of death (such a man was to be put to death) ;
nor "for fleeing into the city of refuge, to return to dwell in the land
till the death of tlie high priest : " that is to say, they were neither to
allow the wilful murderer to come to terms with the relative of the
man who had been put to death, by the payment of a redemption
fee, and so to save his life, as is not unfrequently the case in the
East at the present day (cf. Robinson, Pal. i. p. 209, and Lanis
Manners and Customs) ; nor even to allow the unintentional mur-
derer to purchase permission to return home from the city of refuge
1 On the asyla, in general, see Winer's Real-Worterbuch, art. Freistatt;
Pauly, Real-encykl. der class. Alterthums-wissenschaft, Bd. i. s. v. Asylum ; but
more especially K. Dann, " ilber den Ursprung des Asylrechts und dessen Schicksak
und Ueberreste in Europa," in his Ztschr. fur deutsches Recht, Lpz. 1840. " The
asyla of the Greeks, Romans, and Germans differed altogether from those of the
Hebrews; for whilst the latter were never intended to save the wilful criminal
from the punishment he deserved, but were simply established for the purpose
of securing a just sentence, the former actually answered the purpose of rescu-
ing the criminal from the punishment which he legally deserved."
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXVI. 1-4 267
before the death of the high priest, by the payment of a money
compensation. — Ver. 33. The Israelites were not to desecrate their
land by sparing the murderer ; as blood, ue. bloodshed or murder,
desecrated the land, and there was no expiation C 1 ?^) to the land
for the blood that was shed in it, except through the blood of the
man who had shed it, i.e. through the execution of the murderer, by
which justice would be satisfied. — Ver. 34. And they were not to
desecrate the land in which they dwelt by tolerating murderers,
because Jehovah, the Holy One, dwelt in it, among the children of
Israel (cf. Lev. xviii. 25 sqq.).
LAW CONCERNING THE MARRIAGE OF HEIRESSES. — CHAP. XXXVI.
Vers. 1-4. The occasion for this law was a representation made
to Moses and the princes of the congregation by the heads of the
fathers' houses (^3Kn for rri3Nrrn ,, 3 ) as fti Ex. vi. 25, etc.) of the
family of Gilead the Manassite, to which Zelophehad (chap. xxvi.
33) belonged, to the effect that, by allotting an hereditary possession
to the daughters of Zelophehad, the tribe-territory assigned to the
Manassites would be diminished if they should marry into another
tribe. They founded their appeal upon the command of Jehovah,
that the land was to be distributed by lot among the Israelites for
an inheritance (ver. 2 compared with chap. xxvi. 55, 56, and xxxiii.
54) ; and although it is not expressly stated, yet on the ground of
the promise of the everlasting possession of Canaan (Gen. xvii. 8),
and the provision made by the law, that an inheritance was not
to be alienated (Lev. xxv. 10, 13, 23 sqq.), they understood it as
signifying that the portion assigned to each tribe was to continue
unchanged to all generations. (The singular pronoun, my Lord, in
ver. 2, refers to the speaker, as in chap, xxxii. 27.) Now, as the
inheritance of their brother, i.e. their tribe-mate Zelophehad, had
been given to his daughters (chap, xxvii. 1), if they should be
chosen as wives by any of the children of the (other) tribes of
Israel, i.e. should marry into another tribe, their inheritance would
be taken away from the tribe-territory of Manasseh, and would be
added to that of the tribe into which they were received. The
suffix OH? (ver. 3) refers ad sensum to riBD, the tribe regarded
according to its members. — Ver. 4. And when the year of jubilee
came round (see Lev. xxv. 10), their inheritance would be entirely
withdrawn from the tribe of Manasseh. Strictly speaking, the
hereditary property would pass at once, when the marriage took
Digitizi
ed by Google
268 THE FOURTH BOOK OF MOSES.
place, to the tribe into which an heiress married, and not merely at
the year of jubilee. .But up to the year of jubilee it was always
possible that the hereditary property might revert to the tribe of
Manasseh, either through the marriage being childless, or through
the purchase of the inheritance. But in the year of jubilee all
landed property that had been alienated was to return to its original
proprietor or his heir (Lev. xxv. 33 sqq.). In this way the transfer
of an inheritance from one tribe to another, which took place in
consequence of a marriage, would be established in perpetuity.
And it was in this sense that the elders of the tribe of Manasseh
meant that a portion of the inheritance which had fallen to them
by lot would be taken away from their tribe at the year of jubilee. —
Vers. 5-9. Moses declared that what they had affirmed was right
(??), and then, by command of Jehovah, he told the daughters of
Zelophehad that they might marry whoever pleased them (the suffix
B£, attached to ^PS, for ft, as in Ex. i. 21, Gen. xxxi. 9, etc.), but
that he must belong to the family of their father's tribe, that is to
say, must be a Manassite. For (ver. 7) the inheritance was not to
turn away the Israelites from one tribe to another (not to be trans-
ferred from one to another), but every Israelite was to keep to the
inheritance of his father's tribe, and no one was to enter upon the
possession of another tribe by marrying an heiress belonging to that
tribe. This is afterwards extended, in vers. 8 and 9, into a general
law for every heiress in Israel.
In vers. 10-12 it is related that, in accordance with these
instructions, the five daughters of Zelophehad, whose names are
repeated from chap. xxvi. 33 and xxvii. 1 (see also Josh. xvii. 3),
married husbands from the families of the Manassites, namely, sons
of their cousins (? uncles), and thus their inheritance remained in
their father's tribe (?V njn, to be and remain upon anything). — Ver.
13. The conclusion refers not merely to the laws and rights con-
tained in chap, xxxiii. 50-xxxvi. 13, but includes the rest of the
laws given in the steppes of Moab (chap, xxv.-xxx.), and forms the
conclusion to the whole book, which places the lawgiving in the
steppes of Moab by the side of the lawgiving at Mount Sinai (Lev.
xxvi. 46, xlvii. 34) and brings it to a close, though without in any
way implying that the explanation ("^3, Deut. i. 5), further develop-
ment, and hortatory enforcement of the law and its testimonies,
statutes, and judgments (Deut. i. 5, iv. 44 sqq., xii. 1 sqq.), which
follow in Deuteronomy, are not of Mosaic origin.
Digitized by
Google
THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
(DEUTERONOMY.)
INTRODUCTION.
CONTENTS, ARRANGEMENT, AND CHABACTEB OF DEUTERONOMY.
| HE fifth book of Moses, which is headed D'nain flta, or
briefly O^Vl, in the Hebrew Bibles, from the opening
words of the book, is called JTiinn ruB'D (repetilio legis),
or merely n:E>D by the Hellenistic Jews and some of
the Rabbins, with special reference to its contents as described in
chap. xvii. 18. The rabbinical explanation of the latter given in
Munster and Fagius is DyWKTl p*i3f, "memoria rerum priorum,
qua in aliis scribuntur libris." By some of the Rabbins the book
is also called rrirofri ">BD, liber redargutionum. The first of these
titles has become current in the Christian Church through the
rendering given by the LXX. and Vulgate, Aevrepovo/uov, Deutero-
nomium ; and although it has arisen from an incorrect rendering of
chap. xvii. 18 (see the exposition of the passage), it is so far a suit-
able one, that it describes quite correctly the leading contents of
the book itself. The book of Deuteronomy contains not so much
" a recapitulation of the things commanded and done, as related in
Exodus, Leviticus, and Numbers " (T/ieod.), as " a compendium
and summary of the whole law and wisdom of the people of Israel,
wherein those things which related to the priests and Levites are
omitted, and only such things included as the people generally
required to know" (Luther). Consequently it is not merely a
repetition and summary of the most important laws and events
contained in the previous books, still less a mere " summons to the
law and testimony," or a " fresh and independent lawgiving stand-
ing side by side with the earlier one," a " transformation of the
Digitized by
Google
270 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
old law to suit the altered circumstances," or "merely a second
book of the law, intended for the people that knew not the law "
(Ewald, Eiehm, etc.) ; but a hortatory description, explanation, and
enforcement of the most essential contents of the covenant revelation
and covenant laws, with emphatic prominence given to the spiritual
principle of ilie law and its fulfilment, and with a further develop-
ment of the ecclesiastical, judicial, political, and civil organization,
which was intended as a permanent foundation for the life and well-
being of the people in the land of Canaan. There is not the slightest
trace, throughout the whole book, of any intention whatever to
give a new or second law. Whilst the laws as well as the divine
promises and threatenings in the three middle books of the Penta-
teuch are all introduced as words of Jehovah to Moses, which he
was to make known to the people, and even where the announce-
ment passes over into the form of an address, — as, for example, in
Ex. xxiii. 20 sqq., Lev. xxvi., — are not spoken by Moses in his own
name, but spoken by Jehovah to Israel through Moses ; the book
of Deuteronomy, with the exception of chap. xxxi.-xxxiv., contains
nothing but words addressed by Moses to the people, with the
intention, as he expressly affirms in chap. i. 5, of explaining pS?)
the law to the people. Accordingly he does not quote those laws,
which were given before and are merely repeated here, nor the
further precepts and arrangements that were added to them, such
as those concerning the one site for the worship of God, the pro-
phetic and regal qualifications, the administration of justice and
carrying on of war, in the categorical language of law ; but clothes
them, as well as the other commandments, in the hortatory form of
a paternal address, full of solemn and affectionate admonition, with
the addition of such reminiscences and motives as seemed best
adapted to impress their observance upon the hearts of the people.
As the repetition not only of the decalogue, which God addressed
to the people directly from Sinai, but also of many other laws,
which He gave through Moses at Sinai and during the journey
through the desert, had no other object than this, to make the
contents of the covenant legislation intelligible to all the people,
and to impress them upon their hearts ; so those laws which are
peculiar to our book are not additions made to this legislation for
the purpose of completing it, but simply furnish such explanations
and illustrations of its meaning as were rendered necessary by the
peculiar relations and forms of the religious, social, and political
life of the nation in the promised land of Canaan. Throughout
Digitized by
Google
INTRODUCTION. 271
the whole book, the law, with its commandments, statutes, and
judgments, which Moses laid "this day" before the people, is
never described as either new or altered ; on the contrary, it is only
the law of the covenant, which Jehovah had concluded with His
people at Horeb (chap. v. 1 sqq.) ; and the commandments, statutes,
and judgments of this law Moses had received from the Lord upon
the Mount (Sinai), that he might teach Israel to keep them (chap,
v. 31 sqq. ; comp. chap. vi. 20-25). The details of the book also
bear this out.
The first part of the book, which embraces by far the greater
portion of it, viz. chap, i.— xxx., consists of three long addresses,
which Moses delivered to all Israel, according to the heading of
chap. i. 1-4, in the land of Moab, on the first of the eleventh
month, in the fortieth year after the exodus from Egypt. The first
of these addresses (chap. i. 6-iv. 40) is intended to prepare the
way for the exposition and enforcement of the law, which follow
afterwards. Moses calls to their recollection the most important
facts connected with the history of their forty years' wandering in
the desert, under the protection and merciful guidance of the Lord
(chap. i. 6-iii. 29) ; and to this he attaches the exhortation not to
forget the revelation of the Lord, which they had seen at Horeb,
or the words of the covenant which they had heard, but to bear in
mind at all times, that Jehovah alone was God in heaven and on
earth, and to keep His commandments and rights, that they might
enjoy long life and prosperity in the land of Canaan (chap. iv. 1-40).
This is followed by the statement in chap. iv. 41-43, that Moses
set apart three cities of refuge in the land to the east of the Jordan
for unintentional manslayers. The second address (chap, v.-xxvi.)
is described in the heading in chap. iv. 44-49 as the law, which
Moses set before the children of Israel, and consists of two parts,
the one general and the other particular. In the genercd part (chap.
v,-xi.), Moses repeats the ten words of the covenant, which Jehovah
spoke to Israel from Sinai out of the midst of the fire, together with
the circumstances which attended their promulgation (chap, v.), and
then expounds the contents of the first two commandments of the
decalogue, that Jehovah alone is the true and absolute God, and
requires love, from His people with all their heart and all their soul,
and therefore will not tolerate the worship of any other god beside
Himself (chap. vi.). For this reason the Israelites were not only
to form no alliance with the Canaanites after conquering them, and
taking possession of the promised land, but to exterminate them
Digitized by
Google
272 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
without quarter, and destroy their altars and idols, because the Lord
had chosen them to be His holy nation from love to their forefathers,
and would keep the covenant of His grace, and bestow the richest
blessings upon them, if they observed His commandments (chap,
vii.) ; but. when in possession and enjoyment of the riches of this
blessed land, they were to remain for ever mindful of the tempta-
tion, humiliation, and fatherly chastisement which they had expe-
rienced at the hand of their God in the wilderness, that they might
not forget the Lord and His manifestations of mercy in their self-
exaltation (chap, viii.), but might constantly remember that they
owed their conquest and possession of Canaan not to their own
righteousness, but solely to the compassion and covenant faithful-
ness of the Lord, whom they had repeatedly provoked to anger in
the wilderness (chap. ix. 1-x. 11), and might earnestly strive to
serve the Lord in true fear and love, and to keep His command-
ments, that they might inherit the promised blessing, and not be
exposed ~to the curse which would fall upon transgressors and the
worshippers of idols (chap. x. 12-xi. 32). To this there is added
in the more special part (chap, xii.-xxvi.), an account of the most
important laws which all Israel was to observe in the land of its
inheritance, viz. : (1.) Directions for the behaviour of Israel towards
the Lord God, e.g. as to the presentation of sacrificial offerings and
celebration of sacrificial meals at no other place than the one chosen
by God for the revelation of His name (chap, xii.) ; as to the de-
struction of all seducers to idolatry, whether prophets who rose up
with signs and wonders, or the closest blood-relations, and such towns
in the land as should fall away to idolatry (chap, xiii.) ; as to absti-
nence from the mourning ceremonies of the heathen, and from
unclean food, and the setting apart of tithes for sacrificial meals
and for the poor (chap, xiv.) ; as to the observance of the year of
remission, the emancipation of Hebrew slaves in the seventh year,
and the dedication of the first-born of oxen and sheep (chap, xv.),
and as to the celebration of the feast of Passover, of Weeks, and of
Tabernacles, by sacrificial meals at the sanctuary (chap. xvi. 1-17).
(2.) Laws concerning the organization of the theocratic state, and
especially as to the appointment of judges and official persons in
every town, and the trial of idolaters and evil-doers in both the
lower and higher forms (chap. xvi. 18-xvii. 13) ; concerning the
choice of a king in the future, and his duties (chap. xvii. 14-20) ;
concerning the rights of priests and Levites (chap, xviii. 1-8) ; and
concerning false and true prophets (vers. 9-22). (3.) Regulations
Digitizi
ed by Google
INTRODUCTION. 273
bearing upon the sanctification of human life : viz. legal instructions
as to the establishment of cities of refuge for unintentional man-
slayers (chap. six. 1-13) ; as to the maintenance of the sanctity
of the boundaries of landed property, and abstinence from false
charges against a neighbour (vers. 14-21) ; as to the conduct of
war, with special reference to the duty of sparing their own fighting
men, and also defenceless enemies and their towns (chap, xx.) ; as
to the expiation of inexplicable murders (chap. xxi. 1-9) ; as to the
mild treatment of women taken in war (vers. 10-14) ; the just use
of paternal authority (vers. 15-21) ; and the burial of criminals
that had been executed (vers. 22, 23). (4.) The duty of paying
affectionate regard to the property of a neighbour, and cherishing
a sacred dread of violating the moral and natural order of the world
(chap. xxii. 1-12), with various precepts for the sanctification of
the marriage bond (chap. xxii. 13-xxiii. 1), of the theocratic union
as a congregation *(chap. xxiii. 2-26), and also of domestic and
social life, in all its manifold relations (chaps, xxiv. and xxv.) ; and
lastly, the appointment of prayers of thanksgiving on the presenta-
tion of the first-fruits and tenths of the fruits of the field (chap,
xxvi. 1-15) ; together with a closing admonition (vers. 16-19) to
observe all these laws and rights with all the heart. The third
address (chap. xxvii.-xxx.) has reference to the renewal of the cove-
nant. This solemn act is introduced with a command to write the
law upon large stones when Canaan should be conquered, and to
set up these stones upon Mount Ebal, to build an altar there ; and
after presenting burnt-offerings and slain-offerings, to proclaim in
the most solemn manner both the blessing and curse of the law,
the former upon Gerizim, and the latter upon Ebal (chap, xxvii.).
Moses takes occasion from this command to declare most fully what
blessings and curses would come upon the people, according as they
should or should not hearken to the voice of the Lord (chap, xxviii.).
Then follows the renewal of the covenant, which consisted in the
fact that Moses recited once more, in a solemn address to the whole
of the national assembly, all that the Lord had done for them and
to them ; and after pointing again to the blessings and curses of the
law, called upon them and adjured them to enter into the covenant
of Jehovah their God, which He had that day concluded with
them, and having before them blessing and cursing, life and death,
to make the choice of life. — The second and much shorter portion
of the book (chap. xxxi.-xxxiv.) contains the close of Moses' life and
labours : (a) the appointment of Joshua to be the leader of Israel
PENT. — VOL. III. S
Digitized by
Google
274 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
into Canaan, and the handing over of the book of the law, when
completed, to the priests, for them to keep and read to the people
at the feast of Tabernacles in the year of jubilee (chap, xxxi.) ;
(b) the song of Moses (chap, xxxii. 1-47), and the announcement
of his death (vers. 48-52) ; (c) the blessing of Moses (chap. xxxiii.) ;
and (d) the account of his death (chap, xxxiv.).
From this general survey of the contents, it is sufficiently evident
that the exposition of the commandments, statutes, and rights of
the law had no other object than this, to pledge the nation in the
most solemn manner to an inviolable observance, in the land of
Canaan, of the covenant which Jehovah had made with Israel at
Horeb (chap, xxviii. 69). To this end Moses not only repeats the
fundamental law of this covenant, the decalogue, but many of the
separate commandments, statutes, and rights of the more expanded
Sinaitic law. These are rarely given in extmso (e.g. the laws of food
m chap, xiv.), but for the most part simply in Brief hints, bringing
out by way of example a few of the more important rules, for the
purpose of linking on some further explanations of the law in its ap-
plication to the peculiar circumstances of the land of Canaan. And
throughout, as F. W. Schultz correctly observes, the intention of the
book is, " by means of certain supplementary and auxiliary rules,
to ensure the realization of the laws or institutions of the earlier
books, the full validity of which it presupposes ; and that not merely
in some fashion or other, but in its true essence, and according to
its higher object and idea, notwithstanding all the difficulties that
might present themselves in Canaan or elsewhere." Not only are
the instructions relating to the building of the sanctuary, the service
of the priests and Levites, and the laws of sacrifice and purification,
passed over without mention as being already known ; but of the
festivals and festive celebrations, only the three annual feasts of
Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles are referred to, and that but
briefly, for the purpose of commanding the observance of the sacri-
ficial meals which were to be held at the sanctuary in connection
with these feasts (chap. xvi.). The tithes and first-fruits are noticed
several times, but only so far as they were to be applied to common
sacrificial meals before the Lord. The appointment of judges is
commanded- in all the towns of the land, and rules are given by
which the judicial form of procedure is determined more minutely;
but no rule is laid down as to the election of the judges, simply
because this had been done before. On the other hand, instructions
are given concerning the king whom the people would one day
Digitized by
Google
INTRODUCTION. 275
desire to set over themselves ; concerning the prophets whom the
Lord would raise tip ; and also concerning any wars that might be
waged with other nations than the Canaanites, the extermination
of the latter being enforced once more ; and several things besides.
— And if this selection of materials indicates an intention, not so
much to complete the legislation of the earlier books by the addition
of new laws, as to promote its observance and introduction into
the national life, and secure its permanent force ; this intention
becomes still more apparent when we consider how, Moses, after
repeating the decalogue, not only sums up the essential contents
of all the commandments, statutes, and rights which Jehovah has
commanded, in the one command to love God with all the heart,
etc., and sets forth this commandment as the sum of the whole law,
but in all his expositions of the law, all his exhortations to obedi-
ence, and all threats and promises, aims ever at this one object, to
awaken in the hearts of the people a proper state of mind for the
observance of the commandments of God, viz. a feeling of humility
and love and willing obedience, and to destroy that love for merely
outward legality and pharisaic self-righteousness which is inherent
in the natural man, that the people may circumcise the foreskin of
their heart, and enter heartily into the covenant of their God, and
maintain that covenant with true fidelity.
It is in this peculiar characteristic and design of the legislative
addresses which the book contains, and not in the purpose attributed
to it, of appending a general law for the nation to the legislation of
the previous books, which had reference chiefly to the priests and
Levites, 1 that we are to seek for that completion of the law which
the book of Deuteronomy supplies. And in this we may find the
strongest proof of the Mosaic origin of this concluding part of the
Thorah. What the heading distinctly states (chap. i. 1-4), — viz.
1 In opposition to this view of Ed. R'tehm, SchuUz justly argues that the
book of Deuteronomy is very far from containing everything that concerned the
people and was of great importance to them. It does not even repeat those laws
of the first book of the covenant in Ex. xx.-xxiii., which affected most closely
the social every-day life of the people. It contains nothing about circumcision,
which certainly could not have been omitted from the national law-book; no
further details as to the Passover, Pentecost, and the feast of Tabernacles ; it
does not even mention the great day of atonement, on which every Israelite had
to fast on pain of death, nor the feast of trumpets and year of jubilee ; and the
Sabbath command is simply introduced quite briefly in and with the decalogue.
Of all the defilements and washings, which were of the greatest moment, accord-
ing to the Old Testament view, to every individual, there is not a single word.
Digltizi
ed by Google
y
276 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
that Moses delivered this address to all Israel a short time before
his death in the land of Moab, on the other side of the Jordan, and
therefore on the threshold of the promised land, — is confirmed
by both the form and contents of the book. As Hengstenberg has
well observed (Ev. K. Z. 1862, No. 5, pp. 49 sqq.), " the address of
Moses is in perfect harmony with his situation. He speaks like a-
dying father to his children. The words are earnest, inspired, im-
pressive. He looks back over the "whole of the forty years of their
wandering in the desert, reminds the people of all the blessings
they have received, of the ingratitude with which they have so
often repaid them, and of the judgments of God, and the love that
continually broke forth behind them ; he explains the laws again
and again, and adds what is necessary to complete them, and is
never weary of urging obedience to them in the warmest and most
emphatic words, because the very life of the nation was bound up
with this ; he surveys all the storms and conflicts which they have
passed through, and, beholding the future in the past, takes a survey
also of the future history of the nation, and sees, with mingled
sorrow and joy, how the three great features of the past — viz. apos-
tasy, punishment, and pardon — continue to repeat themselves in the
future also. — The situation throughout is the time when Israel was
standing on the border of the promised land, and preparing to cross
the Jordan ; and there is never any allusion to what formed the
centre of the national life in future times — to Jerusalem and its
temple, or to the Davidic monarchy. The approaching conquest of
the land is merely taken for granted as a whole ; the land is dressed
throughout in all the charms of a desired good, and no reference is
ever made to the special circumstances of Israel in the land about
to be conquered." To this there is to be added what makes its
appearance on every hand — the most lively remembrance of Egypt,
and the condition of the people when living there (cf. chap. v. 15,
vii. 15, xi. 10, xv. 15, xvi. 12, xxiv. 18, xxviii. 27, 35, 60), and an
accurate acquaintance with the very earliest circumstances of the
different nations with which the Israelites came into either friendly
or hostile contact in the Mosaic age (chap, ii.) ; together with many
other things that were entirely changed a short time after the con-
quest of Canaan by the Israelites.
And just as these addresses, which complete the giving of the
law and bring it to a close, form an integral part of the Thorah, so
the historical account of the finishing of the book of the law, and its
being handed over to the priests, together with the song and blessing
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. I. 1-5. 277
of Moses (chap, xxxi.-xxxiii.), form a fitting conclusion to the work
of Moses, the lawgiver and mediator of the old covenant ; and to
this the account of his death, with which the Pentateuch closes
(chap, xxxiv.), is very appropriately appended.
EXPOSITION.
HEADING AND INTRODUCTION.
Chap. i. 1-5.
Vebs. 1-4 contain the heading to the whole book ; and to this the
introduction to the first address is appended in ver. 5. By the ex-
pression, " These he the words" etc., Deuteronomy is attached to the
previous books ; the word " these" which refers to the addresses
that follow, connects what follows with what goes before, just as in
Gen. ii. 4, vi. 9, etc. The geographical data in ver. 1 present no
little difficulty; for whilst the general statement as to the place
where Moses delivered the addresses in this book, viz. beyond
Jordan, is particularized in the introduction to the second address
(chap. iv. 46), as "in the valley over against Beth-Peor" here it is
described as " in the vnlderness, in the Arabah," etc. This contrast
between the verse before us and chap. iv. 45, 46, and still more
the introduction of the very general and loose expression, " in the
desert," which is so little adapted for a geographical definition of
the locality, that it has to be defined itself by the additional words
»"tn the Arabah," suggest the conclusion that the particular names
introduced are not intended to furnish as exact a geographical ac-
count as possible of the spot where Moses explained the law to all
Israel, but to call up to view the scene of the addresses which follow,
and point out the situation of all Israel at that time. Israel was
"in the desert," not yet in Canaan the promised inheritance, and
in fact " in the Arabah." This is the name given to the deep low-
lying plain on both sides of the Jordan, which runs from the Lake
of Gennesaret to the Dead Sea, and stretches southwards from the
Dead Sea to Aila, at the northern extremity of the Red Sea, as we
may see very clearly from chap. ii. 8, where the way which the
Israelites took past Edom to Aila is called the " way of the Arabah,"
and also from the fact that the Dead Sea is called " the sea of the
Digitized by
Google
278 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Arabali" in chap. iii. 17 and iv. 49. At present the name Arabali
is simply attached to the southern half of this valley, between the
Dead Sea and the Ked Sea; whilst the northern part, between
the Dead Sea and the Sea of Galilee, is called el Ghor ; though
Abulfeda, Ibn Haukal, and other Arabic geographers, extend the
name Ghor from the Lake of Gennesaret to Aila (cf. Ge$. ths.
p. 1166 ; Hengstenberg, Balaam, p. 520 ; Robinson, Pal. ii. p. 596).—
»|1D 9iO, " over against Suph" (tiD for So, chap. ii. 19, iii. 29, etc.,
for the sake of euphony, to avoid the close connection of the two
w-sounds). Suph is probably a contraction of IID'D', "the Ked
Sea" (see at Ex. x. 19). This name is given not only to the Gulf
of Suez (Ex. xiii. 18, xv. 4, 22, etc.), but to that of Akabah also
(Num. xiv. 25, xxi. 4, etc.). There is no other Suph that would be
at all suitable here. The LXX. have rendered it 7rKq<nov t%
epvOpas BaXcurarfi ; and Onkelos and others adopt the same ren-
dering. This description cannot serve as a more precise definition
of the Arabah, in which case "iBfet (which) would have to be supplied
before $>io, since " the Arabah actually touches the Red Sea." Nor
does it point out the particular spot in the Arabah where the ad-
dresses were delivered, as Knobel supposes ; or indicate the connec-
tion between the Arboth Moab and the continuation of the Arabah
on the other side of the Dead Sea, and point out the Arabah in all
this extent as the heart of the country over which the Israelites had
moved during the whole of their forty years' wandering (Hengstm-
berg). For although the Israelites passed twice through the Arabah
(see p. 246), it formed by no means the heart of the country in
which they continued for forty years. The words "opposite to Suph,"
when taken in connection with the following names, cannot have
any other object than to define with greater exactness the desert
in which the Israelites had moved during the forty years. Moses
spoke to all Israel on the other side of the Jordan, when it was
still in the desert, in the Arabah, still opposite to the Eed Sea, after
crossing which it had entered the wilderness (Ex. xv. 22), " between
Paran, and Topliel, and Laban, and Hazeroth, and Di-Saliab."
Paran is at all events not the desert of this name in all its extent
(see vol. ii. pp. 58, 59), but the place of encampment in the " desert
of Paran" (Num. x. 12, xii. 16), i.e. the district of Kadesh in the
desert of Zin (Num. xiii. 21, 26) ; and Hazeroth is most probably
the place of encampment of that name mentioned in Num. xi. 35, xii.
16, from which Israel entered the desert of Paran. Both places had
been very eventful to the Israelites. At Hazeroth, Miriam the prc-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. I. 1-5. 279
phetess and Aaron the high priest had stumbled through rebellion
against Moses (Num. xii.). In the desert of Paran by Kadesh the
older generation had been rejected, and sentenced to die in the wil-
derness on account of its repeated rebellion against the Lord (Num.
xiv.) ; and when the younger generation^that had grown up in the
wilderness assembled once more in Kadesh to set out for Canaan,
even Moses and Aaron, the two heads of the nation, sinned there
at the water of strife, so that they two were not permitted to enter
Canaan, whilst Miriam died there at that time (Num. xx.). But if
Paran and Hazeroth are mentioned on account of the tragical events
connected with these places, it is natural to conclude that there were
similar reasons for mentioning the other three names as well. Tophel
is supposed by Hengttenberg (Balaam, p. 517) and Robinson (Pal.
ii. p. 570) and all the more modern writers, to be the large village
of Tafyleh, with six hundred inhabitants, the chief place in Jebal,
on the western side of the Edomitish mountains, in a well-watered
valley of the wady of the same name, with large plantations of fruit-
trees {Burckhardt, Syr. pp. 677, 678). The Israelites may have
come upon this place in the neighbourhood of Oboth (Num. xxi. 10,
11) ; and as its inhabitants, according to Burckhardt, p. 680, supply
the Syrian caravans with a considerable quantity of provisions,
which they sell to them in the castle of el Ahsa, Schultz conjectures
that it may have been here that the people of Israel purchased
food and drink of the Edomites for money (chap. ii. 29), and that
Tafyleh is mentioned as a place of refreshment, where the Israelites
partook for the first time of different food from the desert supply.
There is a great deal to be said in favour of this conjecture : for
even if the Israelites did not obtain different food for the first time
at this place, the situation of Tophel does warrant the supposition
that it was here that they passed for the first time from the wilder-
ness to an inhabited land ; on which' account the place was so
memorable for them, that it might very well be mentioned as being
the extreme east of their wanderings in the desert, as the opposite
point to the encampment at Paran, where they first arrived on the
western side of their wandering, at the southern border of Canaan.
Laban is generally identified with Libnah, the second place of en-
campment on the return journey from Kadesh (Num. xxxiii. 22),
and may perhaps have been the place referred to in Num. xvi., but
not more precisely defined, where the rebellion of the company of
Korah occurred. Lastly, Di-Sahab has been identified by modern
commentators with Mersa Dahab or Mina Dahab, ue. gold-harbour,
Digitized by
Google
280 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
a place upon a tongue of land in the Elanitic Golf, about the same
latitude as Sinai, where there is nothing to be seen now except a
quantity of date-trees, a few sand-hills, and about a dozen heaps of
stones piled up irregularly, but all showing signs of having once
been joined together (cf. Jfyrckhardt, pp. 847-8 ; and Hitter, Erdk.
xiv. pp. 226 sqq.). But this is hardly correct. As Roediger has
observed (on Wellsted's Reisen, ii. p. 127), "the conjecture has
been based exclusively upon the similarity of name, and there is
not the slightest exegetical tradition to favour it." But similarity
of names cannot prove anything by itself, as the number of places
of the same name, but in different localities, that we meet with in
the Bible, is very considerable. Moreover, the further assumption
which is founded upon this conjecture, namely, that the Israelites
went from Sinai past Dahab, not only appears untenable for the
reasons given above (p. 230), but is actually rendered impossible by
the locality itself. The approach to this tongue of land, which
projects between two steep lines of coast, with lofty mountain
ranges of from 800 to 2000 feet in height on both north and south,
leads from Sinai through far too narrow and impracticable a valley
for the Israelites to be able to march thither and fix an encampment
there. 1 And if Israel cannot have touched Dahab on its march,
every probability vanishes that Moses should have mentioned this
place here, and the name DirSahab remains at present undetermin-
able. But in spite of our ignorance of this place, and notwith-
standing the fact that even the conjecture expressed with regard to
Laban is very uncertain, there can be no well-founded doubt that
the words "between Paran and Tophel" are to be understood as
embracing the whole period of the thirty-seven years of mourning,
at the commencement of which Israel was in Paran, whilst at the
end they sought to enter Canaan by Tophel (the Edomitish Tafyleh),
and that the expression " opposite to Suph" points back to their first
entrance into the desert. — Looking from the steppes of Moab over
the ground that the Israelites had traversed, Suph, where they first
• entered the desert of Arabia, would lie between Paran, where the
congregation arrived at the borders of Canaan towards the west,
and Tophel, where they first ended their desert wanderings thirty-
seven years later on the east.
1 From the mouth of the valley through the masses of the primary moun-
tains to the sea-coast, there is a fan-like surface of drifts of primary rock, the
radius of which is thirty-five minutes long, the progressive work of the inun-
dations of an indefinable course of thousands of years " (Riippell, Nubien, p. 206).
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. I. 1-5. 281
In ver. 2 also the retrospective glance at the guidance through
the desert is unmistakeable. "Eleven days is the way from Horeb
to ike mountains of Seir as far as Kadesh-Barnea." With these
words, which were unquestionably intended to be something more
than a geographical notice of the distance of Horeb from Kadesh-
Barnea, Moses reminded the people that they had completed the
journey from Horeb, the scene of the establishment of the covenant,
to Kadesh, the border of the promised land, in eleven days (see pp.
246-7), that he might lead them to lay to heart the events which
took place at Kadesh itself. The " way of the mountains of Seir "
is not the way along the side of these mountains, i.e. the way
through the Arabah, which is bounded by the mountains of Seir on
the east, but the way which leads to the mountains of Seir, just as
in chap. ii. 1 the way of the Red Sea is the way that leads to this
sea. From these words, therefore, it by no means follows that
Kadesh-Barnea is to be sought for in the Arabah, and that Israel
passed through the Arabah from Horeb to Kadesh. According to
ver. 19, they departed from Horeb, went through the great and
terrible wilderness by the way to the mountains of the Amorites,
and came to Kadesh-Barnea. Hence the way to the mountains of
the Amorites, i.e. the southern part of what were afterwards the
mountains of Judah (see at Num. xiii. 17), is the same as the way
to the mountains of Seir ; consequently the Seir referred to here
is not the range on the eastern side of the Arabah, but Seir by
Hormah (ver. 44), i.e. the border plateau by Wady Murreh, opposite
to the mountains of the Amorites (Josh xi. 17, xii. 7 : see at Num.
xxxiv. 3).
Vers. 3, 4. To the description of the ground to which the
following addresses refer, there is appended an allusion to the not
less significant time when Moses delivered them, viz. "on the first
of the eleventh month in the fortieth year" consequently towards the
end of his life, after the conclusion of the divine lawgiving ; so that
he was able to speak " according to all that Jehovah had given him
in commandment unto them" (the Israelites), namely, in the legis-
lation of the former books, which is always referred to in this way
(chap. iv. 5, 23, v. 29, 30, vi. 1). The time was also significant,
from the fact that Sihon and Og, the kings of the Amorites, had
then been slain. By giving a victory over these mighty kings, the
Lord had begun to fulfil His promises (see chap. ii. 25), and had
thereby laid Israel under the obligation to love, gratitude, and
obedience (see Num. xxi. 21-35). The suffix in foian refers to
Digitized by
Google
282 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Moses, who had smitten the Amorites at the command and by the
power of Jehovah. According to Josh. xii. 4, xiii. 12, 31, Edrei
was the second capital of Og, and it is as such that it is mentioned,
and not as the place where Og was defeated (chap. iii. 1 ; Num.
xxi. 33). The omission of the copula 1 before 'JHIRS is to be
accounted for from the oratorical character of the introduction to
the addresses which follow. Edrei is the present Draa (see at
Num. xxi. 33). — In ver. 5, the description of the locality is again
resumed in the words " beyond the Jordan," and still further defined
by the expression " in the land of Moab ; " and the address itself is
introduced by the clause, " Moses took in hand to expound this law,"
which explains more fully the "i^n (spake) of ver. 3. " In the land
of Moab " is a rhetorical and general expression for " in the Arboth
Moab." /^n does not mean to begin, but to undertake, to take in
hand, with the subordinate idea sometimes of venturing, or daring
(Gen. xviii. 27), sometimes of a bold resolution : here it denotes an
undertaking prompted by internal impulse. Instead of being con-
strued with the infinitive, it is construed rhetorically here with the
finite verb without the copula (cf. Ges. § 143, 3, b.). ">N3 probably
signified to dig in the Kal; but this is not used. In the Piel it
means to explain (&iaaa<f>f}o-at,, explanare, LXX. Vulg.), never to
engrave, or stamp, not even here nor in chap, xxvii. 8 and Hab.
ii. 2. Here it signifies " to expound this law clearly," although the
exposition was connected with an earnest admonition to preserve
and obey it. " This " no doubt refers to the law expounded in
what follows ; but substantially it is no other than the law already
given in the earlier books. "Substantially there is throughout
but one law " (Schultz). That the book of Deuteronomy was not
intended to furnish a new or second law, is as evident as possible
from the word "W3.
I.— THE FIRST PREPARATORY ADDRESS.
Chap. i. 6-iv. 40.
For the purpose of enforcing upon the people the obligation to
true fidelity to the covenant, Moses commenced his address with a
retrospective glance at the events that had taken place during the
forty years of their journey from Sinai to the steppes of Moab, and
Digitizi
ed by Google
CHAP. I. 6-IV. 40. 283
showed in striking outlines now, when the Lord had called upon
the Israelites in Horeb to arise and take possession of the land of
Canaan, that had been promised to the patriarchs for their de-
scendants (chap. i. 6-8), they had greatly increased, and were well
organized by chiefs and judges (vers. 9-18) ; how they had pro-
ceeded to Kadesh-Barnea on the border of this land (ver. 19), and
there refused to enter in, notwithstanding the report of the spies
who were sent out as to the goodness of the land (vers.. 20-25), but
were alarmed at the might and strength of the Canaanites from
a want of confidence in the assistance of the Lord, and had rebelled
against their God, and been shut out in consequence from the pro-
mised land (vers. 26-46). It was true that at the expiration of this
period of punishment the Lord had not permitted them to make
war upon Edom and Moab, and drive out these nations from the
possessions which they had received from God; but after they had
gone round the mountains of Edom and the land of Moab (chap. ii.
1-23), He had given Sihon and Og, the kings of the Amorites,
into the power of the Israelites, that they might take possession of
their kingdoms in Gilead and Bashan (chap. ii. 24-iii. 17); and
after the conquest of these, He had imposed upon the tribes of
Reuben, Gad, and half Manasseh, who received the conquered land
for their inheritance, the obligation to go with their brethren across
the Jordan and help them to conquer Canaan, and had also ap-
pointed Joshua as their commander, who would divide the land
among them, since he (Moses) himself was not to be allowed to cross
the Jordan with them because of the anger of God which he had
drawn upon himself on their account (chap. iii. 18-29). He there-
fore appealed to Israel to hearken to the commandments of the
Lord, to preserve and fulfil them without addition or diminution ;
to continue mindful of the covenant which the Lord had made with
them ; to make themselves no image or likeness of Jehovah, that
they might not draw His wrath upon themselves and be scattered
among the heathen, but might ever remain in the land, of which
they were now about to take possession (chap. iv.). — In this address,
therefore, Moses reminded the whole congregation how the Lord
had fulfilled His promise from Horeb to the steppes of Moab, but
how they had sinned against their God through unbelief and rebel-
lion, and had brought upon themselves their long wanderings in the
desert, that he might append to this the pressing warning not to
forfeit the permanent possession of the land they were about to
conquer, through a continued and fresh transgression of the cove-
Digitized by
Google
284 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES. .
nant. — Certainly a very fitting preparation for the exposition of
the law which follows.
REVIEW OF THE DIVINE GUIDANCE OF ISRAEL FROM HOREB TO
KADE8H. — CHAP. I. 6-46.
Vers. 6—18. Moses commenced with the summons issued by the
Lord to Israel at Horeb, to rise and go to Canaan, — Ver. 6. As the
epithet applied to God, " Jehovah our God," presupposes the recep-
tion of Israel into covenant with Jehovah, which took place at Sinai,
so the words, "ye have dwelt long enough at this mountain," imply that
the purpose for which Israel was taken to Horeb had been answered,
i.e. that they had been furnished with the laws and ordinances
requisite for the fulfilment of the covenant, and could now remove
to Canaan to take possession of the promised land. The word of
Jehovah mentioned here is not found in this form in the previous
history ; but as a matter of fact it is contained in the divine instruc-
tions that were preparatory to their removal (Num. i.-iv. and ix.
15— x. 10), and the rising of the cloud from the tabernacle, which
followed immediately afterwards (Num. x. 11). The fixed use of
the name Horeb to designate the mountain group in general, instead
of the special name Sinai, which is given to the particular mountain
upon which the law was given (see vol. ii. p. 90), is in keeping with
the rhetorical style of the book. — Ver. 7. " Go to the mount of the
Amorites, and to all who dwell near." The mount of the Amorites
is the mountainous country inhabited by this tribe, the leading
feature in the land of Canaan, and is synonymous with the " land
of the Canaanites " which follows ; the Amorites being mentioned
instar omnium as being the most powerful of all the tribes in Canaan,
just as in Gen. xv. 16 (see at Gen. x. 16). 1*J5$ " those who dwell
by it," are the inhabitants of the whole of Canaan, as is shown by
the enumeration of the different parts of the land, which follows
immediately afterwards. Canaan was naturally divided, according
to the character of the ground, into the Arabah, the modern Glior
(see at ver. 1) ; the mountain, the subsequent mountains of Judah
and Ephraim (see at Num. xiii. 17) ; the lowland (shephelah), ue.
the low flat country lying between the mountains of Judah and the
Mediterranean Sea, and stretching from the promontory of Carmel
down to Gaza, which is intersected by only small undulations and
ranges of hills, and generally includes the hill country which formed
the transition from the mountains to the plain, though the two are
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. I. 6-18. 285
distinguished in Josh. x. 40 and xii. 8 (see at Josh. xv. 33 sqq.) ; the
south land (negeb: see at Num. xiii. 17) ; and the sea-shore, i.e. the
generally narrow strip of coast running along by the Mediterranean
Sea from Joppa to the Tyrian ladder, or Rds el Abiad, just below
Tyre (yid. v. Raumer, Pal. p. 49). — The special mention of Lebanon
in connection with the land of the Canaanites, and the enumera-
tion of the separate parts of the land, as well as the extension of
the eastern frontier as far as the Euphrates (see at Gen. xv. 18),
are to be attributed to the rhetorical fulness of the style. The
reference, however, is not to Antilibanus, but to Lebanon proper,
which was within the northern border of the land of Israel, as fixed
in Num. xxxiv. 7-9. — Ver. 8. This land the Lord had placed at the
disposal of the Israelites for them to take possession of, as He had
sworn to the fathers (patriarchs) that He would give it to their
posterity (cf. Gen. xii. 7, xiii. 15, xv. 18 sqq., etc.). The " swearing"
on the part of God points back to Gen. xxii. 16. The expression
"to them and to their seed" is the same as "to thee and to thy seed"
in Gen. xiii. 15, xvii. 8, and is not to be understood as signifying
that the patriarchs themselves ought to have taken actual possession
of Canaan; but "to their seed" is in apposition, and also a more
precise definition (comp. Gen. xv. 7 with ver. 18, where the simple
statement " to thee " is explained by the fuller statement " to thy
seed"), njo has grown into an interjection = nan. »aep jru : to give
before a person, equivalent to give up to a person, or place at his free
disposal (for the use of the word in this sense, see Gen. xiii. 9, xxxiv.
10). Jehovah (this is the idea of vers. 6-8), when He concluded
the covenant with the Israelites at Horeb, had intended to fulfil at
once the promise which He gave to the patriarchs, and to put them
into possession of the promised land ; and Moses had also done what
was required on his part, as he explained in vers. 9-18, to bring the
people safely to Canaan (cf. Ex. xviii. 23). As the nation had
multiplied as the stars of heaven, in accordance with the promise
of the Lord, and he felt unable to bear the burden alone and
settle all disputes, he had placed over them at that time wise and
intelligent men from the heads of the tribes to act as judges, and had
instructed them to adjudicate upon the smaller matters of dispute
righteously and without respect of person. For further particulars
concerning the appointment of the judges, see at Ex. xviii. 13-26,
where it is related how Moses adopted this plan at the advice of
Jethro, even before the giving of the law at Sinai. The expression
"<»< that time," in ver. 9, is not at variance with this. The imperfect
Digitized by
Google
286 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
"idSo with vav rel., expresses the order of thought and not of time.
For Moses did not intend to recall the different circumstances
to the recollection of the people in their chronological order, but
arranged them according to their relative importance in connection
with the main object of his address. And this required that he
should begin with what God had done for the fulfilment of His
promise, and then proceed afterwards to notice what he, the servant
of God, had done in his office, as an altogether subordinate matter.
So far as this object was concerned, it was also perfectly indifferent
who had advised him to adopt this plan, whilst it was very important
to allude to the fact that it was the great increase in the number of
the Israelites which had rendered it necessary, that he might remind
the congregation how the Lord, even at that time, had fulfilled the
promise which He gave to the patriarchs, and in that fulfilment had
given a practical guarantee of the certain fulfilment of the other
promises as well. Moses accomplished this by describing the in-
crease of the nation in such a way that his hearers would he invo-
luntarily reminded of the covenant promise in Gen. xv. 5 sqq. (cf.
Gen. xii. 2, xviii. 18, xxii. 17, xxvi. 4). — Ver. 11. But in order to
guard against any misinterpretation of his words, " I cannot bear
you myself alone," Moses added, " May the Lord fulfil the promise
of numerous increase to the nation a thousand-fold." "Jehovah,
the God of your fathers (i.e. who manifested Himself as God to your
fathers), add to you a thousand times, D33, as many as ye are, and
bless you as He has said." The "blessing" after "multiplying"
points back to Gen. xii. 2. Consequently, it is not to be restricted
to "strengthening, rendering fruitful, and multiplying," but must
be understood as including the spiritual blessing promised to Abra-
ham. — Ver. 12. " How can I myself alone bear your cumbrance, and
your burden, and your strife?" The burden and cumbrance of the
nation are the nation itself, with all its affairs and transactions,
which pressed upon the shoulders of Moses. — Vers. 13 sqq. ^J' 3 ?!
give here, provide for yourselves. The congregation was to nomi-
nate, according to its tribes, wise, intelligent, and well-known men,
whom Moses would appoint as heads, ij. as judges, over the nation.
At their installation he gave them the requisite instructions (ver. 16):
" Ye shall hear between your brethren," i.e. hear both parties as medi-
ators, "and judge righteously, without respect of person" DOB "Win,
to look at the face, equivalent to D^S Kiw (Lev. xix. 15), i.e. to act
partially (cf. Ex. xxiii. 2, 3). " The judgment is God's," i.e. ap-
pointed by God, and to be administered in the name of God, or in
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. I. lfl-46. 287
accordance with His justice ; hence the expression " to bring before
God " (Ex. xxi. 6, xxii. 7, etc.). On the difficult cases which the
judges were to bring before Moses, see at Ex. xviii. 26.
Vers. 19-46. Everything had been done on the part of God and
Moses to bring Israel speedily and safely to Canaan. The reason
for their being compelled to remain in the desert for forty years was
to be found exclusively in their resistance to the commandments of
God. The discontent of the people with the guidance of God was
manifested at the very first places of encampment in the desert
(Num. xi. and xii.) ; but Moses passed over this, and simply re-
minded them of the rebellion at Kadesh (Num. xiii. and xiv.),
because it was this which was followed by the condemnation of the
rebellious generation to die out in the wilderness. — Ver. 19. " When
we departed from Horeb, we passed through the great and dreadful
wilderness, which ye have seen" i.e. become acquainted with, viz.
the desert of et Tih (see p. 57), " of the way to the mountains of
the Amorites, and came to Kadesh-Barnea" (see at Num. xii. 16).
=I?n, with an accusative, to pass through a country (cf. chap. ii. 7 ;
Isa. 1. 10, etc.). Moses had there explained to the Israelites, that
they had reached the mountainous country of the Amorites, which
Jehovah was about to give them ; that the land lay before them,
and they might take possession of it without fear (vers. 20, 21).
But they proposed to send out men to survey the land, wittfits towns,
and the way into it. Moses approved of this proposal, and sent out
twelve men, one from each tribe, who went through the land, etc. '
(as is more fully related in Num. xiii., and has been expounded in
connection with that passage, vers. 22-25). Moses' summons to
them to take the land (vers. 20, 21) is not expressly mentioned
there, but it is contained implicite in the fact that spies were sent
out ; as the only possible reason for doing this must have been, that
they might force a way into the land, and take possession of it. In
ver. 25, Moses simply mentions so much of the report of the spies
as had reference to the nature of the land, viz. that it was good,
that he may place in immediate contrast with this the refusal of the
people to enter in. — Vers. 26, 27. " But ye would not go up, and were
rebellious against the mouth (i.e. the express will) of Jehovah your
God, and murmured in your tents, and said, Because Jehovah hated
us, He hath brought us forth out of the land of Egypt, to give us into
tlie luxnd of the Amorites to destroy us" TOOlf, either an infinitive
with a feminine termination, or a verbal noun construed with an
accusative (see Ges. § 133 ; Ewald, § 238, a.). — By the allusion to the
Digitized by
Google
288 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
murmuring in the tents, Moses points them to Num. xiv. 1, and then
proceeds to describe the rebellion of the congregation related there
(vers. 2-4), in such a manner that the state of mind manifested on
that occasion presents the appearance of the basest ingratitude,
inasmuch as the people declared the greatest blessing conferred upon
them by God, viz. their deliverance from Egypt, to have been an
act of hatred on His part. At the same time, by addressing the
existing members of the nation, as if they themselves had spoken
so, whereas the whole congregation that rebelled at Kadesh had
fallen in the desert, and a fresh generation was now gathered round
him, Moses points to the fact, that the sinful corruption which broke
out at that time, and bore such bitter fruit, had not died out with the
older generation, but was germinating still in the existing Israel,
and even though it might be deeply hidden in their hearts, would be
sure to break forth again. — Ver. 28. " Whither shall we go up t Our
brethren (the spies) have quite discouraged our heart" (Don, lit. to
cause to flow away ; cf . Josh. ii. 9), viz. through their report (Num.
xiii. 28, 29, 31-33), the substance of which is repeated here.
The expression 0*!?#3, " in heaven" towering up into heaven, which
is added to " towns great and fortified," is not an exaggeration, but,
as Moses also uses it in chap. ix. 1, a rhetorical description of the
impression actually received with regard to the size of the towns. 1
" The soils of the Anakims :" see at Num. xiii. 22. — Vers. 29-31.
The attempt made by Moses to inspire the despondent people with
courage, .when they were ready to despair of ever conquering the
Canaanites, by pointing them to the help of the Lord, which they
had experienced in so mighty and visible a manner in Egypt and
the desert, and to urge them to renewed confidence in this their
almighty Helper and Guide, was altogether without success. And
just because the appeal of Moses was unsuccessful, it is passed over
in the historical account in Num. xiv. ; all that is mentioned there
(vers. 6—9) being the effort made by Joshua and Caleb to stir up
the people, and that on account of the effects which followed the
courageous bearing of these two men, so far as" their own future
history was concerned. The words " goeth before you" in ver. 30,
are resumed in ver. 33, and carried out still further. " Jehovah, . . •
1 " The eyes of weak faith or unbelief saw the towns really towering up to
heaven. Nor did the height appear less, even to the eyes of faith, in relation,
that is to say, to its own power. Faith does not hide the difficulties from
itself, that it may not rob the Lord, who helps it over them, of any of the praise
that is justly His due" (&Aufte).
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. I. 19-46. . 289
He shall figltt for you according to all (^S) tluit," i.e. in exactly the
same manner as, " Hie did for you in Egypt," especially at the crossing
cf the Red Sea (Ex. xiv.), " and in the wilderness, which thou hast seen
(nw, as in ver. 19), wJiere ("Wto without 1a in a loose connection ; see
Ewald, § 331, c. and 333, a.) Jehovah thy God bore thee as a man bear-
eth his son ;" i.e. supported, tended, and provided for thee in the most
fatherly way (see the similar figure in Num. xi. 12, and expanded
still more fully in Ps. xxiii.). — Vers. 32, 33. " And even at this word
ye remained unbelieving towards ilie Lord ;" i.e. notwithstanding the
fact that I reminded you of all the gracious help that ye had expe-
rienced from your God, ye persisted in your unbelief. The parti-
ciple B^DKO D 9— > " V e were not believing," is intended to describe
their unbelief as a permanent condition. This unbelief was all the
more grievous a sin, because the Lord their God went before them
all the way in the pillar of cloud and fire, to guide and to defend
them. On the fact itself, comp. Num. ix. 15 sqq., x. 33, with Ex.
xiii. 21, 22. — Vers. 34-36. Jehovah was angry, therefore, when He
heard these loud words, and swore that He would not let any one
of those men, that evil generation, enter the promised land, with the
exception of Caleb, because he had followed the Lord faithfully
(cf. Num. xiv. 21-24). The yod in TOW is the antiquated connect-
ing vowel of the construct state.
But in order that he might impress upon the people the judg-
ment of the holy God in all its stern severity, Moses added in ver.
37 : " also Jehovah was angry with me for your sokes, saying, Thou
also shalt not go in thither;" and he did this before mentioning
Joshua, who was excepted from the judgment as well as Caleb,
because his ultimate intention was to impress also upon the minds
of the people the fact, that even in wrath the Lord had been mind-
ful of His covenant, and when pronouncing the sentence upon His
servant Moses, had given the people a leader in the person of
Joshua, who was to bring them into the promised inheritance. We
are not to infer from the close connection in which this event, which
did not take place according to Num. xx. 1-13 till the second
arrival of the congregation at Kadesh, is placed with the earlier
judgment of God at Kadesh, that the two were contemporaneous,
and so supply, after " the Lord was angry with me," the words
" on that occasion." For Moses did not intend to teach the people
history and chronology, but to set before them the holiness of the
judgments of the Lord. By using the expression " for your sakes,"
Moses did not wish to free himself from guilt. Even in this book
PENT. — VOL. III. T
Digitized by
Google
290 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
his sin at the water of strife is not passed over in silence (cf. chap,
xxxii. 51). Bat on the present occasion, if he had given promi-
nence to his own fault, he would have weakened the object for
which he referred to this event, viz. to stimulate the consciences of
the people, and instil into them a wholesome dread of sin, by hold-
ing up before them the magnitude of their guilt. But in order
that he might give no encouragement to false security respecting
their own sin, on the ground that even highly gifted men of God
fall into sin as well, Moses simply pointed out the fact, that the
quarrelling of the people with him occasioned the wrath of God to
fall upon him also. — Ver. 38. " Who standeth before thee" equiva-
lent to " in thy service" (Ex. xxiv. 13, xxxiii. 11 : for this mean-
ing, see chap. x. 8, xviii. 7 ; 1 Kings i. 28). " Strengthen him:"
comp. chap. xxxi. 7 ; and with regard to the installation of Joshua
as the leader of Israel, see Num. xxvii. 18, 19. The suffix in WW
points back to J^Nn in ver. 35. Joshua would divide the. land
among the Israelites for an inheritance, viz. (ver. 39) among the
young Israelites, the children of the condemned generation, whom
Moses, when making a further communication of the judicial sen-
tence of God (Num. xiv. 31), had described as having no share in
the sins of their parents, by adding, " who know not to-day what
is good and evil." This expression is used to denote a condition of
spiritual infancy and moral responsibility (Isa. vii. 15, 16). It is
different in 2 Sam. xix. 36. — -In vers. 40-45 he proceeds to describe
still further, according to Num. xiv. 39-45, how the people, by re-
sisting the command of God to go back into the desert (ver. 41,
compared with Num. xiv. 25), had simply brought still greater
calamities upon themselves, and had had to atone for the presump-
tuous attempt to force a way into Canaan, in opposition to the
express will of the Lord, by enduring a miserable defeat. Instead
of " they acted presumptuously to go up " (Num. xiv. 44), Moses
says here, in ver. 41, " ye acted frivolously to go up ;" and in ver.
43, " ye acted rashly, and went up." Tin, from *W, to boil, or boil
over (Gen. xxv. 29), signifies to act thoughtlessly, haughtily, or
rashly. On the particular fact mentioned in ver. 44, see at Num.
14, 45. — Vers. 45, 46. " Then ye returned and wept before Jehovah,"
i.e. before the sanctuary ; " but Jehovah did not hearken to your
voice." yitf does not refer to the return to Kadesh, but to an inward
turning, noPiideed true conversion to repentance, but simply the
giving up of their rash enterprise, which they had undertaken in
opposition to the commandment of God, — the return from a defiant
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. II. 1-28. 291
attitude to unbelieving complaining on account of the misfortune that
had come upon them. Such complaining God never hears. . " And
ye sat (remained) tn Kadesh many days, that ye remained" i,e. not
" as many days as ye had been there already before the return of the
spies," or " as long as ye remained in all the other stations together,
viz. the half of thirty-eight years" (as Seder Ohm and many of the
Rabbins interpret) ; but " just as long as ye did remain there," as we
may see from a comparison of chap. ix. 25. It seemed superfluous
to mention more precisely the time they spent in Kadesh, because
that was well known to the people, whom Moses was addressing. He
therefore contented himself with fixing it by simply referring to its
duration, which was known to them all. It is no doubt impossible
for us to determine the time they remained in Kadesh, because the
v expression " many days" is simply a relative one, and may signify
many years, just as well as many months or weeks. But it by no
means warrants the assumption of Fries and others, that no abso-
lute departure of the whole of the people from Kadesh ever took
place. Such an assumption is at variance with chap. ii. 1. The
change of subjects, " ye sat," etc. (ver. 46), and " we turned and
removed" (chap. ii. 1), by no' means proves that Moses only went
away with that part of the congregation which attached itself to
him, whilst the other portion, which was most thoroughly estranged
from him, or rather from the Lord, remained there. still. The
change of subject is rather to be explained from the fact that
Moses was passing from the consideration of the events in Kadesh,
which he held up before the people as a warning, to a description
of the further guidance of Israel. The reference to those events
had led him involuntarily, from ver. 22 onwards, to distinguish
between himself and the people, and to address his words to them
for the purpose of bringing out their rebellion against God. And
now that he had finished with this, he returned to the communica-
tive mode of address with which he set out in ver. 6, but which he
had suspended again until ver. 19.
REVIEW OP THE DIVINE GUIDANCE OF ISRAEL BOUND EDOM
AND MOAB TO THE FRONTIER OF THE AMOBITES, AND OF "THE
GRACIOUS ASSISTANCE AFFOBDED BY THE LORD IN THE CON-
QUEST OF THE KINGDOMS OF SIHON AND OG. — CHAJP. II. AND III.
Vers. 1-23. March from Kadesh to the Frontier of the
Amorites. — Ver. 1. After a long stay in Kadesh, they commenced
Digitized by
Google
292 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
their return into the desert. The words, " We departed . . .by the
way to the Red Sea," point back to Num. xiv. 25. This departure
is expressly designated as an act of obedience to the divine command
recorded there, by the expression "as Jehovah spake to me." Con-
sequently Moses is not speaking here of the second departure of the
congregation from Kadesh to go to Mount Hor (Num. xx. 22),
but of the first departure after the condemnation of the generation
that came out of Egypt. " And we went round Mount Seir many
days." This going round Mount Seir includes the thirty-eight years'
wanderings, though we are not therefore to picture it as " going
backwards and forwards, and then entering the Arabah again"
(SchuUz). Just as Moses passed over the reassembling of the con-
gregation at Kadesh (Num. xx. 1), so he also overlooked the going
to and fro in the desert, and fixed his eye more closely upon the
last journey from Kadesh to Mount Hor, that he might recall to the
memory of the congregation how the Lord had led them to the end
of all their wandering. — Vers. 2 sqq. When they had gone through
the Arabah to the southern extremity, the Lord commanded them
to turn northwards, i.e. to go round the southern end of Mount Seir,
and proceed northwards on the eastern side of it (see at Num. xxi.
10), without going to war with the Edomites (^^n, to stir one-
self up against a .person to conflict, norpp), as He would not give
them a foot-breadth of their land ; for He had given Esau (the
Edomites) Mount Seir for a possession. For this reason they were
to buy victuals and water of them for money (^3, to dig, to dig
water, i.e. procure water, as it was often necessary to dig wells, and
not merely to draw it, Gen. xxvi. 25. The verb UTS does not
signify to buy). — Ver. 7. And this they were able to do, because
the Lord had blessed them in all the work of their hand, i.e. not
merely in the rearing of flocks and herds, which they had carried
on in the desert (Ex. xix. 13, xxxiv. 3 ; Num. xx. 19, xxxii. 1 sqq.),
but in all that they did for a living ; whether, for example, when
stopping for a long time in the same place of encampment, they
sowed in suitable spots and reaped, or whether they sold the produce
of their toil and skill to the Arabs of the desert. " He hath observed
thy going through this great desert" (T[\, to know, then to trouble
oneself, Gen. xxxix. 6 ; to observe carefully, Prov. xxvii. 23, Ps.
i. 6),; and He has not suffered thee to want anything for forty
years, but as often as want has occurred, He has miraculously
provided for every necessity. — Ver. 8. In accordance with this
divine command, they went past the Edomites by the side of their
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. II. 1-28. 293
mountains, "from the way of the Arabah, from Elath (see at Gen.
xiv. 6) and Eziongeber" (see at Num. xxxiii. 35), te. into the
steppes of Moab, where they were encamped at that time.
God commanded them to behave in the same manner towards
the Moabites, when they approached their frontier (ver. 9). They
were not to touch their land, because the Lord had given Ar to the
descendants of Lot for a possession. In ver. 9 the Moabites are
mentioned, and in ver. 19 the Amorites also. The Moabites are
designated as " sons of Lot," for the same reason for which the
Edomites are called u brethren of Israel " in ver. 4. The Israelites
were to uphold the bond of blood-relationship with these tribes in
the most sacred manner. Ar, the capital of Moabitis (see at Num.
xxi. 15), is used here for the land itself, which was named after the
capital, and governed by it. — Vers. 11, 12. To confirm the fact that
the Moabites and also the Edomites had received from God the
land which they inhabited as a possession, Moses interpolates into
the words of Jehovah certain ethnographical notices concerning the
earlier inhabitants of these lands, from which it is obvious that
Edom and Moab had not destroyed them by their own power, but
that Jehovah had destroyed them before them, as is expressly stated
in vers. 21, 22. " The JEmim dwelt formerly therein" so. in Ar and
its territory, in Moabitis, " a high (i.e. strong) and numerous people,
of gigantic stature, which were also reckoned among the Rephaites,
like the Enakites (Anakim)." Emim, i.e. frightful, terrible, was
the name given to them by the Moabites. Whether this earlier or
original population of Moabitis was of Hamitic or Semitic descent
cannot be determined, any more than the connection between the
Emim and the JRephaim can be ascertained. On the Repliaim, see
vol. i. p. 203 ; and on the Anakites, at Num. xiii. 22. — Ver. 12.
The origin of the Horites (i.e. the dwellers in caves) of Mount Seir,
who were driven out of their possessions by the descendants of Esau,
and completely exterminated (see at Gen. xiv. 6, and xxxvi. 20), is
altogether involved in obscurity. The words, " as Israel has done
to the land of his possession, which Jehovah has given them" do not
presuppose the conquest of the land of Canaan or a post-Mosaic
authorship ; but u the land of his possession" is the land to the east
of the Jordan (Gilead and Bashan), which was conquered by the
Israelites under Moses, and divided among the two tribes and a half,
and which is also described in chap. iii. 20 as the "possession"
which Jehovah had given to these tribes. — Vers. 13-15. For this
reason Israel was to remove from the desert of Moab (i.e. the desert
Digitized by
Google
294 THE FIFTH BOOK OF HOSES.
whicK bounded Moabitis on the east), and to cross over the brook
Zered, to advance against the country of the Amorites (see at Num.
xxi. 12, 13). This occurred thirty-eight years after the condem-
nation of the people at Kadesh (Num. xiv. 23, 29), when the
generation rejected by God had entirely died out (Bon, to be all
gone, to disappear), so that not one of them saw the promised land.
They did not all die a natural death, however, but " the hand of tlu
Lord was against them to destroy them" ( D ?fJ, lit. to throw into con-
fusion, then used with special reference to the terrors with which
Jehovah destroyed His enemies ; Ex. xiv. 24, xxiii. 27, etc.), sc. by
extraordinary judgments (as in Num. xvi. 35, xvii. 14, xxi. 6, xxv.
9). — Vers. 16-19. When this generation had quite died out, the
Lord made known to Moses, and through him to the people, that
they were to cross over the boundary of Moab (i.e. the Arnon, ver.
24 ; see at Num. xxi. 13), the land of Ar (see at ver. 9), " to come
nigh over against the children of Amnion," i.e. to advance into the
neighbourhood of the Ammonites, who lived to the east of Moab ;
but they were, not to meddle with these descendants of Lot, because
He would give them nothing of the land that was given them for a
possession (ver. 19, as at vers. 5 and 9). — To confirm this, ethno-
graphical notices are introduced again in vers. 20-22 into the words
of God (as in vers. 10, 11), concerning the earlier population of
the country of the Ammonites. Ammonitis was also regarded as
a land of the Rephaites, because Rephaites dwelt therein, whom
the Ammonites called Zamzummim. " Zamzummim" from BDJ, to
hum, then to muse, equivalent to the humming or roaring people,
probably the same people as the Zuzim mentioned in Gen. xiv. 5.
This giant tribe Jehovah had destroyed before the Ammonites
(ver. 22), just as He had done for the sons of Esau dwelling upon
Mount Seir, namely, destroyed the Horites before them, so that the
Edomites "dwelt in their stead, even unto this day." — Ver. 23.
As the Horites had been exterminated by the Edomites, so were the
Avvaans (Avvim), who dwelt in farms (villages) at the south-west
corner of Canaan, as far as Gaza, driven out of their possessions
and exterminated by the Caphtorites, who sprang from Caphtor (see
at Gen. x. 14), although, according to Josh. xiii. 3, some remnants
of them were to be found among the Philistines even at that time.
This notice appears to be attached to the foregoing remarks simply
on account of the substantial analogy between them, without there
being any intention to imply that the Israelites were to assume the
same attitude towards the Caphtorites, who afterwards rose up in
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. II. 24-37. 295
the persons of the Philistines, as towards the descendants of Esau
and Lot.
Vers. 24-37. The Help op God in the Conquest op the
Kingdom op Sihon. — Vers. 24 sqq. Whereas the Israelites were
not to make war upon the kindred tribes of Edomites, Moabites,
and Ammonites, or drive them out of the possessions given to them
by God ; the Lord had given the Amorites, who had forced a way
into Gilead and Bashan, into their hands. — Vers. 24, 25. While
they were encamped on the Arnon, the border of the Amoritish
king of Sihon, He directed them to cross this frontier and take pos-
session of the land of Sihon, and promised that He would give this
king with all his territory into their hands, and that henceforward
(" this day" the day on which Israel crossed the Arnon) He would
put fear and terror of Israel upon all nations under the whole
heaven, so that as soon as they heard the report of Israel they
would tremble and writhe before them. VT\ ?nri, " begin, take" an
oratorical expression for " begin to take " (E*i in pause for Bn, chap.
i. 21). The expression, u aU nations under the whole heaven," is
hyperbolical ; it is not to be restricted, however, to the Canaanites
and other neighbouring tribes, but, according to what follows, to be
understood as referring to all nations to whom the report of the
great deeds of the Lord upon and on behalf of Israel should reach
(cf. chap. xi. 25 and Ex. xxiii. 27). ">^K, so that (as in Gen. xi. 7,
xiii. 16, xxii. 14). WO, with the accent upon the last syllable, on
account of the 1 consec. (Ewald, § 234, a.), from Sn, to twist, or
writhe with pain, here with anxiety. — Vers. 26-29» If Moses, not-
withstanding this, sent messengers to king Sihon with words of
peace (vers. 26 sqq. ; cf. Num. xxi. 21 sqq.), this was done to
show the king of the Amorites, that it was through his own fault
that his kingdom and lands and life were lost. The wish to pass
through his land in a peaceable manner was quite seriously ex-
pressed; although Moses foresaw, in consequence of the divine
communication, that he would reject his proposal, and meet Israel
with hostilities. For Sihon's kingdom did not form part of the land
of Canaan, which God had promised to the patriarchs for their
descendants ; and the divine foreknowledge of the hardness of Sihon
no more destroyed the freedom of his will to resolve, or the freedom
of his actions, than the circumstance that in ver. 30 the unwilling-
ness of Sihon is described as the effect of his being hardened by
God Himself. The hardening was quite as much the production
Digitized by
Google
THE FIFTH BOOK OF HOSES.
of human freedom and guilt, as the consequence of the divine
decree ; just as in the case of Pharaoh (see the discussion in vol. i.
pp. 453 sqq.). On Kedemoth, see p. 144. *TJ13 ^Tih equivalent to
" upon the way, and always upon the way," i.e. upon the high road
alone, as in Num. xx. 19. On the behaviour of the Edomites
towards Israel, mentioned in ver. 29, see p. 142. In the same way
the Moabites also supplied Israel with provisions for money. This
statement is not at variance with the unbrotherly conduct for which
the Moabites are blamed in chap, xxiii. 4, viz. that they did not
meet the Israelites with bread and water. For en?, to meet and
anticipate, signifies a hospitable reception, the offering of food and
drink without reward, which is essentially different from selling for
money. " In Ar " (ver. 29), as in ver. 18. The suffix in la (ver.
30) refers to the king, who is mentioned as the lord of the land, in
the place of the land itself, just as in Num. xx. 18. — Ver. 31. The
refusal of Sihon was suspended over him by God as a judgment of
hardening, which led to his destruction. " As this day^' an abbre-
viation of " as it has happened this day," i.e. as experience has now
shown (cf. chap. iv. 20, etc.). — Vers. 32-37. Defeat of Sihon, as
already described in the main in Num. xxi. 23-26. The war was a
war of extermination, in which all the towns were laid under the
ban (see Lev. xxvii. 29), i.e. the whole of the population of men,
women, and children were put to death, and only the flocks and
herds and material possessions were taken by the conquerors as
prey. — Ver. 34. Dfip "VJ? (city of men) is the town population of
men. — Ver. 36. They proceeded this way with the whole of the
kingdom of Sihon. " From AroSr on the edge of the Anion valley
(see at Num. xxxii. 34), and, in fact, from the city which is in Hie
valley" i.e. Ar, or Areopolis (see at Num. xxi. 15), — Aroer being
mentioned as the inclusive terminus a quo of the land that was
taken, and the Moabitish capital Ar as the exclusive terminus, as in
Josh. xiii. 9 and 16 ; " and as far as Gilead," which rises on the
north, near the Jabbok (or Zerka, see at chap. iii. 4), " there teas no
town too high for us," i.e. so strong that we could not take it. — Ver.
37. Only along the land of the Ammonites the Israelites did not
come, namely, along the whole of the side of the brook Jabbok, or
the country of the Ammonites, which was situated upon the eastern
side of the upper Jabbok, and the towns of the mountain, i.e. of the
Ammonitish highlands, and " to aU that the Lord had commanded]'
sc. commanded them not to remove. The statement, in Josh xiii.
25, that the half of the country of the Ammonites was given to the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. HL 1-11. 297
tribe of Gad, is not at variance with this ; for the allusion there is
to that portion of the land of the Ammonites which was between the
Arnon and the Jabbok, and which had already been taken from the
Ammonites by the Amorites under Sihon (cf. Judg. xi. 13 sqq.).
Chap. iii. 1-11. The Help op God in the Conquest of
the Kingdom of Og op Bashan. — Vers. 1 sqq. After the defeat
of king Sihon and the conquest of his land, the Israelites were able
to advance to the Jordan. But as the powerful Amoritish king
Og still held the northern half of Gilead and all Bashan, they
proceeded northwards at once and took the road to Bashan, that
they might also defeat this king, whom the Lord had likewise
given into their hand, and conquer his country (cf. Num. xxi.
33, 34). They smote him at Edrei, the modern Droit (see p. 155),
without leaving him even a remnant; and took all his towns,
t.e., as is here more fully stated in vers. 4 sqq., " sixty towns,
the whole region of Argob, the kingdom of Og in Bashan." These
three definitions refer to one and the same country. The whole
region of Argob included the sixty towns which formed the king-
dom of Og in Bashan, i.e. all the towns of the land of Bashan, viz.
(according to ver. 5) all the fortified towns, besides the unfortified
and open country towns of Bashan. <on, the chain for measuring,
then the land or country measured with the chain. The name
" region of Argot," which is given to the country of Bashan here,
and in vers. 4, 13, 14, and also in 1 Kings iv. 13, is probably derived
from 3iJ"ij stone-heaps, related to 3£i, a clump or clod of earth (Job
xxi. 33, xxxviii. 38). The Targumists • have rendered it correctly
fcUtolB (Trachona), from Tpaywv, a rough, uneven, stony district, so
called from the basaltic hills of Hauran ; just as the plain to the
east of Jebel Hauran, which resembles Hauran itself, is sometimes
called Tettul, from its tells or hills (Burckhardt, Syr. p. 173). 1 This
district has also received the name of Bashan, from the character
of its soil ; for 1^3 signifies a soft and level soil. From the name
given to it by the Arabic translators, the Greek name Baravaia,
Batancea, and possibly also the modern name of the country on the
north-eastern slope of Hauran at the back of Mount Hauran,
viz. Betlienije, are derived. — The name Argob probably originated
in the north-eastern part of the country of Bashan, viz. the modern
1 The derivation is a much more improbable one, " from the town of Argob,
*pis Vipcurau iro'Xiv ' A/><*/3/*£ , according to the Onomast., fifteen Roman miles to
the weit of Gerasa, which ia called 'P«y«/3i* by Josephus (Ant. xiii. 15, 5)."
Digitized by
Google
298 THE FIFTH BOOK OF HOSES.
Leja, with its stony soil covered with heaps of large blocks of stoue
(Burckhardt, p. 196), or rather in the extensive volcanic region to
the east of Haoran, which was first of all brought to distinct notice
in Wetzstewis travels, and of which he says that the "southern
portion, bearing the name Harra, is thickly covered with loose
volcanic stones, with a few conical hills among them, that have
been evidently caused by eruptions " ( Wetzstein, p. 6). The cen-
tral point of the whole is Safa, " a mountain nearly seven hours'
journey in length and about the same in breadth," in which " the
black mass streaming from the craters piled itself up wave upon
wave, so that the centre attained to the height of a mountain,
without acquiring the smoothness of form observable in mountains
generally," — "the black flood of lava being full of innumerable
streams of stony waves, often of a bright red colour, bridged over
with thin arches, which rolled down the slopes out of the craters
and across the high plateau " ( Wetzstein, pp. 6 and 7). At a later
period this name was transferred to the whole of the district of
Hauran ( == Bashan), because not only is the Jebel Hauran en-
tirely of volcanic formation, but the plain consists throughout of a
reddish brown soil produced by the actibn of the weather upon
volcanic stones, and even "the Leja plain has been poured out
from the craters of the Hauran mountains" {Wetzstein, p. 23).
Through this volcanic character of the soil, Hauran differs essen-
tially from Belka, Jebel Ajlun, and the plain of Jaulan, which is
situated between the Sea of Galilee and the upper Jordan on the
one side, and the plain of Hauran on the other, and reaches up to
the southern slope of the Hermon. In these districts the limestone
and chalk formations prevail, which present the same contrast to
the basaltic formation of the Hauran as white does to black (cf. v.
Raumer, Pal. pp. 75 sqq.). — The land of the limestone and chalk
formation abounds in caves, which are not altogether wanting
indeed in Hauran (as v. Raumer supposes), though they are only
found in eastern and south-eastern Hauran, where most of the
volcanic elevations have been perforated by troglodytes (see Wetz-
stein, pp. 92 and 44 sqq.). But the true land of caves on the
east of the Jordan is northern Gilead, viz. Erbed and Suit (Wetzst
p. 92). Here the troglodyte dwellings predominate, whereas in
Hauran you find for the most part towns and villages with houses
of one or more stories built above the surface of the ground,
although even on the eastern slope of the Hauran mountains there
are hamlets to be seen, in which the style of building forms a
Digitizi
ed by Google
chap. in. 1-11. 299
transition from actual caves to dwellings built upon the ground.
An excavation is first of all made in the rocky plateau, of the
breadth and depth of a room, and this is afterwards arched over
with a solid stone roof. The dwellings made in this manner have
all the appearance of cellars or tunnels. This style of building,
such as Wetzstein found in Hibbike for example, belongs to the
most remote antiquity. In some cases, hamlets of this kind were
even surrounded by a wall. Those villages of Hauran which are
built above the surface of the ground, attract the eye and stimulate
the imagination, when seen from a distance, in various ways. " In
the first place, the black colour of the building materials presents
the greatest contrast to the green around them, and to the trans-
parent atmosphere also. In the second place, the height of the
walls and the compactness of the houses, which always form a
connected whole, are very imposing. In the third place, they are
surmounted by strong towers. And in the fourth place, they are in
such a good state of preservation, that you involuntarily yield to the
delusion that they must of necessity be inhabited, and expect to
see people going out and in " ( Wetzstein, p. 49). The larger towns
are surrounded by walls ; but the smaller ones as a rule have none :
" the backs of the houses might serve as walls." The material of
which the houses are built is a grey dolerite, impregnated with
glittering particles of olivine. " The stones are rarely cemented,
but the fine and for the most part large squares lie one upon
another as if they were fused together." " Most of the doors of
the houses which lead into the streets or open fields are so low, that
it is impossible to enter them without stooping; but the large
buildings and the ends of the streets have lofty gateways, which are
always tastefully constructed, and often decorated with sculptures
and Greek inscriptions." The "larger gates have either simple or
(what are most common) double doors. They consist of a slab of
dolerite. There are certainly no doors of any other kind." These
stone doors turn upon pegs, deeply inserted into the threshold and
lintel. "Even a man can only shut and open doors of this kind,
by pressing with the back or feet against the wall, and pushing the
door with both hands" (Wetzstein, pp. 50 sqq. ; compare with this
the testimony of Buckingham, Burckhardt, Seetzen, and others, in
v. Raumer's Palestine, pp. 78 sqq.).
Now, even if the existing ruins of Hauran date for the most
part from a later period, and are probably of a Nabatsean origin
belonging to the times of Trajan and the Antonines, yet consider-
Digitized by
Google
300 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
ing the stability of the East, and the peculiar nature of the soil of
Hauran, they give a tolerably correct idea of the sixty towns of the
kingdom of Og of Bashan, all of which were fortified with high
walls, gates, and bars, or, as it is stated in 1 Kings iv. 13, " with
walls and brazen bars." l The brazen bars were no doubt, like the
gates themselves, of basalt or dolerite, which might easily be mis-
taken for brass. Besides the sixty fortified towns, the Israelites took
a very large number of T®*? *!!?> " towns of the inhabitants of the flat
country" i.e. unfortified open hamlets and villages in Bashan, and put
them under the ban, like the towns of king Sihon (vers. 6, 7 ; cf.
chap. ii. 34, 35). The infinitive, &}?$, is to be construed as a gerund
(cf. Ges. § 131, 2 ; Ewald, § 280, a.). The expression, " kingdom of
Og tn Bashan," implies that the kingdom of Og was not limited to
the land of Bashan, but included the northern half of Gilead as well.
In vers. 8—1 1, Moses takes a retrospective view of the whole of
the land that had been taken on the other side of the Jordan ; first
of all (ver. 9) in its whole extent from the Arnon to Hermon, then
(ver. 10) in its separate parts, to bring out in all its grandeur what
the Lord had done for Israel. The notices of the different names
of Hermon (ver. 9), and of the bed of king Og (ver. 11), are also
subservient to this end. Hermon is the southernmost spur of Anti-
libanus, the present Jebel es Sheikh, or Jebel et Telj. The Hebrew
name is not connected with ffjn, anathema, as Hengstenberg supposes
(Diss. pp. 197-8) ; nor was it first given by the Israelites to this moun-
tain, which formed part of the northern boundary of the land which
they had taken ; but it is to be traced to an Arabic word signifying
prominens mentis vertex, and was a name which had long been current
at that time, for which the Israelites used the Hebrew name jM?
(Sion = JN'fe'J, the high, eminent : chap. iv. 48), though this nama
did not supplant the traditional name of Hermon. The Sidonians
called it Sirion, a modified form of fey? (1 Sam. xvii. 5), or fl*®
(Jer. xlvi. 4), a " coat of mail ;" the Amorites called it Senir, pro-
bably a word with the same meaning. In Ps. xxix. 6, Sirion is used
1 It is also by no means impossible, that many of the oldest dwellings in the
ruined towers of Hauran date from a time anterior to the conquest of the land
by the Israelites. " Simple, built of heavy blocks of basalt roughly hewn, and
as hard as iron, with very thick walls, very strong stone gates and doors, many
of which were about eighteen inches thick, and were formerly fastened with
immense bolts, and of which traces still remain ; such houses as these may have
been the work of the old giant tribe of Rephaim, whose king, Og, was defeated
by the Israelites 3000 years ago" (C. v. Raumer, Pal. p. 80, after Porter's Five
Years in Damascus).
Digitized by
Google
chap. m. 1-11. 301
poetically for LTermon; and Ezekiel (xxvii. 4) uses Senir, in a
mournful dirge over Tyre, as synonymous with Lebanon ; whilst
Senir is mentioned in 1 Chron. v. 23, and Shenir in Cant. iv. 8, in
connection with Hermon, as a part of Antilibanus, as it might very
naturally happen that the Amoritish name continued attached to one
or other of the peaks of the mountain, just as we find that even
Arabian geographers, such as Abulfeda and Maraszid, call that
portion of Antilibanus which stretches from Baalbek to Emesa
(Horns, Heliopolis) by the name of Sanir. — Ver. 10. The different
portions of the conquered land were the following : "fitfasn, the plain,
i.e. the Amoritish table-land, stretching from the Arnon to Hesh-
bon, and in a north-easterly direction nearly as far as Rabbath-
Ammon, with the towns of Heshbon, Bezer, Medeba, Jahza, and
Dibon (chap. iv. 43 ; Josh. xiii. 9, 16, 17, 21, xx. 8 ; Jer. xlviii. 21
sqq.), which originally belonged to the Moabites, and is therefore
called " the field of Moab" in Num. xxi. 20 (see p. 148). " The
whole of Gilead," i.e. the mountainous region on the southern and
northern sides of the Jabbok, which was divided into two halves by
this river. The southern half, which reached to Heshbon, belonged
to the kingdom of Sihon (Josh. xii. 2), and was assigned by Moses
to the Reubenites and Gadites (ver. 12) ; whilst the northern half,
which is called " the rest of Gilead" in ver. 13, the modern Jebel
Ajhn, extending as far as the land of Bashan (Hauran and Jaulan),
belonged to the kingdom of Og (Josh. xii. 5), and was assigned to
the Manassite family of Machir (ver. 15, and Josh. xiii. 31 ; cf.
v. Raumer, Pal. pp. 229, 230). " And all Bashan unto Salcah and
Edrei." All Bashan included not only the country of Hauran (the
plain and mountain), but unquestionably also the district of Jedur
and Jaulan, to the west of the sea of Galilee and the upper Jordan,
or the ancient Gaulonitis (Jos. Ant. xviii. 4, 6, etc.), as the kingdom
of Og extended to the coasts of Geshuri and Maachathi (see at
ver. 14). Og had not conquered the whole of the land of Hauran,
however, but only the greater part of it. His territory extended
eastwards to Salcah, i.e. the present Szalcliat or Szarchad, about six
hours to the east of Bozrah, south of Jebel Hauran, a town with
800 houses, and a castle upon a basaltic rock, but uninhabited (cf.
v. Raumer, Pal. p. 255) ; and northwards to Edrei, i.e. the northern
Edrei (see at Num. xxi. 33), a considerable ruin on the north-
west of Bozrah, three or four English miles in extent, in the old
buildings of which there are 200 families living at present (Turks,
Druses, and Christians). By the Arabian geographers {Abulfeda,
Digitized by
Google
302 THE ETFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
lbn Baluta) it is called Sora, by modern travellers Adra or Edra
(v. Richter), or Oezraa (Seetzeri), or Ezra (Burckhardt), and Edhra
(Robinson, App. 155). Consequently nearly the whole of Jebel
Hauran, and the northern portion of the plain, viz. the Leja, were
outside the kingdom of Og and the land of Bashan, of which the
Israelites took possession, although Burckhardt reckons Ezra as part
of the Leja. — Ver. 11. Even in Abraham's time, the giant tribe of
Rephaim was living in Bashan (Gen. xiv. 5). But out of the rem-
nant of these, king Og, whom the Israelites defeated and slew, was
the only one left. For the purpose of recalling the greatness of the
grace of God that had been manifested in that victory, and not
merely to establish the credibility of the statements concerning the
size of Og (" just as things belonging to an age that has long passed
away are shown to be credible by their remains," Spinoza, etc.),
Moses points to the iron bed of this king, which was still in Babbath-
Ammon, and was nine cubits long and four broad, " after the cubit
of a man," i.e. the ordinary cubit in common use (see the analogous
expression, " a man's pen," Isa. viii. 1). nV], for tPH, synonymous
with nan. There is nothing to amaze us in the size of the bed or
bedstead given here. The ordinary Hebrew cubit was only a foot
and a half, probably only eighteen Dresden inches (see my Arcliao-
logie, ii. p. 126, Anm. 4). Now a bed is always larger than the
man who sleeps in it. But in this case Clericus fancies that Og
" intentionally exceeded the necessary size, in order that posterity
might be led to draw more magnificent conclusions from the size of
the bed, as to the stature of the man who was accustomed to sleep
in it." He also refers to the analogous case of Alexander the
Great, of whom Diod. Sic. (xvii. 95) affirms, that whenever he was
obliged to halt on his march to India, he made colossal arrange-
ments of all kinds, causing, among other things, two couches to be
prepared in the tents for every foot-soldier, each five cubits long,
and two stalls for every horseman, twice as large as the ordinary
size, " to represent a camp of heroes, and leave striking memorials
behind for the inhabitants of the land, of gigantic men and their
supernatural strength." With a similar intention Og may also have
left behind him a gigantic bed as a memorial of his superhuman
greatness, on the occasion of some expedition of his against the
Ammonites ; and this bed may have been preserved in their capital
as a proof of the greatness of their foe. 1 Moses might then refer
1 " It will often be found, that very tall people are disposed to make them-
selves appear even taller than they actually are" (Hengstenberg, Diss. ii. p. 201).
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. III. 12-20. 303
to this gigantic bed of Og, which was known to the Israelites ; and
there is no reason for resorting to the improbable conjecture, that
the Ammonites had taken possession of a bed of king Og upon some
expedition against the Amorites, and had carried it off as a trophy
into their capital. 1 " Rabbath of the sons of Ammon," or briefly
Kabbah, i.e. the great (Josh. xiii. 25 ; 2 Sam. xi. 1), was the capital
of the Ammonites, afterwards called Philadelphia, probably from
Ptolemaeu3 Philadelphia ; by Polybius, 'Pafifiardjiava ; by Abulfeda,
Amman, which is the name still given. to the uninhabited ruins on
the Nahr Amman, i.e. the upper Jabbok (see Burckhardt, pp. 612
sqq., and v. Baumer, Pal. p. 268).
Vers. 12-20. Review op the Distribution op the con-
quebed Land. — The land which the Israelites had taken belonging
to these two kingdoms was given by Moses to the two tribes and a
half for their possession, viz. the southern portion from Aroer in
the Arnon valley (see at Num. xxxii. 34), and half Gilead (as far
as the Jabbok : see at ver. 10) with its towns, which are enume-
rated in Josh. xiii. 15-20 and 24-28, to the Reubenites and Gadites;
and the northern half of Gilead, with the whole of Bashan (i.e. all
the region of Argob : see at ver. 4, and Num. xxxii. 33), to the half-
tribe of Manasseh. JB'an"?^?, " as for all Bashan," is in apposition
to u all the region of Argob" and the ? simply serves to connect it;
for " all the region of Argob " was not merely one portion of Bashan,
but was identical with "all Bashan," so far as it belonged to the
kingdom of Og (see at ver. 4). All this region passed for a land
of giants. vn^}, to ^ e c ^ e( ^> *•«. *° be, and to be recognised as
being. — Ver. 14. The region of Argob, or the country of Bashan,
was given to Jair (see Num. xxxii. 41), as far as the territory of the
Geshurites and Maachathites (cf. Josh. xii. 5, xiii. 11). " Unto"
as far as, is to be understood as inclusive. This is evident from
Moreover, there are still giants who are eight feet high and upwards. " Accord-
ing to the N. Preuss. Zeit. of 1857, there came a man to Berlin 8 feet 4 inches
high, and possibly still growing, as he was only twenty years old ; and he was
said to have a great-uncle who was nine inches taller" (Schultz).
1 There is still less probability in the conjecture of J. D. Mickaelis, Vater,
Winer, and others, that Og's iron bed was a sarcophagus of basalt, such as are
still frequently met with in those regions, as much as 9 feet long and 3£ feet
broad, or even as much as 12 feet long and 6 feet in breadth and height (yid.
Burckhardt, pp. 220, 246 ; Robinson, iii. p. 385 ; Seetzen, i. pp. 355, 360) ; and
the' still further assumption, that the corpse of the fallen king was taken to
Eabbah, and there interred in a royal way, is altogether improbable.
Digitized by
Google
304 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
the statement in Josh. xiii. 13 : " The children of Israel expelled
not the Geshurites nor the Maachathites ; but the Geshurites and the
Maachathites dwell among the Israelites until this day." Consequently
Moses allotted the territory of these two tribes to the Manassites,
because it formed part of the kingdom of Og. " Geshuri and
Maachathi " are the inhabitants of Geshur and Maachdh, two pro-
vinces which formed small independent kingdoms even in David's
time (2 Sam. iii. 3, xiii. 37, and x. 6). Geshur bordered on Aram.
The Geshurites and Aramaeans afterwards took from the Israelites
the «/air-towns and Kenath, with their daughter towns (1 Chron. ii.
23). In David's time Geshur had a king Thalmai, whose daughter
David married. This daughter was the mother of Absalom ; and
it was in Geshur that Absalom lived for a time in exile (2 Sam. iii.
3, xiii. 37, xiv. 23, xv. 8). The exact situation of Geshur has not
yet been determined. It was certainly somewhere near Hermon,
on the eastern side of the upper Jordan, and by a bridge over
the Jordan, as Geshur signifies bridge in all the Semitic dialects.
Maachah, which is referred to in 1 Chron. xix. 6 as a kingdom
under the name of A ram-Maachah (Eng. V. Syria-Maachah), is
probably to be sought for to the north-east of Geshur. According
to the Onomast. (s. v. Ma^aOl), it was in the neighbourhood of the
Hermon. " And he called tlwn (the towns of the region of Argob)
after his own name ; Bashan (sc. he called) Hawoth Jair unto this
day" (cf. Num. xxxii. 41). The word Tbn {Hawoth), which only
occurs in connection with the Jair-towns, does not mean towns or
camps of a particular kind, viz. tent villages, as some suppose, but
is the plural of rnr^ life (Leben, a common German termination,
e.g. Eisleben), for which afterwards the word ?WJ was used (comp.
2 Sam. xxiii. 13 with 1 Chron. xi. 15). It applies to any kind of
dwelling-place, being used in the passages just mentioned to denote
even a warlike encampment. The Jair's-lives (Jairsleben) were not
a particular class of towns, therefore, in the district of Argob, but
Jair gave this collective name to all the sixty fortified towns, as is
perfectly evident from the verse before us when compared with ver.
5 and Num. xxxii. 41, and expressly confirmed by Josh. xiii. 30 and
1 Kings iv. 13, where the sixty fortified towns of the district of
Argob are called Hawoth Jair. — The statement in 1 Chron. ii. 22,
23, that " Jair had twenty-three towns in Gilead (which is used here
as in chap, xxxiv. 1, Josh. xxii. 9, xiii. 15, Judg. v. 17, xx. 1, to de-
note the whole of Palestine to the east of the Jordan), and Geshur
and Aram took the Hawoth Jair from them, (and) Kenath and its
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. III. 12-20. 305
daughters, sixty towns (sc. in all)," is by no means at variance with
this, but, on the contrary, in the most perfect harmony with it. For
it is evident from this passage, that the twenty-three Havvoth Jair,
with Kenath and its daughters, formed sixty towns altogether. The
distinction between the twenty-three Havvoth Jair and the other
thirty-seven towns, viz. Kenath and its daughters, is to be explained
from the simple fact that, according to Num. xxxii. 42, Nobah, no
doubt a family of sons of Machir related to Jair, conquered Kenath
and its daughters, and called the conquered towns by his name,
namely, when they had been allotted to him by Moses. Conse-
quently Bashan, or the region of Argob, with its sixty fortified
towns, was divided between two of the leading families of Machir
the Manassite, viz. the families of Jair and Nobah, each family
receiving the districts which it had conquered, together with their
towns; namely, the family of Nobah, Kenath and its daughter
towns, or the eastern portion of Bashan ; and the family of Jair,
twenty-three towns in the west, which are called Havvoth Jair in
1 Chron. ii. 23, in harmony with Num. xxxii. 41, where Jair is said
to have given this name to the towns which were conquered by him.
In the address before us, however, in which Moses had no intention
to enter into historical details, all the (sixty) towns of the whole
district of Argob, or the whole of Bashan, are comprehended under
the name of Havvoth Jair, probably because Nobah was a subordi-
nate branch of the family of Jair, and the towns conquered by him
were under the supremacy of Jair. The expression "unto this
day " certainly does not point to a later period than the Mosaic age.
This definition of time is simply a relative one. It does not neces-
sarily presuppose a very long duration, and here it merely serves to
bring out the marvellous change which was due to the divine grace,
viz. that the sixty fortified towns of the giant king Og of Bashan
had now become Jair's lives. 1 — Ver. 15. Machir received Gilead
(see Num. xxxii. 40). — In vers. 16 and 17 the possession of the
tribes of Reuben and Gad is described more fully according to its
boundaries. They received the land of Gilead (to the south of the
Jabbok) as far as the brook Arnon, the middle of the valley and
its territory. ^nan *|in is a more precise definition of |i)"jN ?ru, ex-
1 The conquest of these towns, in fact, does not seem to have been of long
duration, and the possession of them by the Israelites was a very disputed one
(cf. 1 Chron. ii. 22, 28). In the time of the judges we find thirty in the pos-
Beaswn of the judge Jair (Judg. x. 4), which caused the old name Havvoth Jair
to be revived.
PENT. — VOL. III. V
Digitized by
Google
306 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
pressive of the fact that the territory of these tribes was not to reach
merely to the northern edge of the Anion valley, but into the
middle of it, viz. to the river Arnon, which flowed through the
middle of the valley; and Sa» (and the border) is an explanatory
apposition to what goes before, as in Nnm. xxxiv. 6, signifying,
"viz. the border of the Arnon valley as far as the river" On the east,
" even unto Jabbok the brook, the (western) border of the Ammonites"
(i.e. as far as the upper Jabbok, the Nahr Amman : see at Nam.
xxi. 24) ; and on the west " the Arabah (the Ghor : see chap. i. 1)
and the Jordan with territory" (t'.e. with its eastern bank), "from
Chinnereth " (i.e. the town from which the Sea of Galilee received
the name of Sea of Chinnereth : Num. xxxiv. 11 ; see at Josh,
xix. 35) " to the sea of the Arabah, the Salt Sea under the slopes of
Pisgah (see at Nam. xxi. 15 and xxvii. 12) eastward" (i.e. merely
the eastern side of the Arabah and Jordan). — In vers. 18-20 Moses
reminds them of the conditions upon which he had given the two
tribes and a half the land referred to for their inheritance (cf.
Num. xxxii. 20-32).
Vers. 21-29. Nomination of Joshua as his Successor—
This reminiscence also recalls the goodness of God in the appoint-
ment of Joshua (Num. xxvii.. 12 sqq.), which took place " at that
time" i.e. after the conquest of the land on the east of the Jordan.
In accordance with the object of his address, which was to hold up to
view what the Lord had done for Israel, he here relates how, at the
very outset, he pointed Joshua to the things which he had seen with
his eyes (ninn TW, thine eyes were seeing ; cf . Ewald, § 335, b.),
namely, to the defeat of the two kings of the Amorites, in which
the pledge was contained, that the faithful covenant God would
complete the work He had begun, and would do the same to all
kingdoms whither Joshua would go over (i.e. across the Jordan). —
Ver. 22. For this reason they were not to be afraid ; for Jehovah
Himself would fight for them. " He " is emphatic, and adds force
to the subject. — Vers. 23 sqq. Moses then describes how, notwith-
standing his prayer, the Lord had refused him permission to cross
over into Canaan and see the glorious land. This prayer is not
mentioned in the historical account given in the fourth book ; but
it must have preceded the prayer for the appointment of a shepherd
over the congregation in Num. xxvii. 16, as the Lord directs him
in His reply (ver. 28) to appoint Joshua as the leader of the people.
In his prayer, Moses appealed to the manifestations of divine grace
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. III. 21-29. 307
which he had already received. As the Lord had already begun to
show him His greatness and His mighty hand, so might He also show
him the completion of His work. The expression, " begun to show
Thy greatness," relates not so much to the mighty acts of the Lord
in Egypt and at the Red Sea (as in Ex. xxxii. 11, 12, and Num.
xiv. 13 sqq.), as to the manifestation of the divine omnipotence in
the defeat of the Amorites, by which the Lord had begun to bring
His people into the possession of the promised land, and had made
Himself known as God, to whom there was no equal in heaven or
on earth. IK'S before ?N *& (ver. 24) is an explanatory and causal re-
lative : because (quod, quia), or for. " For what God is there in heaven
and on earth," etc. These words recall Ex. xv. 11, and are echoed
in many of the Psalms — in Ps. lxxxvi. 8 almost verbatim. The con-
trast drawn between Jehovah and other gods does not involve the
reality of the heathen deities, but simply presupposes a belief in the
existence of other gods, without deciding as to the truth of that
belief, ^nua, manifestations of ^33, mighty deeds. — Ver. 25. " I
pray Thee, let me go over." tUTnayK, a form of desire, used as a
petition, as in chap. ii. 27, Num. xxi. 22, etc. " That goodly moun-
tain " is not one particular portion of the land of Canaan, such
as the mountains of Judah, or the temple mountain (according to
Ex. xv. 17), but the whole of Canaan regarded as a mountainous
country, Lebanon being specially mentioned as the boundary wall
towards the north. As Moses stood on the lower level of the
Arabah, the promised land presented itself not only to his eyes, but
also to his soul, as a long mountain range ; and that not merely as
suggestive of the lower contrast, that " whereas the plains in the
East are for the most part sterile, on account of the want of springs
or rain, the mountainous regions, which are well watered by springs
and streams, are very fertile and pleasant " (Rosenmiitler), but also
on a much higher ground, viz. as a high and lofty land, which would
stand by the side of Horeb, "where he had spent the best and
holiest days of his life, and where he had seen the commencement
of the covenant between God and His people" (Schultz). — Ver. 26.
But the Lord would not grant his request. " Let it suffice thee"
(tatis sit tibi, as in chap. i. 6), substantially equivalent to 2 Cor.
xii. 8, " My grace is sufficient for thee " (Schultz). 3 "O't, to speak
about a thing (as in chap. vi. 7, xi. 19, etc.). — Ver. 27 is a rhetori-
cal paraphrase of Num. xxvii. 12, where the mountains of Abarim
are mentioned in the place of PUgah, which was the northern por-
tion of Abarim. (On ver. 28, cf. chap. i. 38 and Num. xxvii. 23.)
Digitized by
Google
308 . THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
— Ver. 29. " So we abode in the valley over against Beth-Peor" i.e.
in the Arboth Moab (Num. xxii. 1), sc. where we still are. The
pret. 3?>3? is used, because Moses fixes his eye upon the past, and
looks back upon the events already described in Num. xxviii.-
xxxiv. as having taken place there. On Beth-Peor, see at Num.
xxiii. 28.
EXHORTATION TO A FAITHFUL OBSERVANCE OF THE LAW.
CHAP. IV. 1-40.
With the word fW, " and now," Moses passes from a contem-
plation of what the Lord had done for Israel, to an exhortation to
keep the law of the Lord. The divine manifestations of grace laid
Israel under the obligation to a conscientious observance of the
law, that they might continue to enjoy the blessings of the cove-
nant. The exhortation commences with the appeal, to hear and
keep the commandments and rights of the Lord, without adding to
them or taking from them ; for not only were life and death sus-
pended upon their observance, but it was in this that the wisdom
and greatness of Israel before all the nations consisted (vers. 1-8).
It then proceeds to a warning, not to forget the events at Horeb
(vers. 9-14) and so fall into idolatry, the worship of images or idol
deities (vers. 15—24) ; and it closes with a threat of dispersion
among the heathen as the punishment of apostasy, and with a pro-
mise of restoration as the consequence of repentance and sincere
conversion (vers. 25-31), and also with a reason for this threat
and promise drawn from the history of the immediate past (vers.
32—34), for the purpose of fortifying the nation in its fidelity to
its God, the sole author of its salvation (vers. 35-40).
Vers. 1-8. The Israelites were to hearken to the laws and
rights which Moses taught to do (that they were to do), that they
might live and attain to the possession of the land which the Lord
would give them. "Hearkening" involves laying to heart and
observing. The words " statutes and judgments " (as in Lev. xix.
37) denote the whole of the law of the covenant in its two leading
features. D'jpn, statutes, includes the moral commandments and
statutory covenant laws, for which p*n and n^n are mostly used in
the earlier books, that is to say, all that the people were bound to
observe ; D'CSBT?, rights, all that was due to them, whether in rela-
tion to God or to their fellow-men (cf. chap. xxvi. 17). Sometimes
n jy? i I l , the commandment, is connected with it, either placed first in
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. IV. 1-8. 309
the singular, as a general comprehensive notion (chap. v. 28, vi.
1, vii. 11), or in the plural (chap. viii. 11, xi. 1, xxx. 16) ; or riW},
the testimonies, the commandments as a manifestation of the will
of God (ver. 45, vi. 17, 20). — Life itself depended upon the ful-
filment, or long life in the promised land (Ex. xx. 12), as Moses
repeatedly impressed upon them (cf . ver. 40, chap. v. 30, vi. 2, viii.
1, xi. 21, xvi. 20, xxv. 15, xxx. 6, 15 sqq., xxxii. 47). D?^)l, for
Dntrr (as in ver. 22, Josh. i. 16 ; cf. Ges. § 44, 2, Anm. 2)^— Ver.
2. The observance of the law, however, required that it should be
kept as it was given, that nothing should be added to it or taken
from it, but that men should submit to it as to the inviolable word
of God. Not by omissions only, but by additions also, was the com-
mandment weakened, and the word of God turned into ordinances
of men, as Pharisaism sufficiently proved. This precept is re-
peated in chap. xiii. 1 ; it is then revived by the prophets (Jer.
xxvi. 2 ; Prov. xxx. 6), and enforced again at the close of the
whole revelation (Eev. xxii. 18, 19). In the same sense Christ also
said that He had not come to destroy the law or the prophets, but
to fulfil (Matt. v. 17) ; and the old covenant was not abrogated, but
only glorified and perfected, by the new. — Vers. 3, 4. The Israelites
had just experienced how a faithful observance of the law gave life,
in what the Lord had done on account of Baal-Peor, when He de-
stroyed those who worshipped this idol (Num. xxv. 3, 9), whereas
the faithful followers of the Lord still remained alive. 3 p3"n, to
cleave to any one, to hold fast to him. This example was adduced
by Moses, because the congregation had passed through all this
only a very short time before ; and the results of faithfulness towards
the Lord on the one hand, and of the unfaithfulness of apostasy
from Him on the other, had been made thoroughly apparent to it.
" Your eyes the seeing," as in chap. iii. 21. — Vers. 5, 6. But the
laws which Moses taught were commandments of the Lord. Keep-
ing and doing them were to be the wisdom and understanding of
Israel in the eyes of the nations, who, when they heard all these
laws, would say, " Certainly (P">, only, no other than) a wise and
understanding people is this great nation." History has confirmed
this. Not only did the wisdom of a Solomon astonish the queen of
Sheba (1 Kings x. 4 sqq.), but the divine truth which Israel pos-
sessed in the law of Moses attracted all the more earnest minds of
the heathen world to seek the satisfaction of the inmost necessities
of their heart and the salvation of their souls in Israel's knowledge
of God, when, after a short period of bloom, the inward self-dis-
Digitized by
Google
310 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
solution of the heathen religions had set in ; and at last, in Chris-
tianity, it has brought one heathen nation after another to the
knowledge of the true God, and to eternal salvation, notwith-
standing the fact that the divine truth was and still is regarded as
folly by the proud philosophers and self-righteous Epicureans and
Stoics of ancient and modern times.— Vers. 7, 8. This mighty and
attractive force of the wisdom of Israel consisted in the fact, that
in Jehovah they possessed a God who was at hand with His help
when they called upon Him (cf. chap, xxxiii. 29 ; Ps. xxxiv. 19,
cxlv. 18 ; 1 Kings ii. 7), as none of the gods of the other nations
had ever been; and that in the law of God they possessed such
statutes and rights as the heathen never had. True right has its
roots in God ; and with the obscuration of the knowledge of God,
law and right, with their divinely established foundations, are also
shaken and obscured (cf. Rom. i. 26-32).
Vers. 9-14. Israel was therefore not to forget the things which
it had seen at Horeb with its own eyes. — Ver. 9. u Only beware and
take care of thyself" To " keep the soul," i.e. to take care of the
soul as the seat of life, to defend one's life from danger and injury
(Prov. xiii. 3, xix. 16). " That thou do not forget Dnyirrm (the
facts described in Ex. xix.-xxiv.), and that they do not depart from
thy heart all the days of thy life," i.e. are not forgotten as long as
thou livest, " and thou makest them known to thy children and thy
children's children." These acts of God formed the foundation of the
true religion, the real basis of the covenant legislation, and the firm
guarantee of the objective truth and divinity of all the laws and
ordinances which Moses gave to the people. And it was this which
constituted the essential distinction between the religion of the Old
Testament and all heathen religions, whose founders, it is true,
professed to derive their doctrines and statutes from divine inspira-
tion, but without giving any practical guarantee that their origin
was truly divine. — Vers. 10-12. In the words, " The day (Di»n, ad-
verbial accusative) " that thou stoodest before Jehovah thy God at
Horeb" etc., Moses reminds the people of the leading features of
those grand events : first of all of the fact that God directed him to
gather the people together, that He might make known His words
to them (Ex. xix. 9 sqq.), that they were to learn to fear Him
all their life long, and to teach their children also ( n ^T.> inf., like
nK3fc>, chap. i. 27) ; and secondly (ver. 11), that they came near to
the mountain which burned in fire (cf. Ex. xix. 17 sqq.). The ex-
pression, burning in fire " even to the heart of heaven" i.e. quite into
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. IV. 16-24. 311'
the sky, is a rhetorical description of the awful majesty of the pillar
of fire, in which the glory of the Lord appeared upon Sinai, intended
to impress deeply upon the minds of the people the remembrance
of this manifestation of God. And the expression, " darkness, clouds,
and thick darkness" which is equivalent to the smoking of the great
mountain (Ex. xix. 18), is employed with the same object. And
lastly (vers. 12, 13), he reminds them that the Lord spoke out of
the midst of the fire, and adds this important remark, to prepare
the way for what is to follow, u Ye heard the sound of the words, but
ye did not see a shape" which not only agrees most fully with Ex. .
xxiv., where it is stated that the sight of the glory of Jehovah upon
the mountain appeared to the people as they stood at the foot of the
mountain " like devouring fire" (ver. 17), and that even the elders
who " saw God" upon the mountain at the conclusion of the cove-
nant saw no form of God (ver. 11), but also with Ex. xxxiii. 20, 23,
according to which no man can see the face ( Q, ?f) of God. Even
the similitude (temunah) of Jehovah, which Moses saw when the
Lord spoke to him mouth to mouth (Num. xii. 8), was not the form
of the essential being of God which was visible to his bodily eyes,
but simply a manifestation of the glory of God answering to his
own intuition and perceptive faculty, which is not to be regarded
as a form of God which was an adequate representation of .the
divine nature. The true God has no such form which is visible to
the human eye. — Ver. 1 3. The Israelites, therefore, could not see
a form of God, but could only hear the voice of His words, when
the Lord proclaimed His covenant to them, and gave utterance to
the ten words, which He afterwards gave to Moses written upon
two tables of stone (Ex. xx. 1-14 (17), and xxxi. 18, compared with
chap. xxiv. 12). On the " tables of stone," see at Ex. xxxiv. 1. —
Ver. 14. When the Lord Himself had made known to the people
in the ten words the covenant which He commanded them to do,
He directed Moses to teach them laws and rights which they were
to observe in Ganaan, viz. the rights and statutes of the Sinaitio
legislation, from Ex. xxi. onwards.
Vers. 15-24. As the Israelites had seen no shape of God at
Horeb, they were to beware for their souls' sake (for their lives) of
acting corruptly, and making to themselves any kind of image of
Jehovah their God, namely, as the context shows, to worship God
in it. (On pesel, see at Ex. xx. 4.) The words which follow, viz.
" a form of any kind of sculpture" and " a representation of male or
female" (for tabnith, see at Ex. xxv. 9), are in apposition to " graven
Digitized by
Google
312 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
image," atid serve to explain and emphasize the prohibition. — Vers.
17, 18. They were also not to make an image of any kind of beast;
a caution against imitating the animal worship of Egypt. — Ver. 19.
They were not to allow themselves to be torn away (rna) to worship
the stars of heaven, namely, by the seductive influence exerted upon
the senses by the sight of the heavenly bodies as they shone in their
glorious splendour. The reason for this prohibition is given in the
relative clause, u which Jehovah thy God hath allotted to all nations
under the whole heaven." The thought is not, " God has given the
heathen the sun, moon, and stars for service, i.e. to serve them with
their light," as Onkelos, the Rabbins, Jerome, and others, suppose,
bat He has allotted them to them for worship, i.e. permitted them
to choose them as the objects of their worship, which is the view
adopted by Justin Martyr, Clemens Alex., and others. According
to the scriptural view, even the idolatry of the heathen existed by
divine permission and arrangement. God gave up the heathen
to idolatry and shameful lusts, because, although they knew Him
from His works, they did not praise Him as God (Rom. i. 21, 24,
26). — Ver. 20. The Israelites were not to imitate the heathen in
this respect, because Jehovah, who brought them .out of the iron
furnace of Egypt, had taken them ( n i??) to Himself, i.e. had drawn
them out or separated them from the rest of the nations, to be a
people of inheritance. They were therefore not to seek God and
pray to Him in any kind of creature, but to worship Him without
image and form, in a manner corresponding to His own nature,
which had been manifested in no form, and therefore could not be
imitated. 7H3 113, an iron furnace, or furnace for smelting iron,
is a significant figure descriptive of the terrible sufferings endured
by Israel in Egypt. n?ru Mf (a people of inheritance) is synony-
mous with n?jp Dy (a special people, chap. vii. 6 : see at Ex. xix.
5, "a peculiar treasure"). " This day ;" as in chap. ii. 30- — Vers.
21 sqq. The bringing of Israel out of Egypt reminds Moses of the
end, viz. Canaan, and leads him to mention again how the Lord
had refused him permission to enter into this good land ; and to
this he adds the renewed warning not to forget the covenant or
make any image of God, since Jehovah, as a jealous God, would
never tolerate this. The swearing attributed to God in ver. 21 is
neither mentioned in Num. xx. nor at the announcement of Moses'
death in Num. xxvii. 12 sqq. ; but it is not to be called in question
on that account, as Knobel supposes. It is perfectly obvious from
chap. iii. 23 sqq. that all the details are not given in the historical
Digitized by
Google
\ CHAP IV. 25-81. 313
account of the event referred to. ?% ruion 5DB, " image of a form
o)f all that Jehovah has commanded" »c. not to be made (vers. 16-18).
"U consuming fire" (ver. 24) : this epithet is applied to God with
special reference to the manifestation of His glory in burning fire
(Ex. xxiv. 17). On the symbolical meaning of this mode of revela-
tion, see at Ex. iii. 2 (vol. i. pp. 438-9). "A jealous God ." see at
Ex. xx. 5.
Vers. 25-31. To give emphasis to this warning, Moses holds
np the future dispersion of the nation among the heathen as the
punishment of apostasy from the Lord. — Vers. 25, 26. If the
Israelites should beget children and children's children, and grow
old in the land, and then should make images of God, and do that
which was displeasing to God to provoke Him ; in that case Moses
called upon heaven and earth as witnesses against them, that they
should be quickly destroyed out of the land. " Growing old in the
land " involved forgetf ulness of the former manifestations of grace
on the part of the Lord, but not necessarily becoming voluptuous
through the enjoyment of the riches of the land, although this
might also lead to forgetfulness of God and the manifestations of
His grace (cf. chap. vi. 10 sqq., xxxii. 15). The apodosis com-
mences with ver. 26. T^n, with ? and the accusative, to take or
summon as a witness against a person. Heaven and earth do not
stand here for the rational beings dwelling in them, but are per-
sonified, represented as living, and capable of sensation and speech,
and mentioned as witnesses who would rise up against Israel, not
to proclaim its guilt, but to bear witness that God, the Lord of
heaven and earth, had warned the people, and, as it is described
in the parallel passage in chap. xxx. 19, had set before them the
choice of life and death, and therefore was just in punishing them
for their unfaithfulness (cf. Ps. 1. 6, li. 6). " Prolong days," as in
Ex. xx. 12. — Ver. 27. Jehovah would scatter them among the
nations, where they would perish through want and suffering, and
only a few (1BDD »no, Gen. xxxiv. 30) would be left. " Whither"
refers to the nations whose land is thought of (cf. chap. xii. 29,
xxx. 3). For the thing intended, see Lev. xxvi. 33, 36, 38, 39,
and Deut. xxviii. 64 sqq., from which it is evident that the author
had not " the fate of the nation in the time of the Assyrians in his
mind" (Knobel), but rather all the dispersions which would come
upon the rebellious nation in future times, even down to the dis-
persion under the Romans, which continues still; so that Moses
contemplated the punishment in its fullest extent. — Ver. 28. There
Digltizi
ed by Google
314 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
among the heathen they would be obliged to serve gods that werJ
the work of men's hands, gods of wood and stone, that coul«
neither hear, nor eat, nor smell, i.e. possessed no senses, showed
no sign of life. What Moses threatens here, follows from thd
eternal laws of the divine government. The more refined idola** 4
of image-worship leads to coarser and coarser forms, in which_W
whole nature of idol-worship is manifested in all its pitiableness.
" When once the God of revelation is forsaken, the God of reason
and imagination must also soon be given up and make way for still
lower powers, that perfectly accord with the i" exalted upon the
throne, and in the time of pretended ' illumination ' to atheism and
materialism also" (Schultz). — Ver. 29. From thence Israel would
come to itself again in the time of. deepest misery, like the pro-
digal son in the gospel (Luke xv. 17), would seek the Lord its
God, and would also find Him if it sought with all its heart and
soul (cf . chap. vi. 5, x. 12). — Ver. 30. " In tribulation to thee (in
thy trouble), all these things (the threatened punishments and
sufferings) will befall thee; at the end of the days (see at Gen.
xlix. 1) thou icilt turn to Jehovah thy God, and hearken to His
voice" With this comprehensive thought Moses brings his picture
of the future to a close. (On the subject-matter, vid. Lev. xxvi.
39, 40.) Returning to the Lord and hearkening to His voice
presuppose that the Lord will be found by those who earnestly
seek Him ; "for (ver. 31) He is a merciful God, who does not let
His people go, nor destroy them, and who does not forget the covenant
with the fathers " (cf. Lev. xxvi. 42 and 45). '"IB"!?, to let loose,
to withdraw the hand from a person (Josh. x. 6).
Vers. 32-40. But in order to accomplish something more than
merely preserving the people from apostasy by the threat of
punishment, namely, to secure a more faithful attachment and
continued obedience to His commands by awakening the feeling
of cordial love, Moses reminds them again of the glorious miracles
of divine grace performed in connection with the election and
deliverance of Israel, such as had never been heard of from the
beginning of the world ; and with this strong practical proof of the
love of the true God, he brings his first address to a close. This
closing thought in ver. 32 is connected by 'S (for) with the leading
idea in ver. 31, " Jehovah thy God is a merciful God," to show
that the sole ground for the election and redemption of Israel was
the compassion of God towards the human race. " For ask now of
the days that are past, from the day that God created man upon the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. IV. 32-40. 315
!/j, and from one end of the heaven unto the other, whether so great
itng has ever happened, or anything of the kind has been heard of:"
owe* the history of all times since the creation of man, and of all
thAces under the whole heaven, can relate no such events as those
l^which have happened to Israel, viz. at Sinai (ver. 33 ; cf. ver. 12).
1 ' From this awfully glorious manifestation of God, Moses goes back
in ver. 34 to the miracles with which God effected the deliverance
of Israel out of Egypt. " Or has a god attempted (made the at-
tempt) to come and take to himself people from people (i.e. to fetch
the people of Israel out of the midst of the Egyptian nation), with
temptations (the events in Egypt by which Pharaoh's relation to
the Lord was put to the test; cf. chap. vi. 22 and vii. 18, 19), with
signs and wonders (the Egyptian plagues, see Ex. vii. 3), and with
conflict (at the Red Sea : Ex. xiv. 14, xv. 3), and with a strong
hand and outstretched arm (see Ex. vi. 6), and with great terrors ?"
In the three points mentioned last, all the acts of God in Egypt
are comprehended, according to both cause and effect. They were
revelations of the. omnipotence of the Lord, and produced great
terrors (cf. Ex. xii. 30-36). — Ver. 35. Israel was made to see all
this, that it might know that Jehovah was God (DVPKn, the God,
to whom the name of Elohim rightfully belonged), and there was
none else beside Him (cf. ver. 39, xxxii t 39 ; Isa. xlv. 5, 6). — Ver.
36. But the Lord had spoken to Israel chiefly down from heaven
(cf. Ex. xx. 19 (22)), and that out of the great fire, in which He
had come down upon Sinai, to chastise it. 1BJ does not mean " to
instruct the people with regard to His truth and sovereignty," as
Schultz thinks, but " to take them under holy discipline " {Knobel),
to inspire them with a salutary fear of the holiness of His ways
and of His judgments by the awful phenomena which accompanied
His descent, and shadowed forth the sublime and holy majesty of
His nature. — Vers. 37-40. All this He did from love to the fathers
of Israel (the patriarchs): "and indeed because He loved thy fathers,
Be chose his seed (the seed of Abraham, the first of the patriarchs)
after him, and brought thee (Israel) out of Egypt by His face with
great power, to drive out . . . and to bring thee, to give thee their
land . . . so that thou mightest know and take to heart . . . and keep
I Bis laws," etc. With regard to the construction of these verses,
the clause '3 nnrn (and because) in ver. 37 is not to be regarded as
dependent upon what precedes, as Schultz supposes ; nor are vers.
37 and 38 to be taken as the protasis, and vers. 39, 40 as the
f apodosis (as Knobel maintains). Both forms of construction are
Digitizi
ed by Google
316 THE FIFTH BOOK OF HOSES.
forced and unnatural. The verses form an independent thought ;
and the most important point, which was to bind Israel to faithful-
ness towards Jehovah, is given as the sum and substance of the
whole address, and placed as a protasis at the head of the period.
The only thing that admits of dispute, is whether the apodosis
commences with iron (" He chose" ver. 37), or only with ''IKSi'l
("brought thee out"). Either is possible; and it makes no difference,
so far as the main thought is concerned, whether we regard the
choice of Israel, or simply the deliverance from Egypt, in which
that choice was carried into practical effect, as the consequence of
the love of Jehovah to the patriarchs. — The copula \ before inn is
specially emphatic, " and trvly" and indicates that the sum and
substance of the whole discourse is about to follow, or the one
thought in which the whole appeal culminates. It was the love of
God to the fathers, not the righteousness of Israel (chap. ix. 5),
which lay at the foundation of the election of their posterity to be
the nation of Jehovah's possession, and also of all the miracles of
grace which were performed in connection with their deliverance out
of Egypt. Moses returns to this thought again at chap. x. 15, for
the purpose of impressing it upon the minds of the people as the
one motive which laid them under the strongest obligation to cir-
cumcise the foreskin of their heart, and walk in the fear and love
of the Lord their God (chap. x. 12 sqq.). — The singular suffixes in
iJTW (his seed) and vnnx (after him) refer to Abraham, whom Moses
had especially in his mind when speaking of "thy fathers," because
he was pre-eminently the lover of God (Isa. xli. 8 ; 2 Chron. xx. 7),
and also the beloved or friend of God (Jas. ii. 23 ; cf. Gen. xviii.
17 sqq.). " By His face " points back to Ex. xxxiii. 14. The face
of Jehovah was Jehovah in His personal presence, in His own
person, who brought Israel out of Egypt, to root out great and
mighty nations before it, and give it their land for an inheritance.
"As this day" (clearly shows), viz. by the destruction of Sihon
and Og, which gave to the Israelites a practical pledge that the
Canaanites in like manner would be rooted out before them. The
expression "as this day" does not imply, therefore, that the Ca-
naanites were already rooted out from their land. — Vers. 39, 40. By
this the Israelites were to know and lay it to heart, that Jehovah
alone was God in heaven and on earth, and were to keep His
commandments, in order that (itJ'K) it might be well with them
and their descendants, and they might have long life in Canaan.
DWrb, "all time," for all the future (cf. Ex. xx. 12).
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. IV. 41-43. ■ 317
Vers. 41-43. Selection of three Cities of Refuge fob
UNINTENTIONAL MANSLATEBS ON THE EAST OF THE JORDAN.
— The account of this appointment of the cities of refuge in the
conquered land on the east of the Jordan is inserted between the
first and second addresses of Moses, in all probability for no other
reason than because Moses set apart the cities at that time accord-
ing to the command of God in Num. xxxv. 6, 14, not only to give
the land on that side its full consecration, and thoroughly confirm
the possession of the two Amoritish kingdoms on the other side of
the Jordan, but also to give the people in this punctual observance
of the duty devolving upon it an example for their imitation in the
conscientious observance of the commandments of the Lord, which
he was now about to lay before the nation. The assertion that this
section neither stood after Num. xxxiv.-xxxvi., nor really belongs
there, has as little foundation as the statement that its contents are
at variance with the precepts in chap. xix. " Toward the sunrising "
is introduced as a more precise definition ; IJWJ "OJ?, like nrpTO in
Num. xxxii. 19 and xxxiv. 15. On the contents of ver. 42, comp.
Num. xxxv. 15 sqq. The three towns that were set apart were
Bezer, Ramoth, and Golan. u Bezer in the steppe, (namely) in the
land of the level" (the Amoritish table-land: chap. iii. 10). The
situation of this Levitical town and city of refuge, which is only
mentioned again in Josh. xx. 8, xxi. 36, and 1 Chron. vi. 63, has
not yet been discovered. Bezer was probably the same as Bosor
(1 Mace. v. 36), and is possibly to be seen in the Berza mentioned
by Robinson (Pal. App. p. 170). Ramoth in Gilead, i.e. Ramoth-
Mizpeh (comp. Josh. xx. 8 with xiii. 26), was situated, according
to the Onotn., fifteen Roman miles, or six hours, to the west of
Philadelphia (Rabbath-Ammon) ; probably, therefore, on the site
of the modern Salt, which is six hours' journey from Amman (cf .
v. Raumer, Pal. pp. 265, 266). — Golan, in Bashan, according to
Eusebius (s. v. Gaulon or Golan), was still a very large village in
Batanaea even in his day, from which the district generally received
the name of Gaulonitis or John ; but it has not yet been discovered
again.
Digitized by
Google
318 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
II.— SECOND ADDRESS, OB EXPOSITION OF THE LAW.
Chap. iv. 44-xxvi. 19.
This address, which is described in the heading as the law which
Moses set before the Israelites, commences with a repetition of the
decalogue, and a notice of the powerful impression which was made,
through the proclamation of it by God Himself, upon the people
who were assembled round Him at Horeb (chap. v.). In the
first and more general part, it shows that the true essence of the
law, and of that righteousness which the Israelites were to strive
after, consisted in loving Jehovah their God with all their heart
(chap, vi.) ; that the people were bound, by virtue of their election
as the Lord's people of possession, to exterminate the Canaanites
with their idolatrous worship, in order to rejoice in the blessing of
God (chap, vii.) ; but more especially that, having regard on the
one hand to the divine chastisement and humiliation which they
had experienced in the desert (chap, viii.), and on the other hand
to the frequency with which they had rebelled against their God
(chap. ix. 1-x. 11), they were to beware of self-exaltation and self-
righteousness, that in the land of Canaan, of which they were about
to take possession, they might not forget their God when enjoying
the rich productions of the land, but might retain the blessings
of their God for ever by a faithful observance of the covenant
(chap. x. 12-xi. 32). Then after this there follows an exposition
of the different commandments of the law (chap, xii.-xxvi.).
Chap. iv. 44-49. Announcement or the Discourse upon
the Law. — First of all, in ver. 44, we have the general notice in
the form of a heading : " This is the Thorah which Moses set be/ore
the children of Israel;" and then, in vers. 45, 46, a fuller description
of the Thorah according to its leading features, " testimonies, statutes,
and rights " (see at ver. 1), together with a notice of the place and
time at which Moses delivered this address. " On their coming out
of Egypt," i.e. not " after they had come out," but during the march,
before they had reached the goal of their journeyings, viz. (ver. 46)
when they were still on the other side of the Jordan. "In the
valley? as in chap. iii. 29. " In the land of Sihon," and therefore
already upon ground which the Lord had given them for a posses-
sion. The importance of this possession as the first-fruit and pledge
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. V. 319
of the fulfilment of the farther promises of God, led Moses to
mention again, though briefly, the defeat of the two kings of the
Amorites, together with the conquest of their land, just as he had
done before in chap. ii. 32-36 and iii. 1-17. On ver. 48, cf. chap,
iii. 9, 12-17. Sion, for Hermon (see at chap. iii. 9).
A. THE TRUE ESSENCE OP THE LAW AND ITS FULFILMENT.
Exposition of the Decalogue, and its Promulgation. — Chap. v.
The exposition of the law commences with a repetition of the
ten words of the covenant, which were spoken to all Israel directly
by the Lord Himself. — Vers. 1-5 form the introduction, and point
orit the importance and great significance of the exposition which
follows. Hence, instead of the simple sentence " And Moses said,"
we have the more formal statement " And Moses called all Israel,
and said to them." The great significance of the laws and rights
about to be set before them, consisted in the fact that they con-
tained the covenant of Jehovah with Israel. — Vers. 2, 3. " Jehovah
our God made a covenant with us in Horeb; not with our fatliers,
but with ourselves, who are all of us liere alive this day." The
" fathers " are neither those who died in the wilderness, as Augustine
supposed, nor the forefathers in Egypt, as Calvin imagined; but
the patriarchs, as in chap. iv. 37. Moses refers to the conclusion
of the covenant at Sinai, which was essentially distinct from the
covenant made with Abraham (Gen. xv. 18), though the latter
laid the foundation for the Sinaitic covenant. But Moses passed
over this, as it was not his intention to trace the historical develop-
ment of the covenant relation, but simply to impress upon the hearts
of the existing generation the significance of its entrance into cove-
nant with the Lord. The generation, it is true, with which God
made the covenant at Horeb, had all died out by that time, with
the exception of Moses, Joshua, and Caleb, and only lived in the
children, who, though in part born in Egypt, were all under twenty
years of age at the conclusion of the covenant at Sinai, and there-
fore were hot among the persons with whom the Lord concluded
the covenant. But the covenant was made not with the particular
individuals who were then alive, but rather with the nation as an
organic whole. Hence Moses could with perfect justice identify
those who constituted the nation at that time, with those who had
entered into covenant with the Lord at Sinai. The separate
Digitized by
Google
320 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
pronoun (we) is added to the pronominal suffix for the sake of
emphasis, just as in Gen. iv. 26, etc. ; and n?K again is so con-
nected with Unix, as to include the relative in itself. — Ver. 4.
" Jehovah talked toith you face to face in the mount out of the midst
of the fire" i.e. He came as near to you as one person to another.
O'iM D'JS is not perfectly synonymous with Q^s ?K COB, which is .
used in Ex. xxxiii. 11 with reference to God's speaking to Moses
(cf. chap, xxxiv. 10, and Gen. xxxii. 31), and expresses the very
confidential relation in which the Lord spoke to Moses as one friend
to another ; whereas the former simply denotes the directness with
which Jehovah spoke to the people. — Before repeating the ten
words which the Lord addressed directly to the people, Moses intro-
duces the following remark in ver. 5 — " / stood between Jehovah
and you at that time, to announce to you the word of Jehovah ; because
ye were afraid of the fire, and went not up into the mount " — for the
purpose of showing the mediatorial position which he occupied be-
tween the Lord and the people, not so much at the proclamation of
the ten words of the covenant, as in connection with the conclusion
of the covenant generally, which alone in fact rendered the conclu-
sion of the covenant possible at all, on account of the alarm of the
people at the awful manifestation of the majesty of the Lord. The
word of Jehovah, which Moses as mediator had to announce to the
people, had reference not to the instructions which preceded the
promulgation of the decalogue (Ex. xix. 11 sqq.), but, as is evident
from vers. 22-31, primarily to the further communications which
the Lord was about to address to the nation in connection with the
conclusion of the covenant, besides the ten words (viz. Ex. xx. 18,
22— xxiii. 33), to which in fact the whole of the Sinaitic legislation
really belongs, as being the further development of the covenant
laws. The alarm of the people at the fire is more fully described
in vers. 25 sqq. The word " saying" at the end of ver. 5 is de-
pendent upon the word " talked" in ver. 4 ; ver. 5 simply contain-
ing a parenthetical remark.
In vers. 6—21, the ten covenant words are repeated from Ex. xx.,
with only a few variations, which have already been discussed in
connection with the exposition of the decalogue at Ex. xx. 1-14.—
In vers. 22-33, Moses expounds still further the short account in
Ex. xx. 18-21, viz. that after the people had heard the ten covenant
words, in their alarm at the awful phenomena in which the Lord
revealed His glory, they entreated him to stand between as mediator,
that God Himself might not speak to them any further, and that
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VI. 1-8. 321
they might not die, and then promised that they would hearken to
all that the Lord should speak to him (vers. 23-31). His purpose
in doing so was to link on the exhortation in vers. 32, 33, to keep
all the commandments of the Lord and do them, which paves the
way for passing to the exposition of the law which follows. " A great
voice" (ver. 22) is an adverbial accusative, signifying " with a great
voice" (cf. Ges. § 118, 3). " And He added no more :" as in Num.
xi. 25. God spoke the ten words directly to the people, and then
no more ; i.e. everything further He addressed to Moses alone, and
through his mediation to the people. As mediator He gave him
the two tables of stone, upon which He had written the decalogue
(cf. Ex. xxxi. 18). This statement somewhat forestalls the historical
course ; and in chap. ix. 10, 11, it is repeated again in its proper
historical connection. — Vers. 24—27 contain a rhetorical, and at the
same time really a more exact, account of the events described in
Ex. xx. 18-20 (15-17), and already expounded in vol. ii. p. 125.
flW (ver. 24), a contraction of !Wtfl, as in Num. xi. 15 (cf. Ewald,
§ 184, a.). Jehovah's reply to the words of the people (vers. 28-31)
is passed over in Ex. xx. God approved of what the people said,
because it sprang from a consciousness of the unworthiness of any
sinner to come into the presence of the holy God ; and He added,
" Would that there were always this heart in them to fear Me,"
i.e. would that they were always of the same mind to fear Me and
keep all My commandments, that it might be well with them and
their children for ever. He then directed the people to return to
their tents, and appointed Moses as the mediator, to whom He would
address all the law, that he might teach it to the people (cf. chap,
iv. 5). Having been thus entreated by the people to take the office
of mediator, and appointed to that office by the Lord, Moses could
very well bring his account of these events to a close (vers. 32, 33),
by exhorting them to observe carefully all the commandments of
the Lord, and not to turn aside to the right hand or to the left,
i.e. not to depart in any way from the mode of life pointed out in
the commandments (cf. chap. xvii. 11, 20, xxviii. 14 ; Josh. i. 7,
etc.), that it might be well with them, etc. (cf. chap. iv. 40). 31131,
perfect with 1 rel. instead of the imperfect.
On loving Jehovah, the one God, with all the Heart. — Chap. vi.
Vers. 1—3. Announcement of the commandments which follow,
with a statement of the reason for communicating them, and the
beneficent results of their observance, ni^on, that which is com-
PENT. — VOL. III. X
Digitized by
Google
322 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
nianded, i.e. the substance of all that Jehovah had commanded,
synonymous therefore with the Thorah (chap. iv. 44). The words,
" the statutes and the rights," are explanatory of and in apposition to
" the commandment." These commandments Moses was to teach the
Israelites to keep in the land which they were preparing to possess
(cf. chap. iv. 1). — Ver. 2. The reason for communicating the law
was to awaken the fear of God (cf. chap. iv. 10, v. 26), and, in fact,
such fear of Jehovah as would show itself at all times in the observ-
ance of every commandment. " Thou and thy son :" this forms the
subject to u thou mightest fear," and is placed at the end for the sake
of emphasis. The Hiphil T?$$ has not the transitive meaning,
" to make long," as in chap. v. 30, but the intransitive, to last
long, as in chap. v. 16, Ex. xx. 12, etc. — Ver. 3. The maintenance
of the fear of God would bring prosperity, and the increase of the
nation promised to the fathers. In form this thought is not con-
nected with ver. 3 as the apodosis, but it is appended to the leading
thought in ver. 1 by the words, "Hear there/ore, Israel!" which
correspond to the expression u to teach you" in ver. 1. "M?K, that,
in order that (as in chap. ii. 25, iv. 10, etc.). The increase of the
nation had been promised to the patriarchs from the very first (Gen.
xii. 1 ; see vol. i. p. 193 ; cf. Lev. xxvi. 9). — On " milk and honey"
see at Ex. iii. 8.
Vers. 4-9. With ver. 4 the burden of the law commences,
which is not a new law added to the ten commandments, but simply
the development and unfolding of the covenant laws and rights
enclosed as a germ in the decalogue, simply an exposition of the law,
as had already been announced in chap. i. 5. The exposition com-
mences with an explanation and enforcing of the first commandment.
There are two things contained in it : (1) that Jehovah is the one
absolute God ; (2) that He requires love with all the heart, all the
soul, and all the strength. " Jehovah our God is one Jehovah." 1
This does not mean Jehovah is one God, Jehovah, alone (A benezra),
for in that case tta? rrtn* would be used instead of ^K nfffp • still
":ti t v t : *
less Jehovah our God, namely, Jehovah is one (J. H. Michaelis).
1 On the majuscula ]} and t in JflDB' and "iriK, R. Bochin has this remark:
" It is possible to confess one God with the mouth, although the heart is far
from Him. For this reason J? and *j are majuscula, from which with tsere sub-
scribed the word *i]>, 4 a witness,' is formed, that every one may know, when
he professes the unity of God, that his heart ought to be engaged, and free from
every other thought, because God is a witness and knows all things" (/• B.
Mich. Bibl. Hebr.).
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VI. 4-9. 323
IPiK-nfrr together form the predicate of the sentence. The idea is
not, Jehovah oar God is one (the only) God, hut " one (or the only)
Jehovah :" not in this sense, however, that " He has not adopted one
mode of revelation or appearance here and another there, bat one
mode only, viz. the revelation which Israel had received" (Schultz) ;
for Jehovah never denotes merely a mode in which the true God is
revealed or appears, but God as the absolute, unconditioned, or God
according to the absolute independence and constancy of His* actions
(see vol. i. pp. 72-5). Hence what is predicated here of Jehovah
(Jehovah one) does not relate to the unity of God, but simply states
that it is to Him alone that the name Jehovah rightfully belongs,
that He is the one absolute God, to whom no other Elohim can be
compared. This is also the meaning of the same expression in
Zech. xiv. 9, where the words added, " and His name one," can
only signify that in the future Jehovah would be acknowledged as
the one absolute God, as King over all- the earth. This clause not
merely precludes polytheism, but also syncretism, which reduces
the one absolute God to a national deity, a Baal (Hos. ii. 18), and
in fact every form of theism and deism, which creates for itself a
supreme God according to philosophical abstractions and ideas.
For Jehovah, although the absolute One, is not an abstract notion
like "absolute being" or "the absolute idea," but the absolutely
living God, as He made Himself known in His deeds'in Israel for
the salvation of the whole world.— Ver. 5. As the one God, there-
fore, Israel was to love Jehovah its God with all its heart, with all
its soul, and with all its strength. The motive for this is to be
found in the words " thy God," in the fact that Jehovah was Israel's
God, and had manifested Himself to it as one God. The demand
"with all the heart" excludes all half-heartedness, all division of
the heart in its love. The heart is mentioned first, as the seat of
the emotions generally and of love in particular ; then follows the
soul (nephesh) as the centre of personality in man, to depict the love
as pervading the entire self-consciousness; and to this is added,
"with all the strength," sc. of body and soul. Loving the Lord
with all the heart and soul and strength is placed at the head, a?
the spiritual principle from which the observance of the command-
ments was to flow (see also chap. xi. 1, xxx. 6). It was in love
that the fear of the Lord (chap. x. 12), hearkening to His com-
mandments (chap. xi. 13), and the observance of the whole law
(chap. xi. 22), were to be manifested; but love itself was to be
shown by walking in all the ways of the Lord (chap. xi. 22, xix.
Digitized by
Google
324 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
9, xxx. 16). Christ therefore calls the command to love God
with all the heart " the first and great commandment," and places
on a par with this the commandment contained in Lev. xix. 8 to
love one's neighbour as oneself, and then observes that on these
two commandments hang all the law and the prophets (Matt. xxii.
37-40; Mark xii. 29-31; Luke x. 27). 1 Even the gospel knows
no higher commandment than this. The distinction between the
new covenant and the aid consists simply in this, that the love^of
God which the gospel demands of its professors, is more intensive
and cordial than that which the law of Moses demanded of the
Israelites, according to the gradual unfolding of the love of God
Himself, which was displayed in a much grander and more glorious
form in the gift of His only begotten Son for our redemption, than
in the redemption of Israel out of the bondage of Egypt. — Vers. 6
sqq. But for the love of God to be of the right kind, the command-
ments of God must be laid to heart, and be the constant subject of
thought and conversation. " Upon thine heart:" i.e. the command-
ments of God were to be an affair of the heart, and not merely of
the memory (cf. chap. xi. 18). They were to be enforced upon
the children, talked of at borne and by the way, in the evening on
lying down and in the morning on rising up, i.e. everywhere and
at all times ; they were to be bound upon the hand for a sign, and
worn as bands (frontlets) between the eyes (see at Ex. xiii. 16).
As these words are figurative, and denote an undeviating observance
of the divine commands, so also the commandment which follows,
viz. to write the words upon the door-posts of the house, and also
upon the gates, are to be understood spiritually ; and the literal ful-
filment of such a command could only be a praiseworthy custom or
well-pleasing to God when resorted to as the means of keeping the
commandments of God constantly before the eye. The precept
itself, however, presupposes the existence of this custom, which is
not only met with in the Mahometan countries of the East at the
1 In quoting this commandment, Matthew (xxii. 87) has substituted Zt&mtx,
" thy mind," for "• thy strength," as being of especial importance to spiritual
lore, whereas in the LXX. the mind (iiauoia.) is substituted for the heart.
Mark (xii. 30) gives the triad of Deuteronomy (heart, soul, and strength) ; but
he has inserted " mind" (Ziivoia) before strength (fojiij), whilst in ver. 33 the
understanding (aivwii) is mentioned between the heart and the soul. Lastly
Luke has given the three ideas of the original passage quite correctly, but has
added at the end, " and with all thy mind" (hanoia). Although the term
lixuotec (mind) originated with the Septuagint, not one of the Evangelists has
adhered strictly to this version.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VI. 10-19. 325
present day (cf. A. Russell, Naturgesch. v. Aleppo, i. p. 36 ; Lane,
Sitten u. Gebr. i. pp. 6, 13, ii. p. 71), but was also a common
custom in ancient Egypt (cf. Wilkinson, Manners and Customs,
vol. ii. p. 102). 1
Vers. 10-19. To the positive statement of the command there
is attached, in the next place, the negative side, or a warning against
the danger to which prosperity and an abundance of earthly goods
so certainly expose, viz. of forgetting the Lord and His manifesta-
tions of mercy. The Israelites were all the more exposed to this
danger, as their entrance into Canaan brought them into the pos-
session of all the things conducive to well-being, in which the land
abounded, without being under the necessity of procuring these
things by the labour of their own hands; — into the possession,
namely, of great and beautiful towns which they had not built, of
houses full of all kinds of good things which they had not filled, of
wells ready made which they had not dug, of vineyards and olive-
plantations which they had not planted. — The nouns D*")J?, etc. are
formally dependent upon "$ nro, and serve as a detailed description
of the land into which the Lord was about to lead* His people. —
Ver. 12. " House of bondage," as in Ex. xiii. 3. " Not forgetting "
is described from a positive point of view, as fearing God, serving
Him, and swearing by His name. Fear is placed first, as the funda-
mental characteristic of the Israelitish worship of God ; it was no
slavish fear, but simply the holy awe of a sinner before the holy
God, which includes love rather than excludes it. " Fearing " is
a matter of the heart ; " serving," a matter of working arid striving ;
and "swearing in His name," the practical manifestation of the
worship of God in word and conversation. It refers not merely to
a solemn oath before a judicial court, but rather to asseverations on
oath in the ordinary intercourse of life, by which the religious atti-
tude of a man involuntarily reveals itself. — Vers. 14 sqq. The wor-
ship of Jehovah not only precludes all idolatry, which the Lord, as
a jealous God, will not endure (see at Ex. xx. 5), but will punish
with destruction from the earth (" the face of the ground," as in
Ex. xxxii. 12) ; but it also excludes tempting the Lord by an
1 The Jewish custom of the Medusah is nothing but a formal and outward
observance founded upon this command. It consists in writing the words of
Dent. vi. 4-9 and xi. 13-20 upon a piece of parchment, which is then placed
upon the top of the doorway of houses and rooms, enclosed in a wooden box ;
this box they touch with the finger and then kiss the finger on going either
out or in. S. Buxtorf, Synag. Jud. pp. 582 sqq. ; and Bodenschatz, Kirchl. Ver-
fassung der Juden, iv. pp. 19 sqq.
Digitizi
ed by Google
326 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
unbelieving murmuring against God, if He does not remove any
kind of distress immediately, as the people had already sinned at
Massah, i.e. at Rephidim (Ex. xvii. 1-7). — Vers. 17-19. They
were rather to observe all His commandments diligently, and do
what was right and good in His eyes. The infinitive 'W sfn? con-
tains the further development of 'Ul 2&] JVC? : " to that He (Jehovah)
thrust out all thine enemies before thee, as He hath spoken" (viz. Ex.
xxiii. 27 sqq., xxxiv. 11).
In vers. 20—25, the teaching to the children, which is only
briefly hinted at in ver. 7, is more fully explained. The Israelites
were to instruct their children and descendants as to the nature,
meaning, and object of the commandments of the Lord ; and in
reply to the inquiries of their sons, to teach them what the Lord had
done for the redemption of Israel out of the bondage of Egypt,
and how He had brought them into the promised land, and thus
to awaken in the younger generation love to the Lord and to His
commandments. The " great and sore miracles " (ver. 22) were the
Egyptian plagues, like CflBb, in chap. iv. 34. — " To fear" etc., u.
that we might"fear the Lord. — Ver. 25. " 'And righteousness will be
to us, if we observe to do : " i.e. our righteousness will consist in the
observance of the law ; we shall be regarded and treated by God as
righteous, if we are diligent in the observance of the law. " Before
Jehovah " refers primarily, no doubt, to the expression, " to do all
these commandments ; " but, as we may see from chap. xxiv. 13, this
does not prevent the further reference to the " righteousness " also.
This righteousness before Jehovah, it is true, is not really the
gospel "righteousness of faith ;" but there is no opposition between
the two, as the righteousness mentioned here is not founded upon
the outward (pharisaic) righteousness of works, but upon an earnest
striving after the fulfilment of the law, to love God with all the
heart ; and this love is altogether impossible without living faith.
Command to destroy the Canaanites and their Idolatry. — Chap. vii.
Vers. 1-11. As the Israelites were warned against idolatry in
chap. vi. 14, so here are they exhorted to beware of the false toler-
ance of sparing the Canaanites and enduring their idolatry. — Vers.
1 5. When the Lord drove out the tribes of Canaan before the
Israelites, and gave them up to them and smote them, they were to
put them under the ban (see at Lev. xxvii. 28), to make no treaty
with them, and to contract no marriage with them. ?B>3, to draw
out, to cast away, e.g. the sandals (Ex. iii. 5) ; here and ver. 22 it
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VII. 1-11. 327
signifies to draw out, or drive out a nation from its country and
possessions : it occurs in this sense in the Piel in 2 Kings xvi. 6.
On the Canaanitish tribes, see at Gen. x. 15 sqq. and xv. 20, 21.
There are seven of them mentioned here, as in Josh. iii. 10 and
xxiv. 11 ; on the other hand, there are only six in chap. xx. 17, as
in Ex. iii. 8, 17, xxiii. 23, and xxxiii. 2, the Girgashites being
omitted. The prohibition against making a covenant, as in Ex.
xxiii. 32 and xxxiv. 12, and that against marrying, as in Ex. xxxiv.
16, where the danger of the Israelites being drawn away to idolatry
is mentioned as a still further reason for these commands. TDJ '3,
"for he (the Canaanite) will cause thy son to turn away from behind
me," ue. tempt him away from following me, u to serve other gods."
Moses says "from following me" because he is speaking in the
name of Jehovah. The consequences of idolatry, as in chap. vi. 15,
iv. 26, etc. — Ver. 5. The Israelites were rather to destroy the altars
and idols of the Canaanites, according to the command in Ex.
xxxiv. 13, xxiii. 24. — Vers. 6-8. They were bound to do this by
virtue of their election as a holy nation, the nation of possession,
which Jehovah had singled out from all other nations, and brought
out of the bondage of Egypt, not because of its greatness, but from
love to them, and for the sake of the oath given to the fathers.
This exalted honour Israel was not to cast away by apostasy from
the Lord. It was founded upon the word of the Lord in Ex. xix.
5, 6, which Moses brought to the recollection of the people, and
expressly and emphatically developed. " Not because of your multi-
tude before all nations (because ye were more numerous than all
other nations) hath Jehovah turned to you in love (P^n, to bind one-
self with, to hang upon a person, out of love), for ye are the little-
ness of all nations " (the least numerous). Moses could say this to
Israel with reference to its descent from Abraham, whom God
chose as the one man out of all the world, whilst nations, states,
and kingdoms had already been formed all around (Baumgarteri).
" But because Jehovah loved you, and kept His oath which He had
sworn to the fathers, He hath brought you out" etc. Instead of saying,
He hath chosen you out of love to your fathers, as in chap. iv. 37,
Moses brings out in this place love to the people of Israel as the
divine motive, not for choosing Israel, but for leading it out and
delivering it from the slave-house of Egypt, by which God had
practically carried out the election of the people, that He might
thereby allure the Israelites to a reciprocity of love. — Vers. 9-11.
By this was Israel to know that Jehovah their God was the true
Digitized by
Google
328 THE FIFTH BOOK OF HOSES.
God, the faithful God, who keeps His covenant, showing mercy to
those who love Him, even to the thousandth generation, but repaying
those who hate Him to the face. This development of the nature
of God Moses introduces from Ex. xx. 5, 6, as a light warning not
to forfeit the mercy of God, or draw upon themselves His holy
wrath by falling into idolatry. To this end He emphatically carries
out still further the thought of retribution, by adding VTOKn?, u to
destroy him " (the hater), and 'U1 "i(W t6, " He delays not to His
hater (sc. to repay him) ; He will repay him to his face." " To the
face of every one of them" i.e. that they may see and feel that they
are smitten by God {BosenmUller). — Ver. 11. This energy of the
grace and holiness of the faithful covenant God was a powerful
admonition to keep the divine commandments.
Vers. 12-26. The observance of these commandments would
also bring great blessings (vers. 12-16). " If ye liearken to these
demands of right" (mishpatim) of the covenant Lord upon His
covenant people, and keep them and do them, " Jehovah will keep
unto thee the covenant and the mercy which He hath sworn to thy
fathers." In 3$, for "if K 3^g (Gen. xxii. 18), there is involved
not only the idea of reciprocity, but everywhere also an allusion to
reward or punishment (cf. chap. viii. 20 ; Num. xiv. 24). *JDn was
the favour displayed in the promises given to the patriarchs on oath
(Gen. xxii. 16). — Ver. 13. This mercy flowed from the love of God
to Israel, and the love was manifested in blessing and multiplying
the people. The blessing is then particularized, by a further ex-
pansion of Ex. xxiii. 25-27, as a blessing upon, the fruit of the
body, the fruits of the field and soil, and the rearing of cattle. "UP,
see Ex. xiii. 12. jtfif rftljiBty only occurs again in Deut. xxviii. 4,
18, 51, and certainly signifies the young increase of the flocks. It
is probably a Canaanitish word, derived from Ashtoreth (Astharte),
the female deity of the Canaanites, which was regarded as the
conceiving and birth-giving principle of nature, literally Veneres,
i.e. amores gregis, hence soboles (Ges.) ; just as the Latin poets
employ the name Ceres to signify the corn, Venus for love and
sexual intercourse, and Lucina for birth. On vers. 14 and 15, see
Ex. xxiii. 26. In ver. 15, the promise of the preservation of Israel
from all diseases (Ex. xv. 26, and xxiii. 25) is strengthened by the
addition of the clause, " all the evil diseases of Egypt," by which,
according to chap, xxviii. 27, we are probably to understand chiefly
the malignant species of leprosy called elephantiasis, and possibly
also the plague and other malignant forms of disease. In Egypt,
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VII. 12-26. 329
diseases for the most part readily assume a very dangerous character.
Pliny (A. n. xxvi. 1) calls Egypt the genitrix of contagious pestilence,
and modern naturalists have confirmed this (see ffengstenberg, Egypt
and the Books of Moses, p. 215 ; and Primer, Krankheiten des Orients,
pp. 460 sqq.). Diseases of this kind the Lord would rather bring
upon the enemies of Israel. The Israelites, on the other hand,
should be so strong and vigorous, that they would devour, Le. exter-
minate, all the nations which their God would give into their hands
(cf. Num. xiv. 9). With this thought Moses reverts with emphasis
to the command to root out the Canaanites without reserve, and
not to serve their gods, because they would become a snare to them
(see Ex. x. 7) ; and then in vers. 17-26 he carries out still further
the promise in Ex. xxiii. 27—30 of the successful subjugation of the
Canaanites through the assistance of the Lord, and sweeps away all
the objections that a weak faith might raise to the execution of the
divine command. — Vers. 17-26. To suppress the thought that was
rising up in their heart, how could it be possible for them to destroy
these nations which were more numerous than they, the Israelites
were to remember what the Lord had done in Egypt and to Pharaoh,
namely, the great temptations, signs, and wonders connected with
their deliverance from Egypt (cf. chap. iv. 34 and vi. 22). He
would do just the same to the Canaanites. — Ver. 20. He would
also send hornets against them, as He had already promised in Ex.
xxiii. 28 (see the passage), until all that were left and had hidden
themselves should have utterly perished. — Vers. 21 sqq. Israel had
no need to be afraid of them, as Jehovah was in the midst of it a
mighty God and terrible. He would drive out the nations, but
only gradually, as He had already declared to Moses in Ex. xxiii.
30, 31, and would smite them with great confusion, till they were
destroyed, as was the case for example at Gibeon (Josh. x. 10 ; cf .
Ex. xxiii. 27, where the form Oion is used instead of Din), and would
also deliver their kings into the hand of Israel, so that their names
should vanish under the heaven (cf. chap. ix. 14, xxv. 19 ; and for
the fulfilment, Josh. x. 22 sqq., xi. 12, xii. 7-24). No one would
be able to stand before Israel. — Ver. 24. " To stand before thee :"
lit to put oneself in the face of a person, so as to withstand him.
"Httfo for TDtfn, as in Lev. xiv. 43, etc.— Vers. 25, 26. Trusting
to this promise, the Israelites were to burn up the idols of the
Canaanites, and not to desire the silver and gold upon them (with
which the statues were overlaid : see vol. ii. p. 222), or take it to
themselves, lest they should be snared in it, i.e. lest the silver and
Digitizi
ed by Google
330 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
gold should become a snare to them. It would become so, not from
any danger lest they should practise idolatry with it, but because
silver and gold which had been used in connection with idolatrous
worship was an abomination to Jehovah, which the Israelites were
not to bring into their houses, lest they themselves should fall
under the ban, to which all the objects connected with idolatry were
devoted, as the history of Achan in Josh. vii. clearly proves. For
this reason, any such abomination was to be abhorred, and destroyed
by burning or grinding to powder (cf . Ex. xxxii. 20 ; 2 Kings
xxiii. 4, 5 ; 2 Chron. xv. 16).
Review of the Guidance of God, and their Humiliation in the Desert,
as a Warning against Highmindedness and Forgetfulness of God.
— .Chap. viii.
Vers. 1-6. In addition to the danger of being drawn aside to
transgress the covenant, by sparing the Oanaanites and their idols
out of pusillanimous compassion and false tolerance, the Israelites
would be especially in danger, after their settlement in Canaan, of
falling into pride and forgetfulness of God, when enjoying the
abundant productions of that land. To guard against this danger,
Moses set before them how the Lord had sought to lead and train
them to obedience by temptations and humiliations during their
journey through the desert. In order that his purpose in doing
this might be clearly seen, he commenced (ver. 1) with the renewed
admonition to keep the whole law which he commanded them that
day, that they might live and multiply and attain to the possession
of the promised land (cf. chap. iv. 1, vi. 3). — Ver. 2. To this end
they were to remember the forty years' guidance through the wil-
derness (chap. i. 31, ii. 7), by which God desired to humble them,
and to prove the state of their heart and their obedience. Humili-
ation was the way to prove their attitude towards God. ?W, to
humble, i.e. to bring them by means of distress and privations to
feel their need of help and their dependence upon God. n f ?, to
prove, by placing them in such positions in life as would drive them
to reveal what was in their heart, viz. whether they believed in the
omnipotence, love, and righteousness of God, or not. — Ver. 3. The
humiliation in the desert consisted not merely in the fact that God
let the people hunger, i.e. be in want of bread and their ordinary
food, but also in the fact that He fed them with manna, which was
unknown to them and their fathers (cf. Ex. xvi. 16 sqq.). Feeding
with manna is called a humiliation, inasmuch as God intended to
Digitizi
ed by Google
CHAP. VIII. 1-6. 331
show to the people through this food, which had previously been
altogether unknown to them, that man does not live by bread alone,
that the power to sustain life does not rest upon bread only (Isa.
xxxviii. 16 ; Gen. xxvii. 40), or belong simply to it, but to all that
goeth forth out of the mouth of Jehovah. That which " pro-
eeedeth out of the mouth of Jehovah" is not the word of the law, as
the Rabbins suppose, but, as the word i>3 (all, every) shows, " the
word" generally, the revealed will of God to preserve the life of
man in whatever way (Schultz) : hence all means designed and
appointed by the Lord for the sustenance of life. In this sense
Christ quotes these words in reply to the tempter (Matt. iv. 4), not
to say to him, The Messiah lives not by (material) bread only,
but by the fulfilment of the will of God ( Usteri, UUmann), or by
trusting in the sustaining word of God (OUliausen) ; but that He
left it to God to care for the sustenance of His- life, as God could
sustain His life in extraordinary ways, even without the common
supplies of food, by the power of His almighty word and will. —
Ver. 4. As the Lord provided for their nourishment, so did He
also in a marvellous way for the clothing of His people during
these forty years. " Thy garment did not fall off thee through age,
and thy foot did not swell." n?3 with |0, to fall off from age. pX3
only occurs again in Neh. ix. 21, where this passage is repeated.
The meaning is doubtful. The word is certainly connected with
P!! 3 (dough), and probably signifies to become soft or to swell, al-
though pS3 is also used for unleavened dough. The Septuagint
rendering here is ervktodno-av, to get hard skin ; on the other
hand, in Neh. ix. 21, we find the rendering inrob^ftara aiir&v oi
^pparpjaav, " their sandals were not worn out," from the parallel
passage in Deut. xxix. 5. These words affirm something more than
"clothes and shoes never failed you," inasmuch as ye always had
wool, hides, leather, and other kinds of material in sufficient quan-
tities for clothes and shoes, as not only J. D. Michaelis and others
suppose, but Calmet, and even Kurtz. Knobel is quite correct in
observing, that " this would be altogether too trivial a matter by the
side of the miraculous supply of manna, and moreover that it is
not involved in the expression itself, which rather affirms that their
clothes did not wear out upon them, or fall in tatters from their
backs, because God gave them a miraculous durability" {Luther,
Calvin, Baumgarten, Schultz, etc.). At the same time, there is no
necessity to follow some of the Rabbins and Justin Martyr (dial. c.
Tryph. c. 131), who so magnify the miracle of divine providence,
Digitized by
Google
332 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
as to maintain not only that the clothes of the Israelites did not
get old, but that as the younger generation grew up their clothes
also grew upon their backs, like the shells of snails. Nor is it neces-
sary to shut out the different natural resources which the people
had at their command for providing clothes and sandals, any more
than the gift of manna precluded the use of such ordinary pro-
visions as they were able to procure. — Ver. 5. In this way Jehovah
humbled and tempted His people, that they might learn in their
heart, i.e. convince themselves by experience, that their God was
educating them as a father does his son. "its', to admonish, chasten,
educate; like TraiBeveiv. "It includes everything belonging to a
proper education" {Calvin). — Ver. 6. The design of this education
was to train them to keep His commandments, that they might
walk in His ways and fear Him (chap. vi. 24).
Vers. 7—20. The Israelites were to continue mindful of this
paternal discipline on the part of their God, when the Lord should
bring them into the good land of Canaan. This land Moses de-
scribes in vers. 8, 9, in contrast with the dry unfruitful desert, as a
well-watered and very fruitful land, which yielded abundance of
support to its inhabitants ; a land of water-brooks, fountains, and
floods (niDinn, see Gen. i. 2), which had their source (took their
rise) in valleys and on mountains ; a land of wheat and barley, of
the vine, fig, and pomegranate, and full of oil and honey (see at
Ex. iii. 8) ; lastly, a land " in which thou shalt not eat (support thy-
self) in scarcity, and shalt not be in want of anything ; a land whose
stones are iron, and out of whose mountains thou hewest brass." The
stones are iron, i.e. ferruginous. This statement is confirmed by
modern travellers, although the Israelites did not carry on mining,
and do not appear to have obtained either iron or brass from their
own land. The iron and brass which David collected such quan-
tities for the building of the temple (1 Ohron. xxii. 3, 14), he pro-
cured from Betach and Berotai (2 Sam. viii. 8), or Tibchat and
Kun (1 Chron. xviii. 8), towns of Hadadezer, that is to say, from
Syria. According to Ezek. xxvii. 19, however, the Danites brought
iron-work to the market of Tyre. Not only do the springs near
Tiberias contain iron (v. Schubert, R. iii. p. 239), whilst the soil at
Hasbeya and the springs in the neighbourhood are also strongly
impregnated with iron (Burckhardt, Syrien, p. 83), but in the
southern mountains as well there are probably strata of iron be-
tween Jerusalem and Jericho (Russegger, E. iii. p. 250). But
Lebanon especially abounds in iron-stone ; iron mines and smelting
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. VIII. 7-20. 333
furnaces being found there in many places ( Volney, Travels ;
Burckliardt, p. 73 ; Seetzen, i. pp. 145, 187 sqq., 237 sqq.). The
basalt also, which occurs in great masses in northern Canaan by
. the side of the limestone, from the plain of Jezreel onwards {Robin-
ton, iii. p. 313), and is very predominant in Bashan, is a ferruginous
stone. Traces of extinct copper-works are also found upon Lebanon
{Volney, Travels ; Hitter's Erdkunde, xvii. p. 1063). — Vers. 10-18.
But if the Israelites were to eat there and be satisfied, i.e. to live in
the midst of plenty, they were to beware of forgetting their God ;
that when their prosperity — their possessions, in the form of lofty
houses, cattle, gold and silver, and other good things — increased,
their heart might not be lifted up, i.e. they might not become proud,
and, forgetting their deliverance from Egypt and their miraculous
preservation and guidance in the desert, ascribe the property they
had acquired to their own strength and the work of their own hands.
To keep the people from this danger of forgetting God, which fol-
lows so easily from the pride of wealth, Moses once more enumerates
in vers. 146-16 the manifestations of divine grace, their deliverance
from Egypt the slave-house, their being led through the great and
terrible desert, whose terrors he depicts by mentioning a series of
noxious and even fatal things, such as snakes, burning snakes
(saraph, see at Num. xxi. 6), scorpions, and the thirsty land where
there was no water. The words from BTO, onwards, are attached
rhetorically to what precedes by simple apposition, without any
logically connecting particle ; though it will not do to overlook en-
tirely the rhetorical form of the enumeration, and supply the pre-
position 3 before E>ro and the words which follow, to say nothing
of the fact that it would be quite out of character before these
nouns in the singular, as a whole people could not go through one
serpent, etc. In this parched land the Lord brought the people
water out of the flinty rock, the hardest stone, and fed them with
manna, to humble them and tempt them (cf. ver. 2), in order (this
was the ultimate intention of all the humiliation and trial) " to do
thee good at thy latter end." The " latter end" of any one is " the
time which follows some distinct point in his life, particularly an
important epoch-making point, and which may be regarded as the
end by contrast, the time before that epoch being considered as
the beginning" {Schultz). In this instance Moses refers to the
period of their life in Canaan, in contrast with which the period of
their sojourn in Egypt and their wandering in the desert is regarded
as the beginning ; consequently the expression does not relate to
Digitized by
Google
334 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
death as the end of life, as in Num. xxiii. 10, although this allusion
is not to be altogether excluded, as a blessed death is only the com-
pletion of a blessed life. — Like all the guidance of Israel by the
Lord, what is stated here is applicable to all believers. It is through .
humiliations and trials that the Lord leads His people to blessedness.
Through the desert of tribulation, anxiety, distress, and merciful
interposition, He conducts them to Canaan, into the land of rest,
where they are refreshed and satisfied in the full enjoyment of the
blessings of His grace and salvation ; but those alone who continue
humble, not attributing the good fortune and prosperity to which
they attain at last, to their own exertion, strength, perseverance,
and wisdom, but gratefully enjoying this good as a gift of the grace
of God. Tn nt?y, to create property, to prosper in wealth (as in
Num. xxiv. 18). God gave strength for this (ver. 18), not because
of Israel's merit and worthiness, but to fulfil His promises which
He had made on oath to the patriarchs. " As this day" as was
quite evident then, when the establishment of the covenant had
already commenced, and Israel had come through the desert to the
border of Canaan (see chap. iv. 20). — Vers. 19, 20. To strengthen
his admonition, Moses pointed again in conclusion, as he had already
done in chap. vi. 14 (cf. chap. iv. 25 sqq.), to the destruction which
would come upon Israel through apostasy from its God.
Warning against Self-righteousness, founded upon the recital of
their previous Sins. — Chap. ix.-x. 11.
Besides the more vulgar pride which entirely forgets God, and
attributes success and prosperity to its own power and exertion, there
is one of a more refined character, which very easily spreads — namely,
pride which acknowledges the blessings of God; but instead of
receiving them gratefully, as unmerited gifts of the grace of the
Lord, sees in them nothing but proofs of its own righteousness and
virtue. Moses therefore warned the Israelites more particularly of
this dangerous enemy of the soul, by first of all declaring without
reserve, that the Lord was not about to give them Canaan because
of their own righteousness, but that He would exterminate the
Canaanites for their own wickedness (vers. 1-6) ; and then showing
them for their, humiliation, by proof s drawn from the immediate
past, how they had brought upon themselves the anger of the Lord,
by their apostasy and rebellion against their God, directly after the
conclusion of the covenant at Sinai ; and that in such a way, that it
was only by his earnest intercession that he had been able to prevent
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. IX. 1-6. 335
the destruction of the people (vers. 7-24), and to secure a further
renewal of the pledges of the covenant (ver. 25-chap. x. 11).
Vers. 1-6. Warning against a conceit of righteousness, with
the occasion for the warning. As the Israelites were now about to
cross over the Jordan (" this day," to indicate that the time was
close at hand), to take possession of nations that were superior to
them in size and strength (the tribes of Canaan mentioned in chap,
vii. 1), and great fortified cities reaching to the heavens (cf. chap.
i. 28), namely, the great and tall nation of the Enakites (chap. i. 28),
before which, as was well known, no one could stand (3??W, as in
chap. vii. 24) ; and as they also knew that Jehovah their God was
going before them to destroy and humble these nations, they were
not to say in their heart, when this was done, For my righteousness
Jehovah hath brought me in to possess this land. In ver. 3, ijjnjl
Ota is not to be taken in an imperative sense, but as expressive of
the actual fact, and corresponding to ver. 1, " thou art to pass."
Israel now knew for certain — namely, by the fact, which spoke so
powerfully, of its having been successful against foes which it could
never have conquered by itself, especially against Sihon and Og — ■■
that the Lord was going before it, as the leader and captain of His
people (Schultz : see chap. i. 30). The threefold repetition of t«n
in ver. 3. is peculiarly emphatic. " A consuming fire :" as in chap.
iv. 24. BVto&l K*n is more particularly defined by 'W D}W?- KCT,
which follows : not, however, as implying that *W?t?n does not sig-
nify complete destruction in this passage, but rather as explaining
how the destruction would take place. Jehovah would destroy the
Canaanites, by bringing them down, humbling them before Israel,
so that they would be able to drive them out and destroy them
quickly. " "ino, quickly, is no more opposed to chap. vii. 22, ' thou
mayest not destroy them quickly,' than God's not delaying to
requite (chap. vii. 10) is opposed to His long-suffering" (Schultz).
So far as the almighty assistance of God was concerned, the Israel-
ites would quickly overthrow the Canaanites ; but for the sake of
the well-being of Israel, the destruction would only take place by
degrees. " As Jehovah hath said unto thee ;" viz. Ex. xxiii. 23, 27
s qq., and at the beginning of the conflict, chap. ii. 24 sqq. — Ver. 4.
When therefore Jehovah thrust out these nations before them (1™,
as in chap. vi. 19), the Israelites were not to say within themselves,"
" % (for, on account of) my righteousness Jehovah hath brought me
(led me hither) to possess this land? The following word, njKTDI,
w adversative : " but because of the wickedness of tliese nations" etc.
Digitized by
Google
336 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
— To impress this truth deeply upon the people, Moses repeats the
thought once more in ver. 5. At the same time he mentions, in
addition to righteousness, straightness or uprightness of heart, to
indicate briefly that outward works do not constitute true righteous-
ness, but that an upright state of heart is indispensable, and then
enters more fully into the positive reasons. The wickedness of the
Canaanites was no doubt a sufficient reason for destroying them,
but not for giving their land to the people of Israel, since they could
lay no claim to it on account of their own righteousness. The reason
for giving Canaan to the Israelites was simply the promise of God,
the word which the Lord had spoken to the patriarchs on oath (cf.
chap. vii. 8), and therefore nothing but the free grace of God, — not
any merit on the part of the Israelites who were then living, for
they were a people " of a hard neck," i.e. a stubborn, untractable
generation. With these words, which the Lord Himself had ap-
plied to Israel in Ex. xxxii. 9, xxxiii. 3, 5, Moses prepares the way
for passing to the reasons for his warning against self-righteous
pride, namely, the grievous sins of the Israelites against the Lord.
Vers. 7-24. He reminded the people how they had provoked the
Lord in the desert, and had shown themselves rebellious against
God, from the day of their departure from Egypt till their arrival
in the steppes of Moab. "lEWTiK, for "IE>K, is the object to ri3OT
(Ewald, § 333, a.) : " how thou hast provoked." '""On, generally
with 'BTtS (cf. chap. i. 26), to be rebellious against the command-
ment of the Lord : here with DJ>, construed with a person, to deal
rebelliously with God, to act rebelliously in relation to Him (cf.
chap. xxxi. 27). The words, "from the day that thou earnest out,"
etc., are not to be pressed. It is to be observed, however, that
the rebellion against the guidance of God commenced before they
passed through the Eed Sea (Ex. xiv. 11). This general statement
Moses then followed up with facts, first of all describing the worship
of the calf at Horeb, according to its leading features (vers. 8-21),
and then briefly pointing to the other rebellions of the people in
the desert (vers. 22, 23).— Ver. 8. " And indeed even in Horeb ye
provoked Jehovah to wrath." By the vav exptie. this sin is brought
into prominence, as having been a specially grievous one. It was
so because of the circumstances under which it was committed. —
Vers. 9—12. When Moses went up the mountain, and stayed there
forty days, entirely occupied with the holiest things, so that he
neither ate nor drank, having gone up to receive the tables of the
law, upon which the words were written with the finger of God,
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. IX. 7-24. 337
just as the Lord had spoken them directly to the people out of the
midst of the fire, — at a time, therefore, when the Israelites should
also have been meditating deeply upon the words of the Lord which
they had but just heard, — they acted so corruptly, as to depart at
once from the way that had been pointed out, and make themselves
a molten image (comp. Ex. xxxi. 18-xxxii. 6, with chaps, xxiv. 12—
xxxi. 17). " The day of the assembly" i.e. the day on which Moses
gathered the people together before God (chap. iv. 10), calling them
out of the camp, aud bringing them to the Lord to the foot of
Sinai (Ex. xix. 17). The construction of the sentence is this : the
apodosis to " when I was gone up" commences with " the Lord
delivered unto me," in ver. 10 ; and the clause, " then I abode," etc.,
in ver. 9, is a parenthesis. — The words of God in vers. 12-14 are
taken almost word for word from Ex. xxxii. 7-10. *fin (ver. 14),
the imperative Hiphil of fWi, desist from me, that I may destroy
them, for 7 "nw, in Ex. xxxii. 10. But notwithstanding the apos-
tasy of the people, the Lord gave Moses the tables of the covenant,
not only that they might be a testimony of His holiness before the
faithless nation, but still more as a testimony that, in spite of His
resolution to destroy the rebellious nation, without leaving a trace
behind, He would still uphold His covenant, and make of Moses a,
greater people. There is nothing at all to favour the opinion, that
handing over the tables (ver. 11) was the first beginning of the
manifestations of divine wrath (Schultz) ; and this is also at variance
with the preterite, JTU, in ver. 11, from which it is very evident that
the Lord had already given the tables to Moses, when He com-
manded him to go down quickly, not only to declare to the people
the holiness of God, but to stop the apostasy, and by his mediatorial
intervention to avert from the people the execution of the divine
purpose. It is true, that when Moses came down and saw the
idolatrous conduct of the people, he threw the two tables from his
hands, and broke them in pieces'before the eyes of the people (vers.
15-17 ; comp. with Ex. xxxii. 15-19), as a practical declaration that
the covenant of the Lord was broken by their apostasy. But this
act of Moses furnishes no proof that the Lord had given him the
tables to declare His holy wrath in the sight of the people. And
even if the tables of the covenant were " in a certain sense the
indictments in Moses' hands, accusing them of a capital crime"
(Schultz), this was not the purpose for which God had given them
to him. For if it had been, 'Moses would not have broken them in
pieces, destroying, as it were, the indictments themselves, before
PENT. — VOL. III. Y
Digitized by
Google
338 THE FIFTH BOOK OF'MOSES.
the people had been tried. Moses passed over the fact, that even
before coming down from the mountain he endeavoured to mitigate
the wrath of the Lord by his intercession (Ex. xxxii. 11-14), and
simply mentioned (in vers. 15-17) how, as soon as he came down,
he charged the people with their great sin ; and then, in vers. 18, 19,
how he spent another forty days upon the mountain fasting before
God, on account of this sin, until he had averted the destructive
wrath of the Lord from Israel, through his earnest intercession.
The forty days that Moses spent upon the mountain, " as at ike
first" in prayer before the Lord, are the days mentioned in Ex.
xxxiv. 28 as having been passed upon Sinai for the perfect restora-
tion of the covenant, and for the purpose of procuring the second
tables (cf. chap. x. 1 sqq.). — Ver. 20. It was not from the people
only, but from Aaron also, that Moses averted the wrath of God
through his intercession, when it was about to destroy him. In the
historical account in Ex. xxxii., there is no special reference to this
intercession, as it is included in the intercession for the whole nation.
On the present occasion, however, Moses gave especial prominence
to this particular feature, not only that he might make the people
thoroughly aware that at that time Israel could not even boast of
the righteousness of its eminent men (cf. Isa. xliii. 27), but also to
bring out the fact, which is described still more fully in chap. x. 6
sqq., that Aaron's investiture with the priesthood, and the mainte-
nance of this institution, was purely a work of divine grace. It is
true that at that time Aaron was not -yet high priest ; but he had
been placed at the head of the nation in connection with Hur, as
the representative of Moses (Ex. xxiv. 14), and was already desig-
nated by God for the high-priesthood (Ex. xxviii. 1). The fact,
however, that Aaron had drawn upon himself the wrath of God in
a very high degree, was intimated plainly enough in what Moses
told him in Ex. xxxii. 21. — In ver. 21, Moses mentions again how
he destroyed that manifested sin of the nation, namely, the molten
calf (see at Ex. xxxii. 20). — Vers. 22-24. And it was not on this
occasion only, viz. at Horeb, that Israel aroused the anger of the
Lord its God by its sin, but it did so again and again at other
places : at Tabeerah, by discontent at the guidance of God (Num.
xi. 1-3) ; at Massah, by murmuring on account of the want of
water (Ex. xvii. 1 sqq.) ; at the graves of lust, by longing for flesh
(Num. xi. 4 sqq.) ; and at Kadesh-Barnea by unbelief, of which
they had already been reminded at chap. i. 26 sqq. The list is not
arranged chronologically, but advances gradually *from the smaller
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. IX. 26-29. 339
to the more serious forms of guilt. For Moses" was seeking to
sharpen the consciences of the people, and to impress upon them
the fact that they had been rebellious against the Lord (see at
ver. 7) from the very beginning, " from the day that I knew you."
Vers. 25-29. After vindicating in this way the thought ex-
pressed in ver. 7, by enumerating the principal rebellions of the
people against their God, Moses returns in vers. 25 sqq. to the
apostasy at Sinai, for the purpose of showing still further how
Israel* had no righteousness or ground for boasting before God, and
owed its preservation, with all the saving blessings of the covenant,
solely to the mercy of God and His covenant faithfulness. To this
end he repeats in vers. 26-29 the essential points in his intercession
for the people after their sin at Sinai, and then proceeds to explain
still further, in chap. x. 1—11, how the Lord had not only renewed
the tables of the covenant in consequence of this intercession (vers.
1-5), but had also established the gracious institution of the priest-
hood for the time to come by appointing Eleazar iu Aaron's stead
as soon as his father died, and setting apart the tribe of Levi to
carry the ark of the covenant and attend to the holy service, and
had commanded them to continue their march to Canaan, and take
possession of the land promised to the fathers (vers. 6-11). With
the words " thus I fell down," in ver. 25, Moses returns to the in-
tercession already briefly mentioned in ver. 18, and recalls to the
recollection of the people the essential features of his plea at that
time. For the words " the forty days and nights that I fell down"
see at chap. i. 46. The substance of the intercession in vers. 26-29
is essentially the same as that in Ex. xxxii. 11—13 ; but given with
such freedom as any other than Moses would hardly have allowed
himself (Schultz), and in such a manner as to bring it into the
most obvious relation to the words of God in vers. 12, 13. nnvto"**,
" Destroy not Thy people and Thine inheritance," says Moses, with
reference to the words of the Lord to him : " thy people have cor-
rupted themselves" (ver. 12). Israel was not Moses* nation, but
the nation and inheritance of Jehovah ; it was not Moses, but
Jehovah, who had brought it out of Egypt. True, the people were
stiffnecked (cf. ver. 13) ; but let the Lord remember the fathers,
the oath given to Abraham, which is expressly mentioned in Ex.
xxxii. 13 (see at chap. vii. 8), and not turn to the stiffneckedness
of the people QVfe equivalent to "T^J HB'p, vers. 13 and 6), and to
their wickedness and sin (i.e. not regard them and punish them).
The honour of the Lord before the nations was concerned in this
Digitized by
Google
340 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
(ver. 28). The land whence Israel came out (" the land " = the
people of the land, as in Gen. x. 25, etc., viz. the Egyptians : the
word is construed as a collective with a plural verb) must not have
occasion to say, that Jehovah had not led His people into the pro-
mised land from incapacity or hatred. np\ 'bso recalls Num. xiv. 16.
Just as " inability " would be opposed to the nature of the absolute
God, so u hatred " would be opposed to the choice of Israel as the
inheritance of Jehovah, which He had brought out of Egypt by
His divine and almighty power (cf. Ex. vi. 6).
Chap. x. 1-11. In vers. 1-5 Moses briefly relates the success
of his earnest intercession. "At that time" of his intercession,
God commanded him to hew out new tables, and prepare an ark in
which to keep them (cf. Ex. xxxiv. 1 sqq.). Here again Moses
links together such things as were substantially connected, without
strictly confining himself to the chronological order, which was
already well known from the historical account, inasmuch as this
was not required by the general object of his address. God had
already given directions for the preparation of the ark of the cove-
nant, before the apostasy of the nation (Ex. xxv. 10 sqq.); but
it was not' made till after the tabernacle had been built, and the
tables were only deposited in the ark when the tabernacle was con-
secrated (Ex. xl. 20). — Vers. 6 and 7. And the Israelites owed to
the grace of their God, which was turned towards them once more,
through the intercession of Moses, not only the restoration of the
tables of the covenant as a pledge that the covenant itself was
restored, but also the institution and maintenance of the high-
priesthood and priesthood generally for the purpose of mediation
between them and the Lord. 1 Moses reminds the people of this
1 Even Clericus pointed out this connection, and paraphrased vers. 6 and 7
as follows: "But when, as I have said, God forgave the Hebrew people, He
pardoned my brother Aaron also, who did not die till the fortieth year after we
had come out of Egypt, and when we were coming round the borders of the
Edomites to come hither. God also showed that He was reconciled towards
him by conferring the priesthood upon him, which is now borne by his son
Eleazar according to the will of God." Clericus has also correctly brought out
the fact that Moses referred to what he had stated in chap. ix. 20 as to the
wrath of God against Aaron and his intercession on his behalf, or rather that
he mentioned his intercession on behalf of Aaron in that passage, because he
intended to call more particular attention to the successful result of it in this.
Hengstenberg (Dissertations, vol. ii. pp. 351-2) has since pointed out briefly, but
very conclusively, the connection of thought between vers. 6, 7, and what goes
before and follows after. " Moses," he says, " points out to the people how the
Lord had continued unchangeable in His mercy notwithstanding all their sins.
Digltizi
ed by Google
CHAP. X 1-11. 341
gracious gift on the part of their God, by recalling to their memory
the time when Aaron died and his son Eleazar was invested with
the high-priesthood in his stead. That he may transport his
hearers the more distinctly to the period in question, he lets the
history itself speak, and quotes from the account of their journeys
the passage which supplied the practical proof of what he desires
to say. Instead of saying : And the high-priesthood also, with
which Aaron was invested by the grace of God notwithstanding
his sin at Sinai, the Lord has still preserved to you; for when
Aaron died, He invested his son with the same honour, 1 and also
directed you to continue your journey, — he proceeds in the following
historical style : " And the children of Israel took tJieir journey from
the wells of the sons of Jaakan to Mosera : there Aaron died, and
there he was buried ; and Eleazar his son became priest in his stead.
And from thence they journeyed unto Gudgodah, and from Gudgodah
to Jotbath, a land of water-brooks? The allusion to these .marches,
together with the events which had taken place at Mosera, taught
in very few words " not only that Aaron was forgiven at the inter-
cession of Moses, and even honoured with the high-priesthood, the
medium of grace and blessing to the people of God {e.g. at the
wells of Bene-Jaakan) until the time of his death ; but also that
through this same intercession the high-priesthood was maintained
in perpetuity, so that when Aaron had to die in the wilderness in
consequence of a fresh sin (Num. xx. 12), it continued notwith-
Although they had rendered themselves unworthy of such goodness by their
worship of the calf, He gave them the ark of the covenant with the new tables
of the law in it (chap. x. 1-5). He followed up this gift of His grace by
instituting the high-priesthood, and when Aaron died He caused it to be trans-
ferred, to his son Eleazar (vers. 6, 7). He set apart the tribe of Levi to serve
Him and bless the people in His name, and thus to be the mediators of His
mercy (vers. 8, 9). In short, He omitted nothing that was requisite to place
Israel in full possession of the dignity of a people of God." There is no ground
for regarding vers. 6, 7, as a gloss, as Capellus, Dathe, and Rosenmiiller do, or
vers. 6-9 as " an interpolation of a historical statement concerning the bearers
of the ark of the covenant and the holy persons generally, which has no con-
nection with Moses' address," as Knobel maintains. The want of any formal
connection is quite in keeping with the spirit of simplicity which characterizes
the early Hebrew diction and historical writings. " The style of the Hebrews
is not to be tried by the rules of rhetoricians " (Clericus).
1 "In the death of Aaron they might discern the punishment of their
rebellion. But the fact that Eleazar was appointed in his place, was a sign of
the paternal grace of God, who did not suffer them to be forsaken on that
account " (Calvin).
Digitized by
Google
342 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
standing, and by no means diminished in strength, as might have
been feared, since it led the way from the wells to water-brooks,
helped on the journey to Canaan, which was now the object of
their immediate aim, and still sustained their courage and their
faith" (Schultz). The earlier commentators observed the inward
connection between the continuation of the high-priesthood and the
water-brooks. J. Gerhard, for example, observes : " God generally
associates material blessings with spiritual ; as long as the ministry
of the word and the observance of divine worship flourish among
us, God will also provide for our temporal necessities." On the
places mentioned, see pp. 244—5.
In ver. 8, Moses returns to the form of an address again, and
refers to the separation of the tribe of Levi for the holy service, as
a manifestation of mercy on the part of the Lord towards Israel.
The expression " at that time " is not to be understood as relating
to the time of Aaron's death in the fortieth year of the march, in
which Knobel finds a contradiction to the other books. It refers
quite generally, as in chap. ix. 20 and x. 1, to the time of which
Moses is speaking here, viz. the time when the covenant was re-
stored at Sinai. The appointment of the tribe of Levi for service
at the sanctuary took place in connection with the election of
Aaron and his sons to the priesthood (Ex. xxviii. and xxix.),
although their call to this service, instead of the first-born of Israel,
was not carried out till the numbering and mustering of the people
(Num. i. 49 sqq., iv. 17 sqq., viii. 6 sqq.). Moses is speaking here
of the election of the whole of the tribe of Levi, including the
priests (Aaron and his sons), as is very evident from the account
of their service. It is true that the carrying of the ark upon the
march through the desert was the business of the (non-priestly)
Levites, viz. the Kohathites (Num. iv. 4 sqq.); but on solemn
occasions the priests had to carry it (cf . Josh. iii. 3, 6, 8, vi, 6 ;
1 Kings viii. 3 sqq.). " Standing before the Lord, to serve Him,
and to bless in His name," was exclusively the business of the
priests (cf. chap, xviii. 5, xxi. 5, and Num. vi. 23 sqq.), whereas
the Levites were only assistants of the priests in their service
(see at chap, xviii. 7). This tribe therefore received no share
and possession with the other tribes, as was already laid down in
Num. xviii. 20 with reference to the priests, and in ver. 24 with
regard to all the Levites ; to which passages the words " as the
Lord thy God promised him" refer. — Lastly, in vers. 10, 11, Moses
sums up the result of his intercession in the words, u And I stood
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. X. 12-15. 343
upon the mount as the first days, forty days (a resumption of chap.
ix. 18 and 25) ; and the Lord hearkened to me Ms pirne also (word
for word, as in chap. ix. 19). Jehovah would not destroy thee
(Israel)." Therefore He commanded Moses to arise to depart
before the people, i.e. as leader of the people to command and
superintend their removal and march. In form, this command is
connected with Ex. xxxiv. 1 ; but Moses refers here not only to
that word of the Lord w;th the limitation added there in ver. 2,
but to the ultimate, full, and unconditional assurance of God, in
which the Lord Himself promised to go with His people and bring
them to Canaan (Ex. xxxiv. 14 sqq.).
A dmonition to fear and love God. The Blessing or Curse conse-
quent upon the Fulfilment or Transgression of the Law. — Chap,
x. 12-xi. 32.
Vers. 12-15. The proof that Israel had no righteousness before
God is followed on the positive side by an expansion of the main
law laid down in chap. vi. 4 sqq., to love God with all the heart,
which is introduced by the words, u and now Israel," se. now that
thou hast everything without desert or worthiness, purely from for-
giving grace. " What doth the Lord thy God require of thee?"
Nothing further than that thou f earest Him, " to walk in all His
ways, and to love Him, and to serve Him with all the heart and all
the soul." DS '3, unless, or except that, presupposes a negative
clause (cf. Gen. xxxix. 9), which is implied here in the previous
question, or else to be supplied as the answer. The demand for
fear, love, and reverence towards the Lord, is no doubt very hard
for the natural man to fulfil, and all the harder the deeper it goes
into the heart ; but after such manifestations of the love and grace
of God, it only follows as a matter of course. " Fear, love, and
obedience would naturally have taken root of themselves within the
heart, if man had not corrupted his own heart." Love, which is
the only thing demanded in chap. vi. 5, is here preceded by fear,
which is the only thing mentioned in chap. v. 26 and vi. 24. 1 The
fear of the Lord, which springs from the knowledge of one's own
unholiness in the presence of the holy God, ought to form the one
leading emotion in the heart prompting to walk in all the ways of
the Lord, and to maintain morality of conduct in its strictest form.
1 The fear of God is to be united with the love of God ; for love without
fear- makes men remiss, and fear without love makes them servile and desperate
(/. Gerhard).
Digitized by
Google
344 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
This fear, which first enables us to comprehend the mercy of God,
awakens love, the fruit of which is manifested in serving God with
all the heart and all the soul (see chap. vi. 5). u For thy good," as
in chap. v. 30 and vi. 24. — Vers. 14, 15. This obligation the Lord
had laid upon Israel by the love with which He, to whom all the
heavens and the earth, with everything upon it, belong, had chosen
the patriarchs and their seed out of all nations. By " the heavens
of the heavens," the idea of heaven is perfectly exhausted. This
God, who might have chosen any other nation as well as Israel, or
in fact all nations together, had directed His special love to Israel
alone.
Vers. 16-22. Above all, therefore, they were to circumcise the
foreskin of their hearts, i.e. to lay aside all insensibility of heart to
impressions from the love of God (cf. Lev. xxvi. 41 ; and on the
spiritual signification of circumcision, see vol. i. p. 227), and not
stiffen their necks any more, i.e. not persist in their obstinacy, or
obstinate resistance to God (cf. chap. ix. 6, 13). Without circum-
cision of heart, true fear of God and true love of God are both im-
possible. As a reason for this admonition, Moses adduces in vers.
17 sqq. the nature and acts of God. Jehovah as the absolute God
and Lord is mighty and terrible towards all, without respect of
person, and at the same time a just Judge and loving Protector
of the helpless and oppressed. From this it follows that the true
God will not tolerate haughtiness and stiffness of neck either
towards Himself or towards other men, but will punish it without
reserve. To set forth emphatically the infinite greatness and might
of God, Moses describes Jehovah the God of Israel as the " God of
gods" i.e. the supreme God, the essence of all that is divine, of all
divine power and might (cf. Ps. cxxxvi. 2), — and as the " Lord of
lords" i.e. the supreme, unrestricted Kuler (" the only Potentate,"
1 Tim. vi. 15), above all powers in heaven and on earth, " a great
King above all gods" (Ps. xcv. 3). Compare Rev. xvii. 14 and xix.
16, where these predicates are transferred to the exalted Son of
God, as the Judge and Conqueror of all dominions and powers that
are hostile to God. The predicates which follow describe the un-
folding of the omnipotence of God in the government of the world,
in which Jehovah manifests Himself as the great, mighty, and ter-
rible God (Ps. lxxxix. 8), who does not regard the person (cf. Lev.
xix. 15), or accept presents (cf. chap. xvi. 19), like a human judge.
— Vers. 18, 19. As such, Jehovah does justice to the defenceless
(orphan and widow), and exercises a loving care towards the stranger
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XL 1-12. 345
in his oppression. For this reason the Israelites were not to close
their hearts egotistically against the stranger (cf. Ex. xxii. 20).
This would show whether they possessed any love to God, and had
circumcised their hearts (cf. 1 John iii. 10, 17).— Vers. 20 sqq.
After laying down the fundamental condition of a proper relation
towards God, Moses describes the fear of God, i.e. true reverence
of God, in its threefold manifestation, in deed (serving God), in
heart (cleaving to Him ; cf . chap. iv. 4), and with the mouth (swear-
ing by His name ; cf. chap. vi. 13). Such reverence as this Israel
owed to its God ; for u He is thy praise, and He is thy God" (ver.
21). He has given thee strong inducements to praise. By the
great and terrible things which thine eyes have seen, He has mani-
fested Himself as God to thee. " Terrible things" are those acts
of divine omnipotence,, which fill men with fear and trembling at
the majesty of the Almighty (cf. Ex. xv. 11). IJjiN ?toV, " done
with thee," i.e. shown to thee (nN in the sense of practical help). —
Ver. 22. One marvel among these great and terrible acts of the
Lord was to be seen in Israel itself, which had gone down to Egypt
in the persons of its fathers as a family consisting of seventy souls,
and now, notwithstanding the oppression it suffered there, had
grown into an innumerable nation. So marvellously had the Lord
fulfilled His promise in Gen. xv. 5. By referring to this promise,
Moses intended no doubt to recall to the recollection of the people
the fact that the bondage of Israel in a foreign land for 400 years
had also been foretold (Gen. xv. 13 sqq.). On the seventy souls,
see at Gen. xlvi. 26, 27.
Chap. xi. In vers. 1-12 the other feature in the divine require-
ments (chap. x. 12), viz. love to the Lord their God, is still more
fully developed. Love was to show itself in the distinct perception
of what had to be observed towards Jehovah (to " keep His charge,"
see at Lev. viii. 35), i.e. in the perpetual observance of His com-
. mandments and rights. The words, " and His statutes," etc., serve
to explain the general notion, "His charge." "All days," as in
chap. iv. 10.— Vers. 2 sqq. To awaken this, love they were now to
know, i.e. to ponder and lay to heart, the discipline of the Lord
their God. The words from "for (I speak) not" to " have not seen "
are a parenthetical clause, by which Moses would impress his words
most strongly upon the hearts of the older generation, which had
witnessed the acts of the Lord. The clause is without any verb or
predicate, but this can easily be supplied from the sense. The best
suggestion is that of Schultz, viz. wnn -tfnn, « for it is not with your
Digitized by
Google
346 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
children that I have to do," not to them that this admonition applies.
Moses refers to the children who had been born in the desert, as
distinguished from those who, though not twenty years old when
the Israelites came out of Egypt, had nevertheless seen with their
own eyes the plagues inflicted upon Egypt, and who were now of
mature age, viz. between forty and sixty years old, and formed, as
the older and more experienced generation, the stock and kernel of
the congregation assembled round him now. To the words, " which
have not known and have not seen," it is easy to supply from the
context, " what ye have known and seen." The accusatives from
"the chastisement" onwards belong to the verb of the principal
sentence, " know ye this day." The accusatives which follow show
what we are to understand by " the chastisement of the Lord," viz.
the mighty acts of the Lord to Egypt and .to Israel in the desert.
The object of them all was to educate Israel in the fear and love of
God. In this sense Moses calls them "imd (Eng. Ver. chastisement),
iratZela, i.e. not punishment only, but education by the manifesta-
tion of love as well as punishment (like "©! in chap. iv. 36; cf.
Prov. i. 2, 8, iv. 1, etc.). " His greatness" etc., as in chap. iii. 24
and iv. 34. On the signs and acts in Egypt, see at chap. iv. 34,
vi. 22 ; and on those at the Red Sea, at Ex. xiv. DTWrifc— TO 1%
" over whose face He made the waters of the Red Sea to flow" cf.
Ex. xiv. 26 sqq. — By the acts of God in the desert (ver. 5) we are
not to understand the chastenings in Num. xi.— xv. either solely or
pre-eminently, but all the manifestations of the omnipotence of
God in the guidance of Israel, proofs of love as well as- the penal
wonders. Of the latter, the miraculous destruction of the company
of Korah is specially mentioned in ver. 6 (cf. Num. xvi. 31-33).
Here Moses only mentions Dathan and Abiram, the followers of
Korah, and not Korah himself, probably from regard to his sons,
who were not swallowed up by the earth along with their father, hut
had lived to perpetuate the family of Korah. " Everything existing,
which was in their following" (see Ex. xi. 8), does not mean their
possessions, but their servants, and corresponds to " all the men wbo
belonged to Korah" in Num. xvi. 32, whereas the possessions men-
tioned there are included here in the "tents." Cfijfn is only applied
to living beings, as in Gen. vii. 4 and 23. — In ver. 7 the reason is
given for the admonition in ver. 2 : the elders were to know (dis-
cern) the educational purpose of God in those mighty acts of the
Lord, because they had seen them with their own eyes. — Vers, 8, 9.
And this knowledge was to impel them to keep the law, that they
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XL 1-12. 347
might be strong, i.e. spiritually strong (chap. i. 38), and not only
go into the promised land, but also live long therein (cf . chap. iv.
26, vi. 3). — In vers. 10-12 Moses adduces a fresh motive for his
admonition to keep the law with fidelity, founded upon the peculiar
nature of the land. Canaan was a land the fertility of which was not
dependent, like that of Egypt, upon its being watered by the hand
of man, but was kept up by the rain of heaven which was sent
down by God the Lord, so that it depended entirely upon the Lord
how long its inhabitants should live therein. Egypt is described
by Moses as a land which Israel sowed with seed, and watered with
its foot like a garden of herbs. In Egypt there is hardly any rain
at all (cf. Herod, ii. 4, Diod. Sic. i. 41, and other evidence in
Hengstenberg' 8 Egypt and the Books of Moses, pp. 217 sqq.). The
watering of the land, which produces its fertility, is dependent
upon the annual overflowing of the Nile, and, as this only lasts for
about 100 days, upon the way in which this is made available for
the whole year, namely, by the construction of canals and ponds
throughout the land, to which the water is conducted from the
Nile by forcing machines, or by actually carrying it in vessels up
to the fields and plantations. 1 The expression, " with thy foot,"
probably refers to the large pumping wheels still in use there, which
are worked by the feet, and over which a long endless rope passes
with pails attached, for drawing up the water (cf. Niebuhr, Eeise,
i. 149), the identity of which with the #X*|f described by Philo as
vSpr/Xov Spyavov (de confus. ling. i. 410) cannot possibly be called
in question ; provided, that is to say, we do not confound this £)al-
with the Archimedean water-screw mentioned by Diod. Sic. i. 34,
and described more minutely at v. 37, the construction of which
was entirely different (see my Archaeology, ii. pp. 111-2). — The
Egyptians, as genuine heathen, were so thoroughly conscious of
this peculiar characteristic of then: land, which made its fertility
far more dependent upon the labour of human hands than upon
the rain of heaven or divine providence, that Herodotus (ii. 13)
represents them as saying, "The Greeks, with their dependence
upon the gods, might be disappointed in their brightest hopes and
1 Upon the ancient monuments we find not only the draw-well with the
long rope, which is now called Shaduf, depicted in various ways (see Wilkinson,
i. p. 85, ii. 4) ; but at Beni-Hastan there is a representation of two men carry-
ing a water-vessel upon a pole on their shoulders, which they fill from a draw-
well or pond, and then carry to the field (cf. Hengstenbetg, Egypt and the
Books of Moses, pp. 220-1).
Digltizi
ed by Google
348 . THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
suffer dreadfully from famine." The land of Canaan yielded no
support to such godless self-exaltation, for it was "a land of moun-
tains and valleys, and drank water of the rain of heaven" Q hefore
"1DD, to denote the external cause ; see Ewald, § 217, d.) ; i.e. it
received its watering, the main condition of all fertility, from the
rain, by the way of the rain, and therefore through the providen-
tial care of God. — Ver. 12. It was a land which Jehovah inquired
after, i.e. for which He cared (B*w, as in Prov. xxxi. 13, Job iii.
4) ; His eyes were always directed towards it from the beginning
of the year to the end; a land, therefore, which was dependent
upon God, and in this dependence upon God peculiarly adapted
to Israel, which was to live entirely to its God, and upon His
grace alone.
Vers. 13-32. This peculiarity in the land of Canaan led Moses
to close the first part of his discourse on the law, his exhortation to
fear and love the Lord, with a reference to the blessing that would
follow the faithful fulfilment of the law, and a threat of the curse
which would attend apostasy to idolatry. — Vers. 13-15. If Israel
would serve its God in love and faithfulness, He would give the
land early and latter rain in its season, and therewith a plentiful
supply of food for man and beast (see Lev. xxvi. 3 and 5 ; and for
the further expansion of this blessing, chap, xxviii. 1— 12).— Vers. 16
and 17. But if, on the other hand, their heart was foolish to turn
away from the Lord and serve other gods, the wrath of the Lord
would burn against them, and God would shut up the heaven, that
no rain should fall and the earth should yield no produce, and they
would speedily perish (cf. Lev. xxvi. 19, 20, and Deut. xxviii.
23, 24). Let them therefore impress the words now set before
them very deeply upon themselves and their children (vers. 18-21,
in which there is in part a verbal repetition of chap. vi. 6-9). The
words, "as the days of the heaven above the earth," i.e. as long as the
heaven continues above the earth, — in other words, to all eternity
(cf. Ps. lxxxix. 30; Job xiv. 12), — belong to the main sentence,
" that your days may be multiplied" etc. (ver. 21). " The promise
to give the land to Israel for ever was not made unconditionally; an
unconditional promise is precluded by the words, ' that your days
may be multiplied'" (Schukz). (For further remarks, see at chap.
xxx. 3-5.) For (vers. 22-25) if they adhered faithfully to the
Lord, He would drive out before them all the nations that dwelt in
the land, and would give them the land upon which they trod in
all its length and breadth, and so fill the Canaanites with fear and
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XI. 13-32. 349
terror before them, that no one should be able to stand against
them. (On ver. 23, cf. chap. vii. 1, 2, ix. 1, and i. 28.) The
words, " every place whereon the soles of your feet shall tread shall
be yours," are de€ned more precisely, and restricted to the land of
Canaan on both sides of the Jordan by the boundaries which follow:
"from the desert (of Arabia on the south), and Lebanon (on the
north), and from the river Euphrates (on the east) to the hinder
sea" (the Mediterranean on the west; see Num. xxxiv. 6). The
Euphrates is given as the eastern boundary, as in chap. i. 7, accord-
ing to the promise in Gen. xv. 18. (On ver. 25, cf. chap. vii. 24,
ii. 25, and Ex. xxiii. 27.) — Vers. 26-28. Concluding summary.
"I set before you this day the blessing and the curse? The blessing,
if OfK, ore, as in Lev. iv. 22) ye hearken to the commandments of
your God; the curse, if ye do not give heed to them, but turn aside
from the way pointed out to you, to go after other gods. To this
there are added instructions in vers. 29 and 30, that when they
took possession of the land they should give the blessing upon
Mount Gerizim and the curse upon Mount Ebal, i.e. should give
utterance to them there, and as it were transfer them to the land
to be apportioned to its inhabitants according to their attitude
towards the Lord their God. (For further comment, see at chap,
xxvii. 14.) The two mountains mentioned were selected for this
act, no doubt because they were opposite to one another, and stood,
each about 2500 feet high, in the very centre of the land not only
from west to east, but also from north to south. Ebal stands upon
the north side, Gerizim upon the south ; between the two is Sichem,
the present Nabulus, in a tolerably elevated valley, fertile, attractive,
and watered by many springs, which runs from the south-east to
the north-west from the foot of Gerizim to that of Ebal, and is
about 1600 feet in breadth. The blessing was to be uttered upon
Gerizim, and the curse upon Ebal ; though not, as the earlier com-
mentators supposed, because the peculiarities of these mountains,
viz. the fertility of Gerizim and the barrenness of Ebal, appeared
to accord with this arrangement : for when seen from the valley
between, " the sides of both these mountains are equally naked and
sterile ;" and " the only exception in favour of the former is a small
ravine coming down, opposite the west end of the town, which is in-
deed full of fountains and trees" (Rob. Pal. iii. 96, 97). The reason
for selecting Gerizim for the blessings was probably, as Schults
supposes, the fact that it was situated on the south, towards the
region of the light. "Light and blessing are essentially one. From
Digltizi
ed by Google
350 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
•the light-giving face of God there come blessing and life (Ps. xvi.
11)." — In ver. 30 the situation of these mountains is more clearly
denned : they were " on the other tide of the Jordan" i.e. in the
land to the west of the Jordan, " behind the way of the sunset," i.e.
on the other side of the road of the west, which runs through the
land on the west of the Jordan, just as another such road runs
through the land on the east (Knobet). The reference is to the
main road which ran from Upper Asia through Canaan to Egypt,
as was shown by the journeys of Abraham and Jacob (Gen. xii.
6, xxxiii. 17, 18). Even at the present day the main road leads
from Beisan to Jerusalem round the east side of Ebal into the
valley of Sichem, and then again eastwards from Gerizim through
the Mukra valley on towards the south (cf . Rob. iii. 94 ; Bitter,
Erdkunde, xvi. pp. 658-9). u In the land of the Canaanite who
dwells in the Arabah." By the Arabah, Knobel understands the
plain of Nabulus, which is not much less than four hours' journey
long, and on an average from a half to three-quarters broad, "the
largest of all upon the elevated tract of land between the western
plain and the valley of the Jordan" (Rob. iii. p. 101). This is
decidedly wrong, however, as it is opposed to the fixed use of the
word, and irreconcilable with the character of this plain, which,
Robinson says, " is cultivated throughout and covered with the rich
green of millet intermingled with the yellow of the ripe corn, which
the country people were just reaping" (Pal. iii. 93). The Arabah
is the western portion of the Ghor (see at chap. i. 1), and is men-
tioned here as that portion of the land on the west of the Jordan
which lay stretched out before the eyes of the Israelites who were
encamped in the steppes of Moab. " Over against Gilgal," i.e. not
the southern Grilgal between Jericho and the Jordan, which received
its name for the first time in Josh. iv. 20 and v. 9 ; but probably
the Gilgal mentioned in Josh. ix. 6, x. 6 sqq., and very frequently
in the history of Samuel, Elijah, and Elisha, which is only about
twelve and a half miles from Gerizim in a southern direction, and
has been preserved in the large village of Jiljilia to the south-west
of Sinjil, and which stands in such an elevated position, " close to
the western brow of the high mountain tract," that you "have
here a very extensive prospect over the great lower plain, and
also over the sea, whilst the mountains of Gilead are seen in the
east" (Rob. Pal. iii. 81). Judging from this description of the
situation, Mount Gerizim must be visible from this Gilgal, so that
Gerizim and Ebal might very well be described as over against
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIL-XXVI. 351
Gilgal. 1 The last definition, " beside the terebinths of Moreh" is
intended no doubt to call to mind the consecration of that locality
even from the times of the patriarchs (Schultz : see at Gen. xii. 6,
and xxxv. 4). — Vers. 31-2 contain the reason for these instruc-
tions, founded upon the assurance that the Israelites were going
over the Jordan and would take possession of the promised land,
and should therefore take care to keep the commandments of the
Lord (cf. chap. iv. 5, 6). >
B. EXPOSITION OF THE PBINOIPAL LAWS. — CHAP. XII.-XXVI.
ft
The statutes and rights which follow in the second or special
half of this address, and which consist in part of rules having
regard to circumstances not contemplated by the Sinaitic laws, and
partly of repetitions of laws already given, were designed as a whole
to regulate the ecclesiastical, civil, and domestic life of Israel in the
land of Canaan, in harmony with its calling to be the holy nation
of the Lord. Moses first of all describes the religious and eccle-
siastical life of the nation, in its various relations to the Lord (chap,
xii.-xvi. 17) ; and then the political organization of the congrega-
tion, or the rights and duties of the civil and spiritual leaders of the
nation (chap. xvi. 18-xviii. 22) ; and lastly, seeks to establish upon
a permanent basis the civil and domestic well-being of the whole
congregation and its individual members, by a multiplicity of pre-
cepts, intended to set before the people, as a conscientious obli-
gation on their part, reverence and holy awe in relation to human
life, to property, and to personal rights; a pious regard for the
fundamental laws of the world ; sanctification of domestic life and
of the social bond ; practical brotherly love towards the poor, the
oppressed, and the needy ; and righteousness of walk and conversa-
tion (chap, xuo-xxvi.). — So far as the arrangement of this address
is concerned, the first two series of these laws may be easily regarded
1 There is much less ground for the opinion of Winer, Knobel, and Schultz,
that Gilgal is the Jiljule mentioned by Robinson {Pal. iii. 47 ; and Bibl. Researches,
p. 188), which evidently corresponds to the Galgvla placed by Eusebius and
Jerome six Roman miles from Antipatris, and is situated to the south-east of
Kefr Saba (Antipatris), on the road from Egypt to Damascus. For this place
is not only farther from Gerizim and Ebal, viz. about seventeen miles, but from
its position in the lowland by the sea-shore it presents no salient point for
determining the situation of the mountains of Gerizim and Ebal. Still less can
, we agree with Knobel, who speaks of the village of Kilkilia, to the north-east of
Kefr Saba, as the name itself has nothing in common with Gilgal.
Digitized by
Google
352 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
as expositions, expansions, and completions of the commandments
in the decalogue in relation to the Sabbath, and to the duty of
honouring parents ; and in the third series also there are unques-
tionably many allusions to the commandments in the second table
of the decalogue. Bat the order in which the different laws and
precepts in this last series are arranged, does not follow the order
of the decalogue, so as to warrant us in looking there for the leading
principle of the arrangement, as Schultz has done. Moses allows
himself to be guided much more by analogies and the free associa-
tion of ideas than by any strict regard to the decalogue : although,
no doubt, the whole of the book of Deuteronomy may be described,
as Luther says, as " a very copious and lucid explanation of the
decalogue, an acquaintance with which will supply all that is requi-
site to a full understanding of the ten commandments."
TJie one Place for the Worship of God, and the right Mode of
worshipping Him. — Chap. xii.
The laws relating to the worship of the Israelites commence with
a command to destroy and annihilate all places and memorials of
the Canaanitish worship (vers. 2-4), and then lay it down as an
established rule, that the Israelites were to worship the Lord their
God with sacrifices and gifts, only in the place which He Himself
should choose (vers. 5—14). On the other hand, in the land of
Canaan cattle might be slain for eating and the flesh itself be con-
sumed in any place ; though sacrificial meals could only be cele-
brated in the place of the sanctuary appointed by the Lord (vers.
15—19). Moreover, on the extension of the borders of the land,
oxen, and sheep, and goats could be slaughtered for food in any
place ; but the blood was not to be eaten, and consecrated gifts and
votive sacrifices were not to be prepared as meals anywhere, except
at the altar of the Lord (vers. 20-28). Lastly, the Israelites were
not to be drawn aside by the Canaanites, to imitate them in their
worship (vers. 29—31).
Vers. 1-14. On the heading in ver. 1, see chaps, vi. 1 and iv. 1.
u All the days that ye live" relates to the more distant clause, " which
ye shall observe," etc. (cf. chap. iv. 10). — Vers. 2, 3. Ye shall de-
stroy all the places where the Canaanites worship their gods, upon
the high mountains, upon the hills, and under every green tree (cf.
Jer. ii. 20, iii. 6, xvii. 2 ; 2 Kings xvi. 4, xvii. 10). The. choice of
mountains and hills for places of worship by most of the heathen
nations, had its origin in the wide-spread belief, that men were
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XII. 1-14. 353
nearer to the Deity and to heaven there. The green trees are con-
nected with the holy groves, of which the heathen nations were so
fond, and the shady gloom of which filled the sonl with holy awe at
the nearness of the Deity. In the absence of groves, they chose green
trees with thick foliage (Ezek. vi. 13, xx. 28), such as the vigorous
oak, which attains a great age, the evergreen terebinth (Isa. i. 29,
30, Ivii. 5), and the poplar or osier, which continues green even in
the heat of summer (Hos. iv. 13), and whose deep shade is adapted
to dispose the mind to devotion. — Ver. 3. Beside the places of
worship, they were also to destroy all the idols of the Canaanitish
worship, as had already been commanded in chap. vii. 5, and to blot
out even their names, i.e. every trace of their existence (cf . chap,
vii. 24). — Ver. 4. " Ye shall not do so to Jehovah your God" i.e. not
build altars and offer sacrifices to Him in any place you choose, but
(vers. 5 sqq.) shall only keep yourselves (?N tTTO) to the place u which
He shall choose out of all the tribes to put His name there for His
dwelling." Whereas the heathen seeks and worships his nature-
gods, wherever he thinks he can discern in nature any trace of
Divinity, the true God has not only revealed His eternal power and
Godhead in the works of creation, but His personal being, which
unfolds itself to the world in love and holiness, in grace and right-
eousness, He has made known to man, who was created in His image,
in the words and works of salvation ; and in these testimonies of
His saving presence He has fixed for Himself a name, in which He
dwells among His people. This name presents His personality, as
comprehended in the word Jehovah, in a visible sign, the tangible
pledge of His essential presence. During the journeying of the
Israelites this was effected by the pillar of cloud and fire ; and after
the erection of the tabernacle, by the cloud in the most holy place,
above the ark of the covenant, with the cherubim upon it, in which
Jehovah had promised to appear to the high priest as the repre-
sentative of the covenant nation. Through this, the tabernacle,
and afterwards Solomon's temple, which took its place, became the
dwelling-place of the name of the Lord. But if the knowledge of
the true God rested upon direct manifestations of the divine na-
ture, — and the Lord God had for that very reason made Himself
known to His people in words and deeds as their God, — then as a-
matter of course the mode of His worship could not be dependent
upon any appointment of men, but must be determined exclusively
by God Himself. The place of His worship depended upon the
choice which God Himself should make, and which would be made
PENT. — VOL. III. Z
Digitized by
Google
354 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
known by the fact that He " pat His name," i.e. actually mani-
fested His own immediate presence, in one definite spot. By the
building of the tabernacle, which the Lord Himself prescribed as
the true spot for the revelation of His presence among His people,
the place where His name was to dwell among the Israelites was
already so far determined, that only the particular town or locality
among the tribes of Israel where the tabernacle was to be set up
after the conquest of Canaan remained to be decided. At the same
time, Moses not only speaks of the Lord choosing the place among
all the tribes for the erection of His sanctuary, but also of His
choosing the place where He would put His name, that He might
dwell there (fa??? from J?B>, for ta?t? from fcf). For the presence of
the Lord was not, and was not intended, to be exclusively confined to
the tabernacle (or the temple). As God of the whole earth, wher-
ever it might be necessary, for the preservation and promotion of His
kingdom, He could make known His presence, and accept the sacri-
fices of His people in other places, independently of this sanctuary ;
and there were times when this was really done. The unity of the
worship, therefore, which Moses here enjoined, was not to consist in
the fact that the people of Israel brought all their sacrificial offerings
to the tabernacle, but in their offering them only in the spot where
the Lord made His name (that is to say, His presence) known.
What Moses commanded here, was only an explanation and
more emphatic repetition of the divine command in Ex. xx. 23, 24
(21 and 22) ; and to understand " the place which Jehovah would
choose " as relating exclusively to Jerusalem or the temple-hill, is a
perfectly arbitrary assumption. Shiloh, the place where the taber-
nacle was set up after the conquest of the land (Josh, xviii. 1), and
where it stood during the whole of the times of the judges, was also
chosen by the Lord (cf. Jer. vii. 12). It was not till after David
had set up a tent for the ark of the covenant upon Zion, in the city
of Jerusalem, which he had chosen as the capital of his kingdom,
and had erected an altar for sacrifice there (2 Sam. vi. 17 ; 1 Chron.
xvi.), that the will of the Lord was made known to him by the
prophet Gad, that he should build an altar upon the threshing-floor
of Araunah, where the angel of the Lord had appeared to him ; and
through this command the place was fixed for the future temple
(2 Sam. xxiv. 18 ; 1 Chron. xxi. 18). vhn with ?K, to turn in a
certain direction, to inquire or to seek. SlX>T\t& fflfc>, u to put His
name," i.e. to make known His presence, is still further defined by
the following word tov?, as signifying that His presence was to be
Digitized by
Google
chap. xii. 1-14. 355
of permanent duration. It is true that this word is separated by
an athnach from the previous clause; but it certainly cannot be
connected with whfWl (ye shall geek), not only because of the stand-
ing phrase, of W J3B9 (" to cause His name to dwell there," ver.
11, chap. xiv. 23, xvi. 2, 6, etc.), but also because this connection
would give no fitting sense, as the infinitive pE* does not mean " a
dwelling-place." — Vers. 6, 7. Thither they were to take all their
sacrificial gifts, and there they were to celebrate their sacrificial
meals. The gifts are classified in four pairs: (1) the sacrifices
intended for the altar, burnt-offerings and slain-offerings being
particularly mentioned as the two principal kinds, with which,
according to Num. xv. 4 sqq., meat-offerings and drink-offerings
were to be associated ; (2) " your tithes and every heave-offering of
your hand." By the tithes we are to understand the tithes of field-
produce and cattle, commanded in Lev. xxvii. 30-33 and Num.
xviii. 21-24, which were to be brought to the sanctuary because
they were to be offered to the Lord, as was the case under Hezekiah
(2 Chron. xxxi. 5-7). That the tithes mentioned here should be
restricted to vegetable tithes (of corn, new wine, and oil), is neither
allowed by the general character of the expression, nor required by
the context. For instance, although, according to vers. 7 and 11,
12, as compared with ver. 17, a portion of the vegetable tithe was
to be applied to the sacrificial meals, there is no ground whatever
for supposing that all the sacrifices and consecrated gifts mentioned
in ver. 6 were offerings of this kind, and either served as sacrificial
meals, or had such meals connected with them. Burnt-offerings,
for example, were not associated in any way with the sacrificial
meals. The difficulty, or as some suppose " the impossibility," of
delivering all the tithes from every part of the land at the place of
the sanctuary, does not warrant us in departing from the simple
meaning of Moses' words in the verse before us. The arrangement
permitted in chap. xiv. 24, 25, with reference to the so-called second
tithe, — viz. that if the sanctuary was too far off, the tithe might be
sold at home, and whatever was required for the sacrificial meals
might be bought at the place of the sanctuary with the money so
obtained, — might possibly have been also adopted in the case of the
other tithe. At all events, the fact that no reference is made to
such cases as these does not warrant us in assuming the opposite.
As the institution of tithes generally did not originate with the law
of Moses, but is presupposed as a traditional and well-known custom,
— all that is done being to define them more precisely, and regulate
Digitized by
Google
356 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
the way in which they should be applied (cf . vol. ii. p. 485), — Moses
does not enter here into any details as to the course to be adopted
in delivering them, but merely lays down the law that all the gifts
intended for the Lord were to be brought to Him at His sanctuary,
and connects with this the further injunction that the Israelites
were to rejoice there before the Lord, that is to say, were to cele-
brate their sacrificial meals at the place of His presence which
He had chosen. — The gifts, from which the sacrificial meals were
prepared, are not particularized here, but are supposed to be already
known either from the earlier laws or from tradition. From the
earlier laws we learn that the whole of the flesh of the burnt-
offerings was to be consumed upon the altar, but that the flesh of
the slam-offerings, except in the case of the peace-offerings, was to
be applied to the sacrificial meals, with the exception of the fat
pieces, and the wave-breast and heave-shoulder. . With regard to
the tithes, it is stated in Num. xviii. 21-24 that Jehovah had given
them to the Levites as their inheritance, and that they were to give
the tenth part of them to the priests. In the laws contained in
the earlier books, nothing is said about the appropriation of any
portion of the tithes to sacrificial meals. Yet in Deuteronomy this
is simply assumed as a customary thing, and not introduced as a
new commandment, when the law is laid down (in ver. 17, chap,
xiv. 22 sqq., xxvi. 12 sqq.), that they were not to eat the tithe of
corn, new wine, and oil within their gates (in the towns of the
land), any more than the first-born of oxen and sheep, but only at
the place of the sanctuary chosen by the Lord ; and that if the
distance was too great for the whole to be transported thither, they
were to sell the tithes and firstlings at home, and then purchase at
the sanctuary whatever might be required for the sacrificial meals.
From these instructions it is very apparent that sacrificial meals
were associated with the delivery of the tithes and firstlings to the
Lord, to which a tenth part of the corn, must, and oil was applied,
as well as the flesh of the first-born of edible cattle. This tenth
formed the so-called second tithe (ievrepap Be/carr/p, Tob. i. 7),
which is mentioned here for the first time, but not introduced as a
new rule or an appendix to the former laws. It is rather taken for
granted as a custom founded upon tradition, and brought into
harmony with the law relating to the oneness of the sanctuary and
worship. 1 u The heave-offerings of your hand," which are mentioned
1 The arguments employed by De Welle and Voter against this arrangement
with regard to the vegetable tithe, which is established beyond all question hj
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XII. 1-14. _ 357
again in Mai. iii. 8 along with the tithes, are not to be restricted to
the first-fruits, as we may see from Ezek. xx. 40, where the terumoth
are mentioned along with the first-fruits. We should rather under-
stand them as being free gifts of love, which were consecrated to
the Lord in addition to the legal first-fruits and tithes without being
actual sacrifices, and which were then applied to sacrificial meals. —
The other gifts were (3) O^T" and ^3"i3, sacrifices which were
offered partly in consequence of vows and partly of their own free
will (see at Lev. xxiii. 38, compared with Lev. vii. 16, xxii. 21, and
Num. xv. 3, xxix. 39) ; and lastly (4), " firstlings of your herds and
of your flocks," viz. those commanded in Ex. xiii. 2, 12 sqq., and
Num. xviii. 15 sqq.
According to Ex. xiii. 15, the Israelites were to sacrifice the
firstlings to the Lord ; and according to Num. xviii. 8 sqq. they
belonged to the holy gifts, which the Lord assigned to the priests
for their maintenance, with the more precise instructions in vers.
17, 18, that the first-born of oxen, sheep, and goats were not to be
redeemed, but being holy were to be burned upon the altar in the
same manner as the shelamim, and that the flesh was to belong to
the priests, like the wave-breast and right leg of the shelamim.
These last words, it is true, are not to be understood as signifying
that the only portions of the flesh of the firstlings which were to be
given to the priest were the wave-breast and heave-leg, and that
the remainder of the flesh was to be left to the offerer to be applied
the custom of the Jews themselves, have been so fully met by Hengslenberg
(Dissertations, ii. 334 sqq.), that Riehm has nothing to adduce in reply, except the
assertion that in Deut. xviii., where the revenues of the priests and Levites are
given, there is nothing said about the tithe, and the tithe of the tithe, and also
that the people would have been overburdened by a second tithe. But, apart
from the fact that argumenta e silentio generally do not prove much, the first
assertion rests upon the erroneous assumption that in Dent, xviii. all the revenues
of the priests are given separately ; whereas Moses confines himself to this general
summary of the revenue's of the priests and Levites enumerated singly in Num.
xviii., " The firings of Jehovah shall be the inheritance of the tribe of Levi,
these they shall eat," and then urges upon the people in vers. 3-5 an addition
to the revenues already established. The second objection is refuted by history.
For if in later times, when the people of Israel had to pay very considerable
taxes to the foreign kings under whose rule they were living, they could give a
second tenth of the fruits of the ground in addition to the priests' tithe, as we
may see from Tobifr i. 7, such a tax could not have been too grievous a burden
for the nation in the time of its independence ; to say nothing of the fact that
this second tenth belonged in great part to the donors themselves, since it was
consumed in sacrificial meals, to which only poor and needy persons were invited,
and therefore could not be regarded as an actual tax.
Digitized by
Google
358 < THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES. 1
to a sacrificial meal (Hengstenberg) ; but they state most unequi-
vocally tliat the priest was to apply the flesh to a sacrificial meal,
like the wave-breast and heave-leg of all the peace-offerings, which
the priest was not even allowed to consume with his own family at
home, like ordinary flesh, but to which the instructions given for all
the sacrificial meals were applicable, namely, that" whoever was
clean in the priest's family" might eat of it (Num. xviii. 11), and
that the flesh was to be eaten on the day when the sacrifice was
offered (Lev. vii. 15), or at the latest on the following morning, as
in the case of the votive offering (Lev. vii. 16), and that whatever
was left was to be burnt. These instructions concerning the flesh
of the firstlings to be offered to the Lord no more prohibit the
priest from allowing the persons who presented the firstlings to take
part in the sacrificial meals, or handing over to them some portion
of the flesh which belonged to himself to hold a sacrificial meal,
than any other law does ; on the contrary, the duty of doing this
was made very plain by the fact that the presentation of firstlings is
described as ftiiT? rnt in Ex. xiii. 15, in the very first of the general
instructions for their sanctification, since even in the patriarchal
times the 13? was always connected with a sacrificial meal in which
the offerer participated. Consequently it cannot be shown that
there is any contradiction between Deuteronomy and the earlier
laws with regard to the appropriation of the first-born. The com-
mand to bring the firstlings of the sacrificial animal, like all the
rest of the sacrifices, to the place of His sanctuary which the Lord
would choose, and to hold sacrificial meals there with the tithes of
corn, new wine, and oil, and also with the firstlings of the flocks
and herds, is given not merely to the laity of Israel, but to the
whole of the people, including the priests and Levites, without the
distinction between the tribe of Levi and the other tribes, estab-
lished in the earlier laws, being even altered, much less abrogated.
The Israelites were to bring all their sacrificial gifts to the place of
the sanctuary to be chosen by the Lord, and there, not in all their
towns, they were to eat their votive and free-will offerings in sacri-
ficial meals. This, and only this, is what Moses commands the
people both here in vers. 7 and 17, 18, and also in chap. xiv. 22
sqq. and xv. 19 sqq. 1 " Rejoice in all that your hand has acquired."
1 If, therefore, the supposed discrepancies between the law of Deuteronomy
and that of Exodus and Leviticus concerning the tithes and firstlings vanish
into mere appearance when the passages in Deuteronomy are correctly explained,
the conclusions to which Riehm comes (pp. 43 sqq.) — viz. that in Deuteronomy
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XII. 1-14. 359
The phrase 1J n?B>D (cf. ver. 18, chap. xv. 10, xxiii. 21, xxviii. 8,
20) signifies that to which the hand is stretched out, that which a
man undertakes (synonymous with <^0), and also what a man
acquires by his activity : hence Isa. xi. 14, T rrii'B'D, what a man
appropriates to himself with his hand, or takes possession of. "lEW
before 13"]? is dependent upon D3*P fwD, and T?.U is construed with
a double accusative, as in Gen. xlix. 25. The reason for these
instructions is given in vers. 8, 9, namely, that this had not hitherto
taken place, but that up to this day every one had done what he
thought right, because they had not yet come to the rest and to the
inheritance which the Lord was about to give them. The phrase,
" whatsoever is right in his own eyes," is applied to actions per-
formed according to a man's own judgment, rather than according
to the standard of objective right and the law of God (cf. Judg.
xvii. 6, xxi. 25). The reference is probably not so much to open
idolatry, which was actually practised, according to Lev. xvii. 7,
Num. xxv., Ezek. xx. 16, 17, Amos v. 25, 26, as to acts of illegality,
for which some excuse might be found in the circumstances in
which they were placed when wandering through the desert, — such,
for example, as the omission of the daily sacrifice when the taber-
nacle was not set up, and others of a similar kind. — Vers. 10-14.
But when the Israelites had crossed over the Jordan, and dwelt
peaceably in Canaan, secured against their enemies round about,
these irregularities were not to occur any more ; but all the sacri-
fices were to be offered at the place chosen by the Lord for the
dwelling-place of His name, and there the sacrificial meals were to
be held with joy before the Lord. " The choice of your vows,"
equivalent to your chosen vows, inasmuch as every vow was some-
thing special, as the standing phrase "H3 K?B (Lev. xxii. 21, and
Nam. xv. 3, 8) distinctly shows. — "Rejoicing before the Lord,"
which is the phrase applied in Lev. xxiii. 40 to the celebration of
the feast of Tabernacles, was to be the distinctive feature of all the
sacrificial meals held by the people at the sanctuary, as is repeatedly
affirmed (chap. xiv. 26, xvi. 11, xxvi. 11, xxvii. 7). This holy joy
in the participation of the blessing bestowed by the Lord was to be
shared not only by sons and daughters, bat also by slaves (inen-
the tithes and firstlings are no longer the property of the priests and Levites,
and that all the laws concerning the redemption and sale of tbem are abrogated
there — are groundless assertions, founded upon the unproved and unfounded
assumption, that Deuteronomy was intended to contain a repetition of the
whole of the earlier law.
Digitized by
Google
360 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
servants and maid-servants), that they too might taste the friendli-
ness of their God, and also by " the Levite that is in your gates"
(i.e. your towns and hamlets ; see at Ex. xx. 10). This frequently
recurring description of the Levites (cf. ver. 18, chap. xiv. 27, xvi.
11, 14, xviii. 6, xxvi. 12) does not assume that they were homeless,
which would be at variance with the allotment of towns for them
to dwell in (Num. xxxv.) ; but simply implies what is frequently
added in explanation, that the Levites had "no part nor inherit-
ance," no share of the land as their hereditary property, and in this
respect resembled strangers (chap. xiv. 21, 29, xvi. 11, etc.). 1 And
the repeated injunction to invite the Levites to the sacrificial meals
is not at variance with Num. xviii. 21, where the tithes are assigned
to the tribe of Levi for their maintenance. For however ample
this revenue may have been according to the law, it was so entirely
dependent, as we have observed at p. 120, upon the honesty and
conscientiousness of the people, that the Levites might very easily
be brought into a straitened condition, if indifference towards the
Lord and His servants should prevail throughout the nation. — In
vers. 13, 14, Moses concludes by once more summing up these in-
structions in the admonition to beware of offering sacrifices in every
place that they might choose, the burnt-offering, as the leading
sacrifice, being mentioned instar omnium.
Vers. 15-19. But if these instructions were really to be observed
by the people in Canaan, it was necessary that the law which had
been given with reference to the journey through the wilderness,
viz. that no animal should be slain anywhere else than at the taber-
nacle in the same manner as a slain-offering (Lev. xvii. 3-6), should
be abolished. This is done in ver. 15, where Moses, in direct con-
nection with what goes before, allows the people, as an exception
(pT, only) to the rules laid down in vers. 4-14, to kill and eat flesh
for their own food according to all their soul's desire. Flesh that
was slaughtered for food could be eaten by both clean and unclean,
such for example as the roebuck and the hart, animals which could
not be offered in sacrifice, and in which, therefore, the distinction
between clean and unclean on the part of the eaters did not come
into consideration at all. — Ver. 16. But blood was forbidden to be
1 The explanation given by De Wette, and adopted by Riehm, of the expres-
sion, " the Levite that is within thy gates," is perfectly arbitrary and unfounded :
viz. that " the Levites did not live any longer in the towns assigned them by
the earlier laws, but were scattered about in the different towns of the other
tribes."
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XII. 20-31. 361
eaten (see at Lev. xvii. 10 sqq.). The blood was to be poured out
. upon the earth like water, that it might suck it in, receive it into
its bosom (see vol. ii. p. 410). — Vers. 17 sqq. Sacrificial meals could
only be held at the sanctuary ; and the Levite was not to be for-
gotten or neglected in connection with them (see at vers. 6, 7, and
12). fenn t6, " thou must not," as in chap. vii. 22.
Vers. 20-31. These rules were still to remain in force, even
when God should extend the borders of the land in accordance with
His promise. This extension relates partly to the gradual but com-
plete extermination of the Canaanites (chap. vii. 22, comp. with
Ex. xxiii. 27-33), and partly to the extension of the territory of the
Israelites beyond the limits of Canaan Proper, in accordance with
the divine promise in Gen. xv. 18. The words " as He hath spoken
to thee " refer primarily to Ex. xxiii. 27-33. (On ver. 206, see
ver. 15.) — In ver. 21a, " if the place . . . be too far from thee," sup-
plies the reason for the repeal of the law in Lev. xvii. 3, which re-
stricted all slaughtering to the place of the sanctuary. The words
u kill . . . as I have commanded thee" refer back to ver. 15. —
Ver. 22. Only the flesh that was slaughtered was to be eaten as
the hart and the roebuck (cf. ver. 15), i.e. was not to be made into
a sacrifice. WP, together, i.e. the one just the same as the other, as
in Isa. x. 8, without the clean necessarily eating along with the
unclean. — Vers. 23, 24. The law relating to the blood, as in ver.
16. — " Be strong not to eat the blood" i.e. stedfastly resist the temp-
tation to eat it. — Ver. 25. On the promise for doing what was right
in the eyes of the Lord, see chap. vi. 18. — In vers. 26, 27, the
command to offer all the holy gifts at the place chosen by the Lord
is enforced once more, as in vers. 6, 11, 17, 18 ; also to prepare
the sacrifices at His altar. 0'?^^, the holy offerings prescribed in
the law, as in Num. xviii. 8 ; see at Lev. xxi. 22. The " votive
offerings" are mentioned in connection with these, because vows
proceeded from a spontaneous impulse. n> W IB'N, " which are to
thee" are binding upon thee. In ver. 27, " the flesh and the blood"
are in opposition to " thy burnt-offerings :" " thy burnt-offerings,
namely the flesh and blood of them," thou shalt prepare at the
altar of Jehovah ; i.e. the flesh and blood of the burnt-offerings
were to be placed upon and against the altar (see at Lev. i. 5-9).
Of the slain-offerings, i.e. the shelamim, the blood was to be poured
out against the altar (Lev. iii. 2, 8, 13) ; " the flesh thou canst eat"
(cf. Lev. vii. 11 sqq.). There is no ground for seeking an anti-
thesis in Tpf], as Knobel does, to the p~}\ in the sacrificial ritual.
Digitized by
Google
362 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
The indefinite expression may be explained from the retrospective
allusion to ver. 24 and the purely suggestive character of the whole
passage, the thing itself being supposed to be sufficiently known
from the previous laws. — Ver. 28. The closing admonition is a
further expansion of ver. 25 (see at ch. xi. 21). — In vers. 29-31,
the exhortation goes back to the beginning again, viz. to a warning
against the Ganaanitish idolatry (cf. vers. 2 sqq.). When the Lord
had cut off the nations of Canaan from before the Israelites, they
were to take heed that they did not get into the snare behind them,
i.e. into the sin of idolatry, which had plunged the Canaanites into
destruction (cf. chap. vii. 16, 25). The clause " aft-er they be
destroyed from before thee" is not mere tautology, but serves to
depict the danger of the snare most vividly before their eyes. The
second clause, " tliat tJwu inquire not after them " (their gods), etc,
explains more fully to the Israelites the danger which threatened
them. This danger was so far a pressing one, that the whole of
the heathen world was animated with the conviction, that to neglect
the gods of a land would be sure to bring misfortune (cf. 2 Bangs
xvii. 26). — Ver. 31a, like ver. 4, with the reason assigned in ver.
31J : " for the Canaanites prepare (pbV, as in ver. 27) all kinds of
abominations for their gods," i.e. present offerings to these, which
Jehovah hates and abhors ; they even burn their children to their
idols — for example, to Moloch (see at Lev. xviii. 21).
Punishment of Idolaters, and Tempters to Idolatry. — Chap. xiii.
Ver. 1. (chap. xii. 32). The admonition to observe the whole
law, without adding to it or taking from it (cf. chap. iv. 2), is
regarded by many commentators as the conclusion of the previous
chapter. But it is more correct to understand it as an intermediate
link, closing what goes before, and introductory to what follows.
Strictly speaking, the warning against inclining to the idolatry of
the Canaanites (chap. xii. 29-31) forms a transition from the en-
forcement of the true mode of worshipping Jehovah to the laws
relating to tempters to idolatry and worshippers of idols (chap. xiii.).
The Israelites were to cut off not only the tempters to idolatry,
but those who had been led astray to idolatry also. Three different
cases are mentioned.
Vers. 2-6 (1-5). The first case. If a prophet, or one who had
dreams, should rise up to summon to the worship of other gods,
with signs and wonders which came to pass, the Israelites were not
to hearken to his words, but to put him to death. The introduction
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIII. 2-6. 363
of wn D7h } " a dreamer of dreams" along with the prophet, answers
to the two media of divine revelation, the vision and the dream, by
which, according to Num. xii. 6, God made known His will. With
regard to the signs and wonders (mopheth, see at Ex. iv. 21) with
which such a prophet might seek to accredit his higher mission, it
is taken for granted that they come to pass (ttfa) ; yet for all that,
the Israelites were to give no heed to such a prophet, to walk after
other gods. It follows from this, that the person had not been sent
by God, but was a false prophet, and that the signs and wonders
which he gave were not wonders effected by God, but ay/ieia teal
ripara yfev&ow: (" lying signs and wonders," 2 Thess. ii. 9) ; i.e. not
merely seeming miracles, but miracles wrought in the power of the
wicked one, Satan, the possibility and reality of which even Christ
attests (Matt. xxiv. 24). — The word 1b"7, saying, is dependent upon
the principal verb of the sentence : " if a prophet rise up ... .
saying, We will go after other gods." — Ver. 4. God permitted false
prophets to rise up with such wonders, to try the Israelites, whether
they loved Him, the Lord their God, with all their heart. (HIM as
in Gen. xxii. 1.) D^nk 03t^n, whether ye are loving, i.e. faithfully
maintain your love to the Lord. It is evident from this, " that
however great the importance attached to signs and wonders, they
were not to be regarded among the Israelites, either as the highest
test, or as absolutely decisive, but that there was a certainty in
Israel, which was so much the more certain and firm than any proof
from miracles could be, that it might be most decidedly opposed to
it" (Baumgarteri). This certainty, however, was not u the know-
ledge of Jehovah," as B. supposes ; but as Luther correctly observes,
" the word of God, which had already been received, and confirmed
by its own signs," and which the Israelites were to preserve and hold
fast, without adding or subtracting anything. u In opposition to
such a word, no prophets were to be received, although they rained
signs and wonders ; not even an angel from heaven, as Paul says
in Gal. i. 8." The command to hearken to the prophets whom the
Lord would send at a future time (chap, xviii. 18 sqq.), is not at
variance with this : for even their announcements were to be judged
according to the standard of the fixed word of God that had been
already given ; and so far as they proclaimed anything new, the
fact that what they announced did not occur was to be the criterion
that they had not spoken in the name of the Lord, but in that of
other gods (chap, xviii. 21, 22), so that even there the signs and
wonders of the prophets are not made the criteria of their divine
Digitized by
Google
364 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
mission. — Vers. 5, 6. Israel was to adhere firmly to the Lord its
Qod (cf . chap. iv. 4), and to put to death the prophet who preached
apostasy from Jehovah, the Redeemer of Israel out of the slave-
house of Egypt. 10*TO, u j f orce thee from the way in which
Jehovah hath commanded thee to walk." The execution of seducers
to idolatry is enjoined upon the people, i.e. the whole community,
not upon single individuals, but upon the authorities who had to
maintain and administer justice. " So shalt thou put the evil away
from the midst of thee" Vy\ is neuter, as we may see from chap,
xvii. 7, as comp. with ver. 2. The formula, " so shalt thou put the
evil away from the midst of thee," which occurs again in chap. xvii.
7, 12, xix. 19, xxi. 21, xxii. 21, 22, 24, and xxiv. 7 (cf. chap. xix.
13 and xxi. 9), belongs to the hortatory character of Deuteronomy,
in accordance with which a reason is given for all the command-
ments, and the observance of them is urged upon the congregation
as a holy affair of the heart, which could not be expected in the
objective legislation of the earlier books.
Vers. 7-12 (6-11). The second case was when the temptation
to idolatry proceeded from the nearest blood-relations and friends.
The clause, " son of thy mother," is not intended to describe the
brother as a step-brother, but simply to bring out the closeness of
the fraternal relation ; like the description of the wife as the wife
of thy bosom, who lies in thy bosom, rests upon thy breast (as in
chap, xxviii. 54 ; Micah vii. 5), and of the friend as " thy friend
which is as thine own soul," i.e. whom thou lovest as much as thy life
(cf. 1 Sam. xviii. 1, 3). inD3 belongs to IVp* : if the temptation
occurred in secret, and therefore the fact might be hidden from
others. The power of love and relationship, which flesh and blood
find it hard to resist, is placed here in contrast with the supposed
higher or divine authority of the seducers. As the persuasion was
already very seductive, from the fact that it proceeded from the
nearest blood-relations and most intimate friends, and was offered
in secret, it might become still more so from the fact that it recom-
mended the worship of a deity that had nothing in common with
the forbidden idols of Canaan, and the worship of which, therefore,
might appear of less consequence, or commend itself by the charm of
peculiarity and novelty. To prevent this deceptive influence of sin,
it is expressly added in ver. 8 (7), " of the gods nigh unto thee or far
of from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of
the earth" i.e. whatever gods there might be upon the whole circuit
of the earth. — Vers. 9 (8) sqq. To such persuasion Israel was not to
Digitized by
Google
chap. xm. 13-19. 365
yield, nor were they to spare the tempters. The accumulation of
synonyms (pity, spare, conceal) serves to make the passage more
emphatic. HEO, to cover, i.e. to keep secret, conceal. They were
to put him to death without pity, viz. to stone him (cf. Lev. xx. 2).
That the execution even in this case was to he carried out by the
regular authorities, is evident from the words, " thy hand shall be
first against him to put him to death, and the hand of all the people
afterwards," which presuppose the judicial procedure prescribed in
chap. xvii. 7, that the witnesses were to cast the fitst stones at the
person condemned. — Ver. 12. This was to be done, and all Israel
was to hear it and fear, that no such wickedness should be performed
any more in the congregation. The fear of punishment, which is
given here as the ultimate end of the punishment itself, is not to be
regarded as the principle lying at the foundation of the law, but
simply, as Calvin expresses it, as " the utility and fruit of severity,"
one reason for carrying out the law, which is not to be confounded
with the so-called deterrent theory, ue. the attempt to deter from
crime by the mode of punishing (see my Archaologie, ii. p. 262).
Vers. 13-19 (12-18). The third case is that of a town that had
been led away to idolatry. " If thou shalt hear in one of thy cities"
n !?N3, not de una, of one, which )Kj& with 3 never can mean, and
does not mean even in Job xxvi. 14. The thought is not that they
would hear in one city about another, as though one city had the
oversight over another ; but there is an inversion in the sentence,
" if thou hear, that in one of thy cities . . . worthless men have risen
up, and led the inhabitants astray to serve strange gods" "ib&6 intro-
duces the substance of what is heard, which follows in ver. 14. NY 1
merely signifies to rise up, to go forth. 13"li?D, out of the midst of
the people. — Yer. 15 (14). Upon this report the people as a whole,
of course through their rulers, were to examine closely into the affair
(30V1, an adverb, as in chap. ix. 21), whether the word was estab-
lished as truth, i.e. the thing was founded in truth (cf. chap. xvii. 4,
xxii. 20) 5 and if it really were so, they were to smite the inhabit-
ants of that town with the edge of the sword (cf. Gen. xxxiv. 26),
putting the town and all that was in it under the ban. " All that is
in it" relates to men, cattle, and the material property' of the town,
and not to men alone (Schultz). The clause from " destroying" to
"therein" is a more minute definition of the punishment introduced
as a parenthesis ; for " the cattle thereof," which follows, is also
governed by " thou shalt smite." The ban was to be executed in all
its severity as upon an idolatrous city : man and beast were to be
Digitized by
Google
366 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
put to death without reserve ; and its booty, i.e. whatever was to be
found in it as booty — all material goods, therefore — were to be heaped
together in the market, and burned along with the city itself.
Tftp'b Ws (Eng. Ver. " every whit, for the Lord thy God") signifies
"as a whole offering for the Lord" (see Lev. vi. 15, 16), t.e. it was
to be sanctified to Him entirely by being destroyed. The town was
to continue an eternal hill (or heap of ruins), never to be built up
again. — Ver. 18 (17). To enforce this command still more strongly,
it is expressly stated, that of all that was burned, nothing whatever
was to cleave or remain hanging to the hand of Israel, that the Lord
might turn from His wrath and have compassion upon the nation, i&
not punish the sin of one town upon the nation as a whole, but have
mercy upon it and multiply it, — make up the diminution consequent
upon the destruction of the inhabitants of that town, and so fulfil the
promise given to the fathers of the multiplication of their seed. —
Ver. 19 (18). Jehovah would do this if Israel hearkened to His voice,
to do what was right in His eyes. In what way the appropriation
of property laid under the ban brought the wrath of God upon the
whole congregation, is shown by the example of Achan (Josh. vii.).
Avoidance of the Mourning Customs of the Heathen, and Unclean
Food. Application of the Tithe of Fruits. — Chap. xiv.
Vers. 1-21. The Israelites were not only to suffer no idolatry
to rise up in their midst, but in all their walk of life to show them-
selves as a holy nation of the Lord ; and neither to disfigure their
bodies by passionate expressions of sorrow for the dead (vers. 1 and
2), nor to defile themselves by unclean food (vers. 3-21). Both of
these were opposed to their calling. To bring this to their mind,
Moses introduces the laws which follow with the words, " ye are
children to the Lord your God." The divine sonship of Israel was
founded upon its election and calling as the holy nation of Jehovah,
which is regarded in the Old Testament not as generation by the
Spirit of God, but simply as an adoption springing out of the free
love of God, as the manifestation of paternal love on the part of
Jehovah to Israel, which binds the son to obedience, reverence, and
childlike trust towards a Creator and Father, who would train it
up into a holy people (see vol. i. p. 457). The laws in ver. 16 are
simply a repetition of Lev. xix. 28 and xxi. 5. rip?, with reference
to, or on account of, a dead person, is more expressive than Vm>
(for a soul) in Lev. xix. 28. The reason assigned for this com-
mand in ver. 2 (as in chap. vii. 6) is simply an emphatic elucida-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIV. 22-29. 367
tion of the first clause of ver. 1. (On the substance of the verse,
see Ex. xix. 5, 6.) — Vers. 3-20. With reference to food, the
Israelites were to eat nothing whatever that was abominable. In
explanation of this prohibition, the laws of Lev. xi. relating to
clean and unclean animals are repeated in all essential points in
vers. 4-20 (for the exposition, see at Lev. xi.) ; also in ver. 21 the
prohibition against eating any animal that had fallen down dead
(as in Ex. xxxii. 30 and Lev. xvii. 15), and against boiling a kid
in its mother's milk (as in Ex. xxiii. 19).
Vers. 22-29. As the Israelites were to sanctify their food, on
the one hand, positively by abstinence from everything unclean, so
were they, on the other hand, to do so negatively by delivering the
tithes and firstlings at the place where the Lord would cause His
name to dwell, and by holding festal meals on the occasion, and
rejoicing there before Jehovah their God. This law is introduced
with the general precept, " Thou sluxlt tithe all the produce of thy
teed which groweth out of the field (N£ construes with an accusative,
as in Gen. ix. 10, etc.) year by year" (rotf roc*, i.e. every year; cf.
Ewald, § 313, a.), which recalls the earlier laws concerning the tithe
(Lev. xxvii. 30, and Num. xviii. 21, 26 sqq.), without repeating
them one by one, for the purpose of linking on the injunction to
celebrate sacrificial meals at the sanctuary from the tithes and
firstlings. Moses had already directed (chap. xii. 6 sqq.) that all
the sacrificial meals should take place at the sanctuary, and had
then alluded to the sacrificial meals to be prepared from the tithes,
though only casually, because he intended to speak of them more
fully afterwards. This he does here, and includes the firstlings
also, inasmuch as the presentation of them was generally associated
with that of the tithes, though only casually, as he intends to revert
to the firstlings again, which he does in chap. xv. 19 sqq. The
connection between the tithes of the fruits of the ground and the
firstlings of the cattle which were devoted to the sacrificial meals,
and the tithes and first-fruits which were to be delivered to the
Levites and priests, we have already discussed at chap. xii. (p. 356).
The sacrificial meals were to be held before the Lord, in the place
where He caused His name to dwell (see at chap. xii. 5), that Israel
might learn to fear Jehovah its God always; not, however, as
Schultz supposes, that by the confession of its dependence upon
Him it might accustom itself more and more to the feeling of
dependence. For the fear of the Lord is not merely a feeling of
dependence upon Him, but also includes the notion of divine
Digitized by
Google
368 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
blessedness, which is the predominant idea here, as the sacrificial
meals were to furnish the occasion and object of the rejoicing
before the Lord. The true meaning therefore is, that Israel might
rejoice with holy reverence in the fellowship of its God. — Vers. 24
sqq. In the land of Canaan, however, where the people would be
scattered over a great extent of country, there would be many for
whom the fulfilment of this command would be very difficult—
would, in fact, appear almost impossible. To meet this difficulty,
permission was given for those who lived at a great distance from
the sanctuary to sell the tithes at home, provided they could not
convey them in kind, and then to spend the money so obtained in
the purchase of the things required for the sacrificial meals at the
place of the sanctuary. 1?? WV '3, "if the way be too great (too
far) for thee" etc., sc. for the delivery of the tithe. The paren-
thetical clause, "if Jehovah thy God shall "bless thee," hardly means
"if He shall extend thy territory" {Knqbel), but if He shall bless
thee by plentiful produce from the field and the cattle. — Ver. 25.
" Turn it into money" lit. "give it up for silver," sc. the produce of
the tithe ; " and bind the silver in thy hand," const, prcegnans for
" bind it in a purse and take it in thy hand .... and give the
silver for all that thy soul desireth, for oxen and small cattle, for
wine and strong drink," to hold a joyous meal, to which the Levite
was also to be invited (as in chap. xii. 12, 18, and 19). — Vers.
28 and 29. Every third year, on the other hand, they were to
separate the whole of the tithe from the year's produce ("bring
forth," sc. from the granary), and leave it in their gates (t.«. their
towns), and feed the Levites, the strangers, and the widows and
orphans with it. They were not to take it to the sanctuary, there-
fore ; but according to chap. xxvi. 12 sqq., after bringing it out,
were to. make confession to the Lord of what they had done, and
pray for His blessing. "At the end of three years:" i.e. when the
third year, namely the civil year, which closed with the harvest
(see at Ex. xxiii. 16), had come to an end. This regulation as to
the time was founded upon the observance of the sabbatical year,
as we may see from chap. xv. 1, where the seventh year is no other
than the sabbatical year. Twice, therefore, within the period of a
sabbatical year, namely in the third and sixth years, the tithe set
apart for a sacrificial meal was not to be eaten at the sanctuary,
but to be used in the different towns of the land in providing festal
meals for those who had no possessions,* viz. the Levites, strangers,
widows, and orphans. Consequently this tithe cannot properly be
Digitized by
Google
chap. xv. i-u. 369
called the "third tithe," as it is by many of the Rabbins, but rather
the "poor tithe," as it was simply in the way of applying it that it
differed from the " second " (see Hottinger, de decimis, exerc. viii.
pp. 182 sqq., and my Arehdol. i. p. 339). As an encouragement
to carry out these instructions, Moses closes in ver. 29 with an
allusion to the divine blessing which would follow their observance.
On the Year of Release, the Emancipation of Hebrew Slaves, and the
Sanctification of the Firstrbom of Cattle. — Chap. xv.
Vers. 1-11. On the Yeak of Release. — The first two regu-
lations in this chapter, viz. vers. 1-11 and 12-18, follow simply
upon the law concerning the poor tithe in chap. xiv. 28, 29. The
Israelites were not only to cause those who had no possessions
(Levites, strangers, widows, and orphans) to refresh themselves with
the produce of their inheritance, but they were not to force and
oppress the poor. Debtors especially were not to be deprived of
the blessings of the sabbatical year (vers. 1-6). "At the end of seven
years thou shalt make a release." The expression, " ai the end of
seven years," is to be understood in the same way as the correspond-
ing phrase, " at the end of three years," in chap. xiv. 28. The end
of seven years, i.e. of the seven years' cycle formed by the sab-
batical year, is mentioned as the time when debts that had been con-
tracted were usually wiped off or demanded, after the year's harvest
had been gathered in (cf . chap. xxxi. 10, acccording to which the feast
of Tabernacles occurred at the end of the year). n&W, from BOB*,
to let lie, to let go (cf. Ex. xxiii. 11), does not signify a remission
of the debt, the relinquishing of all claim for payment, as Philo
and the Talmudists affirm, but simply lengthening the term, not
pressing for payment. This is the explanation in ver. 2 : " This is
tlie manner of the release ,t (shemittah) : cf . chap. xix. 4 ; 1 Kings ix.
15. " Every owner of a loan of his hand shall release (leave) what
he has lent to his neighbour ; he shall not press his neighbour, and
indeed his brother ; for they have proclaimed release for Jehovah"
As Btot? (release) points unmistakeably back to Ex. xxiii. 11, it must
be interpreted in the same manner here as there. And as it is not
used there to denote the entire renunciation of a field or possession,
so here it cannot mean the entire renunciation of what had been
lent, but simply leaving it, i.e. not pressing for it during the seventh
year. This is favoured by what follows, " thou shalt not press thy
neighbour," which simply forbids an unreserved demand, but does
not require that the debt should be remitted, or presented to the
PENT. — VOL. III. 2 A
Digitized by
Google
370 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
debtor (see also Bdhr, Symbolik, ii. pp. 570-1). " The loan of the
hand :" what the hand has lent to another. " The master of the
loan of the hand :" i.e. the owner of a loan, the lender. " His
brother" defines with greater precision the idea df u a neighbour."
Calling a release, presupposes that the sabbatical year was publicly
proclaimed, like the year of jubilee (Lev. xxv. 9). Ky> is imper-
sonal (" they call"), as in Gen. xi. 9 and xvi. 14. u For Jehovah :"
i.e. in honour of Jehovah, sanctified to Him, as in Ex. xii. 42. — This
law points back to the institution of the sabbatical year in Ex.
xxiii. 10, Lev. xxv. 2-7, though it is not to be regarded as an ap-
pendix to the law of the sabbatical year, or an expansion of it, but
simply as an exposition of what was already implied in the main
provision of that law, viz. that the cultivation of the land should
be suspended in the sabbatical year. If no harvest was gathered
in, and even such produce as had grown without sowing was to be
left to the poor and the beasts of the field, the landowner could
have no income from which to pay his debts. The fact that the
u sabbatical year" is not expressly mentioned, may be accounted for
on the ground, that even in the principal law itself this name does
not occur; and it is simply commanded that every seventh year
there was to be a sabbath of rest to the land (Lev. xxv. 4). In the
subsequent passages in which it is referred to (ver. 9 and chap. xxxi.
10), it is still not called a sabbatical year, but simply the " year of
release," and that not merely with reference to debtors, but also with
reference to the release (shemittah) to be allowed to the field (Ex.
xxiii. 11). — Ver. 3. The foreigner thou mayest press, but what thou
hast with thy brother shall thy hand let go. *WJ is a stranger of
another nation, standing in no inward relation to Israel at all, and
is to be distinguished from "B, the foreigner who lived among the
Israelites, who had a claim upon their protection and pity. This
rule breathes no hatred of foreigners, but simply allows the Israel-
ites the right of every creditor to demand his debts, and enforce the
demand upon foreigners, even in the sabbatical year. There was
no severity in this, because foreigners could get their ordinary in-
come in the seventh year as well as in any other. — Ver. 4. " Only that
there shall be no poor with thee." nw is jussive, like the foregoing
imperfects. The meaning in this connection is, " Thou needestnot
to remit a debt to foreigners in the seventh year ; thou hast only to
take care that there is no poor man with or among thee, that thou
dost not cause or increase their poverty, by oppressing the brethren
who have borrowed of thee." Understood in this way, the sentence
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XV. 12-18. 371
is not at all at variance with ver. 11, where it is stated that the poor
would never cease out of the land. The following clause, " for
Jehovah will bless thee," etc., gives a reason for the main thought,
that they were not to press the Israelitish debtor. The creditor,
therefore, had no need to fear that he would suffer want, if he
refrained from exacting his debt from his brother in the seventh
year. — Vers. 5, 6. This blessing would not fail, if the Israelites
would only hearken to the voice of the Lord ; " for Jehovah blesseth
thee" (by the perfect I?}?, the blessing is represented not as a
possible and future one only, but as one already bestowed according
to the counsel of God, and, so far as the commencement was con-
cerned, already fulfilled), " as He hath spoken" (see at chap. i. 11).
" And thou wilt lend on pledge to many nations, but thou thyself wilt
not borrow upon pledge" B3Jf, a denom. verb, from Ota}?, a pledge,
signifies in Kal to give a pledge for the purpose of borrowing ; in
Hiphil, to cause a person to give a pledge, or furnish occasion for
giving a pledge, id. to lend upon pledge. " And thou wiU rule over
many nations" etc. Ruling is mentioned here as the result of supe-
riority in wealth (cf. chap, xxviii. 1 : Schulte). — Vers. 7-11." And in
general Israel was to be ready to lend to the poor among its brethren,
not to harden its heart, to be hard-hearted, but to lend to the poor
brother Vibrio *n, " the sufficiency of his need," whatever he might
need to relieve his wants. — Vers. 9, 10. Thus they were also to
beware " that there was not a word in the heart, worthlessness,"' i.e.
that a worthless thought did not arise in their hearts (?Pv3 is the
predicate of the sentence, as the more precise definition of the word
that was in the heart) ; so that one should say, " The seventh year is
at hand, the year of release," sc. when I shall not be able to demand
what I have lent, and " that thine eye be evil towards thy poor brother"
U. that thou cherishest ill-will towards him (cf. chap, xxviii. 54, 56),
" and givest him not, and he appeals to Jehovah against thee, and it
becomes sin to thee," sc. which brings down upon thee the wrath of
God. — Ver. 10. Thou shalt give him, and thy heart shall not be-
come evil, i.e. discontented thereat (cf . 2 Cor. ix. 7), for Jehovah
will bless thee for it (cf. Prov. xxii. &, xxviii. 27 ; Ps. xli. 2 ; Matt.
vi. 4). — Ver. 11. For the poor will never cease in the land, even the
land that is richly blessed, because poverty is not only the penalty
of sin, but is ordained by God for punishment and discipline.
Vers. 12-18. These provisions in favour of the poor are fol-
lowed very naturally by the rules which the Israelites were to be
urged to observe with reference to the manumission of Hebrew
Digitized by
Google
372 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
slaves. It is not the reference to the sabbatical year in the fore-
going precepts which forms the introduction to the laws which fol-
low respecting the manumission of Hebrews who had become slaves,
but the poverty and want which compelled Hebrew men and women
to sell themselves as slaves. The seventh year, in which they were
to be set free, is not the same as the sabbatical year, therefore, bat
the seventh year of bondage. Manumission in the seventh year of
service had already been commanded in Ex. xxi. 2-6, in the rights
laid down for the nation, with special reference to the conclusion of
the covenant. This command is not repeated here for the purpose
of extending the law to Hebrew women, who are not expressly
mentioned in Ex. xxi. ; for that would follow as a matter of course,
in the case of a law which was quite as applicable to women as to
men, and was given without any reserve to the whole congregation.
It is rather repeated here as a law which already existed as a right,
for the purpose of explaining the true mode of fulfilling it, viz. that
it was not sufficient to give a man-servant and maid-servant their
liberty after six years of service, which would not be sufficient relief
to those who had been obliged to enter into slavery on account of
poverty, if they had nothing with which to set up a home of their
own; but love to the poor was required to do more than this,
namely, to make some provision for the continued prosperity of those
who were set at liberty. " If thou let him go free from thee, thou
shalt not let him go (send him away) empty :" this was the new
feature which Moses added here to the previous law. " Thou shah
load (P!i??i?> lit. put upon the neck) of thy flock, and of thy floor
(corn), and of thy press (oil and wine) ; wherewith thy God hath blessed
thee, of that thou shalt give to him." — Ver. 15. They were to be in-
duced to do this by the recollection of their own redemption out of
the bondage of Egypt, — the same motive that is urged for the laws
and exhortations enjoining compassion towards foreigners, servants,
maids, widows, orphans, and the poor, not only in chap. y. 15, x. 19,
xvi. 12, xxiv. 18, 22, but also in Ex. xxii. 20, xxiii. 9, and Lev. xix.
34. — Vers. 16, 17. But if the man-servant and the maid-servant
should not wish for liberty in the sixth year, because it was well
with them in the house of their master, they were not to be com-
pelled to go, but were to be bound to eternal, i.e. lifelong bondage,
in the manner prescribed in Ex. xxi. 5, 6. 1 This is repeated from
1 KnobeTs assertion, that the judicial process enjoined in Ex. xxi. 6 does not
seem to have heen usual in the author's own time, is a worthless argumentum e
sxlentio.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XV. 19-23. 373
Ex. xxi., to guard against such an application of the law as might
be really cruelty under the circumstances rather than love. Manu-
mission was only an act of love, when the person to be set free had
some hope of success and of getting a living for himself ; and where
there was no such prospect, compelling him to accept of freedom
might be equivalent to thrusting him away. — Ver. 18. If, on the
other hand, the servant (or maid) wished to be set free, the master
was not to think it hard ; u for the double of the wages of a day-
labourer he has earned for thee for six years," i.e. not " twice the
time of a day-labourer, so that he had really deserved twice the
wages" (Vatablius, Ad. Osiander, J. Gerhard), for it cannot be
proved from Isa. xvi. 14, that a day-labourer generally hired him-
self out for three years ; nor yet, " he has been obliged to work
much harder than a day-labourer, very often by night as well as
day" (Cleticus, J. H. Michaelis, Rosenm&ller, Baumgarten) ; but
simply, " he has earned and produced so much, that if you had
been obliged to keep a day-labourer in his place, it would have cost
you twice as much" (Schultz, Knobel).
Vers. 19-23. Application of the Fibst-bobn of Cattle.
— From the laws respecting the poor and slaves, to which the in-
structions concerning the tithes (chap. xiv. 22-29) had given occa-
sion, Moses returns to appropriation of the first-born of the herd
and flock to sacrificial meals, which he had already touched upon in
chap. xii. 6, 17, and xiv. 23, and concludes by an explanation upon
this point. The command, which the Lord had given when first
they came out of Egypt (Ex. xiii. 2, 12), that all the first-born of
the herd and flock should be sanctified to Him, is repeated here by
Moses, with the express injunction that they were not to work with
the first-born of cattle (by yoking them to the plough or waggon),
and not to shear the firstborn of sheep ; that is to say, they were
not to use the first-born animals which were sanctified to the Lord
for their own earthly purposes, but to offer them year by year as
sacrifices to the Lord, and consume them in sacrificial meals, in the
manner explained at p. 357. To this he adds (vers. 21, 22) the
further provision, that first-born animals, which were blind or lame,
or had any other bad fault, were not to be offered in sacrifice to the
Lord, but, like ordinary animals used for food, could be eaten in
all the towns of the land. Although the first part of this law was
involved in the general laws as to the kind of animal that could be
offered in sacrifice (Lev. xxii. 19 sqq.), it was by no means unim-
Digitizi
ed by Google
374 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
portant to point out distinctly their applicability to the first-boni,
and add some instructions with regard to the way in which they
were to be applied. (On vers. 22 and 23, see chap. xii. 15 and 16.)
On the Celebration of the Feasts of Passover, of Pentecost, and of
Tabernacles. — Chap. xvi. 1-17.
The annual feasts appointed by the law were to be celebrated,
like the sacrificial meals, at the place which the Lord would choose
for the revelation of His name; and there Israel was to rejoice
before the Lord with the presentation of sacrifices. From this
point of view Moses discusses the feasts of Passover, Pentecost,
and Tabernacles, assuming the laws previously given concerning
these festivals (Ex. xii., Lev. xxiii., and Num. xxviii. and xxix.) as
already known, and simply repeating those points which related to
the sacrificial meals held at these festivals. This serves to explain
the reason why only those three festivals are mentioned, at which
Israel had already been commanded to appear before the Lord
in Ex. xxiii. 14-17, and xxxiv. 18, 24, 25, and not the feast of
trumpets or day of atonement : viz. because the people were not
required to assemble at the sanctuary out of the whole land on the
occasion of these two festivals. 1
Vers. 1—8. Israel was to make ready the Passover to the Lord
in the earing month (see at Ex. xii. 2). The precise day is sup-
posed to be known from Ex. xii., as in Ex. xxiii. 15. nps fife^ (to
prepare the Passover), which is used primarily to denote the pre-
paration of the paschal lamb for a festal meal, is employed here in
a wider signification, viz. " to keep the Passover." At this feast they
were to slay sheep and oxen to the Lord for a. Passover, at the
place, etc. In ver. 2, as in ver. 1, the word "Passover" is employed
in a broader sense, and includes not only the paschal lamb, but the
paschal sacrifices generally, which the Rabbins embrace under the
1 That the assembling of the people at the central sanctuary is the leading
point of view under which the feasts are regarded here, has been alreadj
pointed out by Bachmann (die Feste, p. 143), who has called attention to the
fact that "the place which Jehovah thy God will choose" occurs six times (vera.
2, 6, 7, 11, 15, 16) ; and "before the faceof Jehovah" three times (vers. 11 and
16 twice) ; and that the celebration of the feast at any other place is expressly
declared to be null and void. At the same time, he has once more thoroughly
exploded the contradictions which are said to exist between this chapter and
the earlier festal laws, and which Hup/eld has revived in his comments upon
the feasts, without troubling himself to notice the careful discussion of the
subject by H&vernick in his Introduction, and Hengstenberg in his Dissertations.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVI. 1-8. 375
common name of chagiga; not the burnt-offerings and sin-offerings,
however, prescribed in Num. xxviii. 19-26, but all the sacrifices
that were slain at the feast of the Passover (i.e. during the seven
days of the Mazzoth, which are included under the name of paschd)
for the purpose of holding sacrificial meals. This is evident from
the expression "of the flock and the herd;" as it was expressly laid
down, that only a nE> r i.e. a yearling animal of the sheep or goats,
was to be slain for the paschal meal on the fourteenth of the month
in the evening, and an ox was never slaughtered in the place of the
lamb. But if any doubt could exist upon this point, it would be
completely set aside by ver. 3 : " Thou shalt eat no leavened bread
with it : seven days shalt thou eat unleavened bread therewith." As
the word " therewith " cannot possibly refer to anything else than
the " Passover " in ver. 2, it is distinctly stated that the slaughter-
ing and eating of the Passover was to last seven days, whereas the
Passover lamb was to be slain and consumed in the evening of the
fourteenth Abib (Ex. xii. 10). Moses called the unleavened bread
" the bread of affliction" because the Israelites had to leave Egypt
in anxious flight (Ex. xii. 11) and were therefore unable to leaven
the dough (Ex. xii. 39), for the purpose of reminding the congrega-
tion of the oppression endured in Egypt, and to stir them up to
gratitude towards the Lord their deliverer, that they might re-
member that day as long as they lived. (On the meaning of the
Mazzoth, see at Ex. xii. 8 and 15.) — On account of the importance
of the unleavened bread as a symbolical shadowing forth of the
significance of the Passover, as the feast of the renewal and sancti-
fication of the life of Israel (see vol. ii. p. 21), Moses repeats in
ver. 4 two of the points in the law of the feast : first of all the one
laid down in Ex. xiii. 7, that no leaven was to be seen in the land
during the seven days ; and secondly, the one in Ex. xxiii. 18 and
xxxiv. 25, that none of the flesh of the paschal lamb was to be left
till the next morning, in order that all corruption might be kept at
a distance from the paschal food. Leaven, for example, sets the
dough in fermentation, from which putrefaction ensues (see vol. ii.
p. 15); and in the East, if flesh is kept, it very quickly decom-
poses. He then once more fixes the time and place for keeping the
Passover (the former according to Ex. xii. 6 and Lev. xxiii. 5,
etc.), and adds in ver. 7 the express regulation, that not only the
slaughtering and sacrificing, but the roasting (see at Ex. xii. 9)
and eating of the paschal lamb were to take place at the sanctuary,
and that the next morning they could turn and go back home.
Digitized by
Google
376 • THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
This role contains a new feature, which Moses prescribes with
reference to the keeping of the Passover in the land of Canaan,
and by which he modifies the instructions for the first Passover in
Egypt, to suit the altered circumstances. In Egypt, when Israel
was not yet raised into the nation of Jehovah, and had as yet no
sanctuary and no common altar, the different houses necessarily
served as altars. But when this necessity was at an end, the slay-
ing and eating of the Passover in the different houses were to cease,
and they were both to take place at the sanctuary before the Lord,
as was the case with the feast of Passover at Sinai (Num. ix. 1-5).
Thus the smearing of the door-posts with the blood was tacitly
abolished, since the blood was to be sprinkled upon the altar as
sacrificial blood, as it had already been at Sinai (see vol. ii. p. 50).
— The expression " to thy tents," for going " home," points to the
time when Israel was still dwelling in tents, and had not as yet
secured any fixed abodes and houses in Canaan, although this ex-
pression was retained at a still later time (e$. 1 Sam. xiii. 2 ; 2
Sam. xix. 9, etc.). The going home in the morning after the
paschal meal, is not to be understood as signifying a return to their
homes in the different towns of the land, but simply, as even Riehm
admits, to their homes or lodgings at the place of the sanctuary.
How very far Moses was from intending to release the Israelites
from the duty of keeping the feast for seven days, is evident from
the fact that in ver. 8 he once more enforces the observance of the
seven days' feast. The two clauses, "six days thou shalt eat
mazzothf and " on the seventh day shall be azereih (Eng. Ver. ' a
solemn assembly ') to the Lord thy God," are not placed in anti-
thesis to each other, so as to imply (in contradiction to vers. 3 and
4 ; Ex. xii. 18, 19, xiii. 6, 7 , Lev. xxiii. 6 ; Num. xxviii. 17) that
the feast of Mazzoth was to last only six days instead of seven; but
the seventh day is brought into especial prominence as the azereih
of the feast (see at Lev. xxiii. 36), simply because, in addition to
the eating of mazzoth, there was to be an entire abstinence from
work, and this particular feature might easily have fallen into
neglect at the close of the feast. But just as the eating of mazzoth
for seven days is not abolished by the first clause, so the suspension
of work on the first day is not abolished by the second clause, any
more than in Ex. xiii. 6 the first day is represented as a working
day by the fact that the seventh day is called "a feast to Jehovah."
Vers. 9-12. With regard to the feast of Weeks (see at Ex.
xxiii. 16), it is stated that the time for its observance was to be
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVI. 18-17. 377
reckoned from the Passover. Seven weeks shall they count "from
the beginning of the sickle to the corn," i.e. from the time when the
sickle began to be applied to the corn, or from the commencement
of the corn-harvest. As the corn-harvest was opened with the pre-
sentation of the sheaf of first-fruits on the second day of the Pass-
over, this regulation as to time coincides with the rule laid down in
Lev. xxiii. 15. " Thou shalt keep the feast to the Lord thy God
according to tlie measure of the free gift of thy hand, which thou givest
as Jehovah thy God blesseth thee." The air. Xey. TV3D is the stand-
ing rendering in the Chaldee for **» sufficiency, need ; it probably
signifies abundance, from DDD = riDD, to flow, to overflow, to derive.
The idea is this : Israel was to keep this feast with sacrificial gifts,
which every one was able to bring, according to the extent to which
the Lord had blessed him, and (ver. 11) to rejoice before the Lord at
the place where His name dwelt with sacrificial meals, to which the
needy were to be invited (cf. xiv. 29), in remembrance of the fact
that they also were bondmen in Egypt (cf. xv. 15). The "free-
will offering of the hand," which the Israelites were to bring with
them to this feast, and with which they were to rejoice before the
Lord, belonged to the free-will gifts of burnt-offerings, meat-offer-
ings, drink-offerings, and thank-offerings, which might be offered,
according to Num. xxix. 39 (cf. Lev. xxiii. 38), at every feast,
along with the festal sacrifices enjoined upon the congregation.
The latter were binding upon the priests and congregation, and
are fully described in Num. xxviii. and xxix., so that there was no
necessity for Moses to say anything further with reference to them.
Vers. 13-17. In connection with the feast op Tabebnacles
also, he simply enforces the observance of it at the central sanctuary,
and exhorts the people to rejoice at this festival, and not only to
allow their sons and daughters to participate in this joy, but also
the man-servant and maid-servant, and the portionless Levites,
strangers, widows, and orphans. After what had already been
stated, Moses did not consider it necessary to mention expressly
that this festal rejoicing was also to be manifested in joyous sacrifi-
cial meals ; it was enough for him to point to the blessing which
God had bestowed upon their cultivation of the corn, the olive, and
the vine, and upon all the works of their hands, i.e. upon their
labour generally (vers. 13-15), as there was nothing further to
remark after the instructions which had already been given with
reference to this feast also (Lev. xxiii. 34-36, 39-43 ; Num. xxix.
12-38). — Vers. 16, 17. In conclusion, the law is repeated, that the
Digitized by
Google
378 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
men were to appear before the Lord three times a year at the three
feasts just mentioned (compare Ex. xxiii. 17 with ver. 15, and chap.
xxxiv. 23), with the additional clause, " at the place which the Lord
shall choose," and the following explanation of the words "not
empty :" " every man according to the gift of his hand, according to
the blessing of Jehovah his God, which He hath given thee," i.e. with
sacrificial gifts, as much as every one could offer, according to the
blessing which he had received from God.
On the Administration of Justice and the Choice of a King. —
Chap. xvi. 18-xvii. 20.
Just as in its religious worship the Israelitish nation was to show
itself to be the holy nation of Jehovah, so was it in its political relations
also. This thought forms the link between the laws already given
and those which follow. Civil order — that indispensable condition
of the stability and prosperity of nations and states — rests upon a
conscientious maintenance of right by means of a well-ordered judi-
cial constitution and an impartial administration of justice. — For the
purpose of settling the disputes of the people, Moses had already
provided them with judges at Sinai, and had given the judges them-
selves the necessary instructions for the fulfilment of their duties
(Ex. xviii.). This arrangement might suffice as long as the people
were united in one camp and had Moses for a leader, who could lay
before God any difficult cases that were brought to him, and give
an absolute decision with divine authority. But for future times,
when Israel would no longer possess a prophet and mediator like
Moses, and after the conquest of Canaan would live scattered about
in the towns and villages of the whole land, certain modifications
and supplementary additions were necessary to adapt this judicial
constitution to the altered circumstances of the people. Moses anti-
cipates this want in the following provisions, in which he first of all
commands the appointment of judges and officials in every town,
and gives certain precise injunctions as to their judicial proceedings
(chap. xvi. 18-xvii. 7); and secondly, appoints a higher judicial
court at the place of the sanctuary for the more difficult cases
(chap. xvii. 8-13) ; and thirdly, gives them a law for the future
with reference to the choice of a king (vers. 14-20).
Chap. xvi. 18-xvii. 7. Appointment and Insteuction of
the Judges. — Ver. 18. " Judges and officers thou slialt appoint thee
in all thy gates (places, see at Ex. xx. 10), which Jehovah thy God
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVL 18-XVII. 7. 379
shall give thee, according to thy tribes" The nation is addressed as
a whole, and directed to appoint for itself judges and officers, i.e. to
choose them, and have them appointed by its rulers, just as was
done at Sinai, where the people chose the judges, and Moses in-
ducted into office the persons so chosen (cf. chap. i. 12—18). That
the same course was to he adopted in future, is evident from the
expression, "throughout thy tribes," i.e. according to thy tribes,
which points back to chap. i. 13. Election by majorities was un-
known to the Mosaic law. The shoterim, officers (lit. writers, see
at Ex. v. 6), who were associated with the judges, according to
chap. i. 15, even under the previous arrangement, were not merely
messengers and servants of the courts, but secretaries and advisers
of the judges, who derived their title from the fact that they had
to draw up and keep the genealogical lists, and who are mentioned
as already existing in Egypt as overseers of the people and of their
work (see at Ex. v. 6 ; and for the different opinions concerning
their official position, see Selden, de Synedriis, i. pp. 342-3). The
new features, which Moses introduces here, consist simply in the
fact that every place was to have its own judges and officers,
whereas hitherto they had only been appointed for the larger and
smaller divisions of the nation, according to their genealogical or-
ganization. Moses lays down no rule as to the number of judges
and shoterim to be appointed in each place, because this would
depend upon the number of the inhabitants ; and the existing ar-
rangement of judges over tens, hundreds, etc. (Ex. xviii. 21),
would still furnish the necessary standard. The statements made
by Josephus and the Rabbins with regard to the number of judges
in each place are contradictory, or at all events are founded upon
the circumstances of much later times (see my Archdologie, ii. pp.
257-8). — These judges were to judge the people with just judg-
ment. The admonition in ver. 19 corresponds to the instructions
in Ex. xxiii. 6 and 8. "Respect persons :" as in chap. i. 17. To
this there is added, in ver. 20, an emphatic admonition to strive
zealously to maintain justice. The repetition of the word justice
is emphatic : justice, and nothing but justice, as in Gen. xiv. 10,
etc. But in order to give the people and the judges appointed by
them a brief practical admonition, as to the things they were more
especially to observe in their administration of justice, Moses notices
by way of example a few crimes that were deserving of punishment
(vers. 21, 22, and chap. xvii. 1), and then proceeds in chap. xvii.
2-7 to describe more fully the judicial proceedings in the case of
Digitizi
ed by Google
380 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
idolaters. -*- Ver. 21. " Tlwu shalt not plant (Jiee as asherah any
wood beside the altar of Jehovah." JRM, to plant, used figuratively,
to plant up or erect, as iu Eccles. xii. 11, Dan. xi. 25 ; cf . Isa. li. 16.
Aslierah, the symbol of Astarte (see at Ex. xxxiv. 13), cannot mean
either a green tree or a grove (as Movers, Relig. der Pkdnizier,
p. 572, supposes), for the simple reason that in other passages we
find the words nfe>B, make (1 Kings xiv. 15, xvi. 33 ; 2 Kings xvii.
16, xxi. 3 ; 2 Chron. xxxiii. 3), or yvn, set up (2 Kings xvii. 10),
" 1, ?J?0» s * an< i U P (2 Chron. xxxiii. 19), and H33, build (1 Kings xiv.
23), used to denote the erection of an asherah, not one of which is
at all suitable to a tree or grove. But what is quite decisive is the
fact that in 1 Kings xiv. 23, 2 Kings xvii. 10, Jer. xvii. 2, the
asherah is spoken of as being set up under, or by the side of, the
green tree. This idol generally consisted of a wooden column ; and
a favourite place for setting it up was by the side of the altars of
Baal. — Ver. 22. They were also to abstain from setting up any
mazzebah, i.e. any memorial stone, or stone pillar dedicated to Baal
(see at Ex. xxiii. 24).
Chap. xvii. 1. Not only did the inclination to nature-worship,
such as the setting up of the idols of Ashera and Baal, belong to
the crimes which merited punishment, but also a manifest trans-
gression of the laws concerning the worship of Jehovah, such as
the offering of an ox or sheep that had some fault, which was an
abomination in the sight of Jehovah (see at Lev. xxii. 20 sqq.).
" Any evil thing," i.e. any of the faults enumerated m Lev. xxii.
22-24. — Vers. 2-7. If such a case should occur, as that a man or
woman transgressed the covenant of the Lord and went after other
gods and worshipped them ; when it was made known, the facts
were to be carefully inquired into ; and if the charge were substan-
tiated, the criminal was to be led out to the gate and stoned. On
the testimony of two or three witnesses, not of one only, he was to
be put to death (see at Num. xxxv. 30) ; and the hand of the wit-
nesses was to be against him first to put him to death, i.e. to throw
the first stones at him, and all the people were to follow. With
regard to the different kinds of idolatry in ver. 3, see chap. iv. 19.
(On ver. 4, see chap. xiii. 15.) " Bring him out to thy gates," u.
to one of the gates of the town in which the crime was committed.
By the gates we are to understand the open space near the gates,
where the judicial proceedings took place (cf . Neh. viii. 1, 3 ; Job
xxix. 7), the sentence itself being executed outside the town (cf.
chap. xxii. 24 ; Acts vii. 58 ; Heb. xiii. 12), just as it had been ont-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVII. 8-13. 381
side the camp daring the journey through the wilderness (Lev.
xxiv. 14 ; Num. xv. 36), to indicate the exclusion of the criminal
from the congregation, and from fellowship with God. The in-
fliction of punishment in vers. 5 sqq. is like that prescribed in chap,
xiii. 10, 11, for those who tempted others to idolatry; with this
exception, that the testimony of more than one witness was required
before the sentence could be executed, and the witnesses were to
be the first to lift up their hands against the criminal to stone him,
that they might thereby give a practical proof of the truth of their
statement, and their own firm conviction that the condemned was
deserving of death, — " a rule which would naturally lead to the sup-
position that no man would come forward as a witness without the
fullest certainty or the greatest depravity" (Schnell, das isr. Recht)}
nsn (ver. 6), the man exposed to death, who was therefore really
ipso facto already dead. " So shah thou put the evil away" etc. :
cf. chap. xiii. 6.
Vers. 8-13. The higher Judicial Court at the Place
of the Sanctuary. — Just as the judges appointed at Sinai were
to bring to Moses whatever cases were too difficult for them to
decide, that he might judge them according to the decision of God
(Ex. xviii. 26 and 19) ; so in the future the judges of the different
towns were to bring all difficult cases, which they were unable to
decide, before the Levitical priests and judges at the place of the
sanctuary, that a final decision might be given there. — Vers. 8 sqq.
" If there is to thee a matter too marvellous for judgment ("??? with
ID, too wonderful, incomprehensible, or beyond carrying out, Gen.
xviii. 14, i.e. too difficult to give a judicial decision upon), between
blood and blood, plea and plea, stroke and stroke (i.e. too hard for
you to decide according to what legal provisions a fatal blow, or dis-
pute on some civil matter, or* a bodily injury, is to be settled), dis-
putes in thy gates (a loosely arranged apposition in this sense, disputes
of different kinds, such as shall arise in thy towns) ; arise, and get
thee to the place which Jehovah thy God shall choose ; and go to the
Levitical priests and the judge that shall be in those days, and in-
1 " He assigned this part to the witnesses, chiefly because there are so many
whose tongne is so slippery, not to say good for nothing, that they would boldly
strangle a man with their words, when they would not dare to touch him with
one of their fingers. It was the best remedy, therefore, that could be tried for
restraining such levity, to refuse to admit the testimony of any man who was
not ready to execute judgment with his own hand" (Calvin).
Digitized by
Google
382 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
quire" Israel is addressed here as a nation, but the words are not
to be supposed to be directed u first of all to the local courts
(chap. xvi. 18), and lastly to the contending parties " (Knobel), nor
" directly to the parties to the suit" (Schulte), but simply to the per-
sons whose duty it was to administer justice in the nation, i.e. to
the regular judges in the different towns and districts of the land.
This is evident from the general fact, that the Mosaic law never
recognises any appeal to higher courts by the different parties to a
lawsuit, and that in this case also it is not assumed, since all that is
enjoined is, that if the matter should be too difficult for the local
judges to decide, they themselves were to carry it to the superior
court. As Oehler has quite correctly observed in Herzog's Cyclo-
paedia, " this superior court was not a court of appeal ; for it did
not adjudicate after the local court had already given a verdict, but
in cases in which the latter would not trust itself to give a verdict
at all." And this is more especially evident from what is stated in
ver. 10, with regard to the decisions of the superior court, namely,
that they were to do whatever the superior judges taught, without
deviating to the right hand or to the left. This is unquestionably
far more applicable to the judges of the different towns, who were
to carry out exactly the sentence of the higher tribunal, than to the
parties to the suit, inasmuch as the latter, at all events those who
were condemned for blood (i.e. for murder), could not possibly be
in a position to alter the decision of the court at pleasure, since it
did not rest with them, but with the authorities of their town, to
carry out the sentence.
Moses did not directly institute a superior tribunal at the place
of the sanctuary on this occasion, but rather assumed its existence ;
not however its existence at that time (as Riehm and other modern
critics suppose), but its establishment and existence in the future.
Just as he gives no minute directions concerning the organization
of the different local courts, but leaves this to the natural develop-
ment of the judicial institutions already in existence, so he also
restricts himself, so far as the higher court is concerned, to general
allusions, which might serve as a guide to the national rulers of a
future day, to organize it according to the existing models. He had
no disorganized mob before him, but a well-ordered nation, already
in possession of civil institutions, with fruitful germs for further
expansion and organization. In addition to its civil classification
into tribes, families, fathers' houses, and family groups, which pos-
sessed at once their rulers in their own heads, the nation had
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVII. 8-13. 383
received in the priesthood, with the high priest at the head, and
the Levites as their assistants, a spiritual class, which mediated
between the congregation and the Lord, and not only kept up the
knowledge of right in the people as the guardian of the law, hut
by virtue of the high priest's office was able to lay the rights of
the people before God, and in difficult cases could ask for His
decision. Moreover, a leader had already been appointed for the
nation, for the time immediately succeeding Moses' death ; and in
this nomination of Joshua, a pledge had been given that the Lord
would never leave it without a supreme ruler of its civil affairs,
but, along with the high priest, would also appoint a judge at the
place of the central sanctuary, who would administer justice in the
highest court in association with the priests. On the ground of
these facts, it was enough for the future to mention the Levitical
priests and the judge who would be at the place of the sanctuary,
as constituting the court by which the difficult questions were to
be decided. 1 For instance, the words themselves show distinctly
enough, that by " the judge " we are not to understand the high
priest, but the temporal judge or president of the superior court ;
and it is evident from the singular, " the priest that standeth to
minister there before the Lord" (ver. 12), that the high priest is in-
cluded among the priests. The expression " the priests the Levites "
(Levitical priests), which also occurs in ver. 18, chap, xviii. 1, xxi.
5, xxiv. 8, xxvii. 9, xxxi. 9, instead of " sons of Aaron," which
we find in the middle books, is quite in harmony with the time and
character of the book before us. As long as Aaron was living
with his sons, the priesthood consisted only of himself and his sons,
that is to say, of one family. Hence all the instructions in the
middle books are addressed to them, and for the most part to
Aaron personally (vid. Ex. xxviii. and xxix. ; Lev. viii.-x. ; Num.
xviii., etc.). This was all changed when Aaron died ; henceforth
the priesthood consisted simply of the descendants of Aaron and his
sons, who were no longer one family, but formed a distinct class in
the nation, the legitimacy of which arose from its connection with
the tribe of Levi, to which Aaron himself had belonged. It was
evidently more appropriate, therefore, to describe them as sons of
1 The simple fact, that the judicial court at the place of the national sanc-
tuary is described in such general terms, furnishes a convincing proof that we
have here the words of Moses, and not those of some later prophetic writer who
had copied the superior court at Jerusalem of the times of the kings, as Riehm
and the critios assume.
Digltizi
ed by Google
384 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Levi than as sons of Aaron, which had teen the title formerly
given to the priests, with the exception of the high priest, viz.
Aaron himself. — In connection with the superior court, however,
the priests are introduced rather as knowing and teaching the
law (Lev. x. 11), than as actual judges. For this reason appeal
was to be made not only to them, but also to the judge, whose duty
it was in any case to make the judicial inquiry and pronounce the
sentence. — The object of the verb " inquire 7 ' (ver. 9) follows after
" they shall show thee," viz. " the word of right" the judicial sen-
tence which is sought (2 Chron. xix. 6). — Vers. 10, 11. They shall
do " according to the sound of the word which they utter" (follow
their decision exactly), and that u according to the sound of the law
which they teach" and u according to the right which they shall
speak." The sentence was to be founded upon the ThoraJi, upon
the law which the priests had to teach. — Ver. 12. No one was to
resist in pride, to refuse to listen to the priest or to the judge.
Resistance to the priest took place when any one was dissatisfied
with his interpretation of the law ; to the judge, when any one was
discontented with the sentence that was passed on the basis of the
law. Such refractory conduct was to be punished with death, as
rebellion against God, in whose name the right had been spoken
(chap. i. 17). (On ver. 13, see chap. xiii. 12.)
Vers. 14-20. Choice and Right of the King. — Vers. 14,
15. If Israel, when dwelling in the land which was given it by the
Lord for a possession, should wish to appoint a king, like all the
nations round about, it was to appoint the man whom Jehovah its
God should choose, and that from among its brethren, i.e. from its
own people, not a foreigner or non-Israelite. The earthly king-
dom in Israel was not opposed to the theocracy, i.e. to the rule of
Jehovah as king over the people of His possession, provided no
one was made king but the person whom Jehovah should choose.
The appointment of a king is not commanded, like the institution
of judges (chap. xvi. 18), because Israel could exist under the
government of Jehovah, even without an earthly king ; it is simply
permitted, in case the need should arise for a regal government
There was no necessity to describe more minutely the course to be
adopted, as the people possessed the natural provision for the ad-
ministration of their national affairs in their well-organized tribes,
by whom this point could be decided. Moses also omits to state more
particularly in what way Jehovah would make known the choice of
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVII. U-20. 38*
the king to be appointed. The congregation, no doubt, possessed
one means of asking the will of the Lord in the Urim and Thummim
of the high priest, provided the Lord did not reveal His will in a
different manner, namely through a prophet, as He did in the
election of Saul and David (1 Sam. viii., ix., and xvi.). The com-
mand not to choose a foreigner, acknowledged the right of the nation
to choose. Consequently the choice on the part of the Lord may
have consisted simply in His pointing out to the people, in a very
evident manner, the person they were to elect, or in His confirming
the choice by word and act, as in accordance with His will. — Three
rules are laid down for the king himself in vers. 16-20. In the
first place, he was not to keep many horses, or lead back the people
to Egypt, to multiply horses, because Jehovah had forbidden the
people to return thither by that way. The notion of modern critics,
that there is an allusion in this prohibition to the constitution of the
kingdom under Solomon, is so far from having any foundation, that
the reason assigned — namely, the fear lest the king should lead back
the people to Egypt from his love of horses, " to the end that he
should multiply horses" — really precludes the time of Solomon, inas-
much as the time had then long gone by when any thought could
have been entertained of leading back the people to Egypt. But
such a reason would be quite in its place in Moses' time, and only
then, " when it would not seem impossible to reunite the broken
band, and when the people were ready to express their longing, and
even their intention, to return to Egypt on the very slightest occa-
sion ; whereas the reason assigned for the prohibition might have
furnished Solomon with an excuse for regarding the prohibition
itself as merely a temporary one, which was no longer binding"
(Oehler in Herzog's Cyclopaedia: vid. Hengstenberg"s Dissertations). 1
The second admonition also, that the king was not to take to him-
self many wives, and turn away his heart (sc. from the Lord), nor
1 When Riehm objects to this, that if such a prohibition had been unneces-
sary in a future age, in which the people had reached the full consciousness of
its national independence, and every thought of the possibility of a reunion
with the Egyptians had disappeared, Moses would never have issued it, since he
most have foreseen the national independence of the people ; the force of this
objection rests simply upon his confounding foreseeing with assuming, and upon
a thoroughly mistaken view of the prophet's vision of the future. Even if Moses,
as " a great prophet?' did foresee the future national independence of Israel, he
had also had such experience of the fickle character of the people, that he could
not regard the thought of returning to Egypt as absolutely an impossible one,
even after the conquest of Canaan, or reject it as inconceivable. Moreover, the
PENT. — VOL. III. 2 B
Digitized by
Google
•386 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
greatly multiply to himself silver and gold, can be explained without
the hypothesis that there is an allusion to Solomon's reign, although
this king did transgress both commands (1 Kings x. 14 sqq., xi. 1
sqq.). A richly furnished harem, and the accumulation of silver
and gold, were inseparably connected with the luxury of Oriental
monarchs generally ; so that the fear was a very natural one, that
the future king of Israel might follow the general customs of the
heathen in these respects. — Vers. 18 sqq. And thirdly, Instead of
hanging his heart upon these earthly things, when he sat upon his
royal throne he was to have a copy of the law written out by the
Levitical priests, that he might keep the law by him, and read
therein all the days of his life. STS does not involve writing with
his own hand (Philo), but simply having it written. Itftn rntoin TWO
does not mean to Sevrepovo/iiov tovto (LXX.), " this repetition of
the law," as n&n cannot stand for fWJ ; but a copy of this law, as
most of the Rabbins correctly explain it in accordance with the
Chaldee version, though they make mishneh to signify duplum, two
copies (see Havernick, Introduction). — Every copy of a book is really
a repetition of it. " From before the priests," i.e. of the law which
lies before the priests or is kept by them. The object of the daily
reading in the law (vers. 19b and 20) was " to learn the fear of
the Lord, and to keep His commandments" (cf . v. 25, vi. 2, xiv. 23),
prophetic foresight of Moses was not, as Riehm imagines it, a foreknowledge of
all the separate points in the historical development of the nation, much less a
foreknowledge of the thoughts and desires of the heart, which might arise in the
course of time amidst the changes that would take pjace in the nation. A fore-
sight of the development of Israel into national independence, so far as we may
attribute it to Moses as a prophet, was founded npt upon the character of the
people, but upon the divine choice and destination of Israel, which by no means
precluded the possibility of their desiring to return to Egypt, even at some future
time, since God Himself had threatened the people with dispersion among the
heathen as the punishment for continued transgression of His covenant, and yet,
notwithstanding this dispersion, had predicted the ultimate realization of His
covenant of grace. And when Riehm still further observes, that the taste for
horses, which lay at the foundation of this fear, evidently points to a later time,
when the old repugnance to cavalry which existed in the nation in the days of
the judges, and even under David, had disappeared ; this supposed repugnance
to cavalry is a fiction of the critic himself, without any historical foundation.
For nothing more is related in the history, than that before the time of Solo-
mon the Israelites had not cultivated the rearing of horses, and that David only
kept 100 of the war-horses taken from the Syrians for himself, and had the
others put to death (2 Sam. viii. 4). And so long as horses were neither reared
nor possessed by the Israelites, there can be no ground for speaking of the old
repugnance to cavalry. On the other hand, the impossibility of tracing this
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVIII. 1-8. 38T
that his heart might not be lifted up above his brethren, that he
might not become proud (chap. viii. 14), and might not turn aside
from the commandments to the right hand or to the left, that he
and his descendants might live long upon the throne.
Rights of the Priests, the Levites, and the Prophets. — Chap, xviii.
In addition to the judicial order and the future king, it was
necessary that the position of the priests and Levites, whose duties
and rights had been regulated by previous laws, should at least be
mentioned briefly and finally established (vers. 1-8), and also that
the prophetic order should be fully accredited by the side of the
other state authorities, and its operations regulated by a definite law
(vers. 9-22).
Vers. 1-8. The Eights of the Priests and Levites. —
With reference to these, Moses repeats verbatim from Num. xviii.
20, 23, 24, the essential part of the rule laid down in Num. xviii. :
" The priests the Levites, the whole tribe of Levi, shall have no part
nor inheritance with Israel." " All the tribe of Levi " includes the
priests and Levites. They were to eat the " firings of Jehovah and
His inheritance," as described in detail in Num. xviii. The inherit-
ance of Jehovah consisted of the holy gifts as well as the sacrifices,
prohibition to the historical circumstances of the time of Solomon, or even a
later age, is manifest in the desperate subterfuge to which Riehm has recourse,
when he connects this passage with the threat in chap, xxviii. 68, that if all the
punishments suspended over them should be ineffectual, God would carry them
back in ships to Egypt, and that they should there be sold to their enemies as
men-servants and maid-servants, and then discovers a proof in this, that the
Egyptian king Psammetichus, who sought out foreign soldiers and employed
them, had left king Manasseh some horses, solely on the condition that he sent
him some Israelitish infantry, and placed them at his disposal. But this is not
expounding Scripture ; it is putting hypotheses into it. As Oehler has already
observed, this hypothesis has no foundation whatever in the Old Testament, nor
(we may add) in the accounts of Herodotus and Diodorus Siculus concerning
Psammetichus. According to Diod. (i. 66), Psammetichus hired soldiers from
Arabia, Caria, and Ionia ; and according to Herodotus (i. 152), he hired Ionians
and Carians armed with brass, that he might conquer his rival kings with their
assistance. But neither of these historians says anything at all about Israelitish
infantry. And even if it were conceivable that any king of Israel or Judah
could carry on such traffic in men, as to sell his own subjects to the Egyptians
for horses, it is very certain that the prophets, who condemned every alliance
with foreign kings, and were not silent with regard to Manasseh's idolatry,
would not have passed over such an abomination as this without remark or
without reproof.
Digitizi
ed by Google
388 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
i.e. the tithes, firstlings, and first-fruits. Moses felt it to be super-
fluous to enumerate these gifts one by one from the previous laws, and
also to describe the mode of their application, or define how much
belonged to the priests and how much to the Levites. However
true it may be that the author assigns all these gifts to the Levites
generally, the conclusion drawn from this, viz. that he was not
acquainted with any distinction between priests and Levites, but
placed the Levites entirely on a par with the priests, is quite a false
one. For, apart from the evident distinction between the priests and
Levites in ver. 1, where there would be no meaning in the clause,
" all the tribe of Levi," if the Levites were identical with the
priests, the distinction is recognised and asserted as clearly as pos-
sible in what follows, when a portion of the slain-offerings is allotted
to the priests in vers. 3-5, whilst in vers. 6-8 the Levite is allowed
to join in eating the altar gifts, if he come to the place of the sanc-
tuary and perform service there. The repetition in ver. 2 is an
emphatic confirmation : " As He hath said unto them :" as in chap,
x. 9. — Vers. 3-5. " This shall be the right of the priests on the part
of the people, on the part of those who slaughter slain-offerings, whether
ox or sheep ; he (the offerer) shall give the priest the shoulder, the
cheek, and the stomach." }n|n, the shoulder, ue. the front leg ; see
Num. vi. 19. nagn, the rough stomach, to rjvurrpov (LXX.), ue.
the fourth stomach of ruminant animals, in which the digestion of
the food is completed ; Lat. omasus or abomasus, though the Vul-
gate has ventriculus here. On the choice of these three pieces in
particular, Munster and Fagius observe that " the sheep possesses
three principal parts, the head, the feet, and the trunk ; and of each
of these some portion was to be given to the priest who officiated" (f ).
" Of each of these three principal parts of the animal," says Schultz,
" some valuable piece was to be presented : the shoulder at least,
and the stomach, which was regarded as particularly fat, are seen at
once to have been especially good." That this arrangement is not at
variance with the command in Lev. vii. 32 sqq., to give the wave-
breast and heave-leg of the peace-offerings to the Lord for the
priests, but simply enjoins a further gift to the priests on the part
of the people, in addition to those portions which were to be given
to the Lord for His servants, is sufficiently evident from the con-
text, since the heave-leg and wave-breast belonged to the firings of
Jehovah mentioned in ver. 1, which the priests had received -as an
inheritance from the Lord, that is to say, to the tenuphoth of the
children of Israel, which the priests might eat with their sons and
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVIII. 1 8. 389
daughters, though only with such members of their house as were
levitically clean (Num. xviii. 11); and also from the words of the
present command, viz. that the portions mentioned were to be a
right of the priests on the part of the people, on the part of those
who slaughtered slain-offerings, i.e. to be paid to the priest as a
right that was due to him on the part of the people. BfiE'D was
what the priest could justly claim. This right was probably ac-
corded to the priests as a compensation for the falling off which
would take place in their incomes in consequence of the repeal of
the law that every animal was to be slaughtered at the sanctuary as
a sacrifice (Lev. xvii. ; vid. chap* xii. 15 sqq.).
The only thing that admits of dispute is, whether this gift was
to be presented from every animal that was slaughtered at home for
private use, or only from those which were slaughtered for sacri-
ficial meals, and therefore at the place of the sanctuary. Against
the former view, for which appeal is made to Phih, Josephus (Ant.
iv. 4, 4), and. the Talmud, we may adduce not only " the difficulty
of carrying ont such a plan" (was every Israelite who slaughtered
an ox, a sheep, or a goat to carry the pieces mentioned to the priests'
town, which might be many miles away, or were the priests to
appoint persons to collect them ?), but the general use of the words
nat rot. The noun rnt always signifies either slaughtering for a
sacrificial meal or a slain sacrifice, and the verb rot is never applied
to ordinary slaughtering (for which &nt^ is the verb used), except
in chap. xii. 15 and 21 in connection with the repeal of the law
that every slaughtering was to be a EVPf rot (Lev. xvii. 5) ; and
there the use of the word rot, instead of BnB>, may be accounted
for from the allusion to this particular law. At the same time, the
Jewish tradition is probably right, when it understands by the
^f} *0?f m *bis verse, /cat' oIkov ffveiv ew0%la<: heica (Josephvs), or
?£a> rov fieo/jLov dvofievois eveica icpeco<$>ar/ia<; (Philo), or, as in the
Mishnah Choi. (x. 1), refers the gift prescribed in this passage to
the p^n, prof ana, and not to the pehpio, conseerata, that is to say,
places it in the same category with the first-fruits, the tithe of
tithes, and other less holy gifts, which might be consumed outside
the court of the temple and the holy city (compare Beland, Antiqq.
ss. P. ii. c. 4, § 11, with P. ii. c. 8, § 10). In all probability, the
reference is to the slaughtering of oxen, sheep, or goats which were
not intended for shelamim in the more limited sense, i.e. for one of
the three species of peace-offerings (Lev. vii. 15, 16), but for festal
meals in the broader sense, which were held in connection with the
Digitized by
Google
390 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
sacrificial meals prepared from the shelamim. For it is evident
that the meals held by the people at the annual feasts when they
had to appear before the Lord were not all shelamim meals, but that
other festal meals were held in connection with these, in which the
priests and Levites were to share, from the laws laid down with
reference to the so-called second tithe, which could not only be
turned into money by those who lived at a great distance from the
sanctuary, such money to be applied to the purchase of the things
required for the sacrificial meals at the place of the sanctuary, but
which might also be appropriated every third year to the preparation
of love-feasts for the poor in the different towns of the land (chap,
xiv. 22-29). For in this case the animals were not slaughtered or
sacrificed as shelamim, at all events not in the latter instance, be-
cause the slaughtering did not take place at the sanctuary. If
therefore we restrict the gift prescribed here to the slaughtering of
oxen and sheep or goats for such sacrificial meals in the wider sense,
not only are the difficulties connected with the execution of this
command removed, but also the objection, which arises out of the
general use of the expression rnt rat, to the application of this
expression to every slaughtering that took place for domestic use.
And beside this, the passage in 1 Sam. ii. 13-16, to which Calvin
calls attention, furnishes a historical proof that the priests could
claim a portion of the flesh of the slain-offerings in addition to the
heave-leg and wave-breast, since it is there charged as a sin on the
part of the sons of Eli, not only that they took out of the cauldrons
as much of the flesh which was boiling as they could take up with
three-pronged forks, but that before the fat was burned upon the
altar they asked for the pieces which belonged to' the priest, to be
given to them not cooked, but raw. From this Michaelis has drawn
the correct conclusion, that even at that time the priests had a right
to claim that, in addition to the portions of the sacrifices appointed
by Moses in Lev. vii. 34, a further portion of the thank-offerings
should be given to them ; though he does not regard the passage as
referring to the law before us, since he supposes this to relate to
every slaughtered animal which was not placed upon the altar.
In ver. 4, Moses repeats the law concerning the first-fruits in
Num. xviii. 12, 13 (cf. Ex. xxii. 28), for the purpose of extending
it to the first produce of the sheep-shearing. — Ver. 5. The reason
for the right accorded to the priests was the choice of them for the
office of standing "to minister in the name of Jehovah," sc. for all
the tribes. " In the name of Jehovah" not merely by the appoint-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVIII. 1-8. 391
merit, but also in the power of the Lord, as mediators of His grace.
The words "he and his sons" point back quite to the Mosaic times,
in which Aaron and his sons held the priest's office. — Vers. 6-8. As
the priests were to be remembered for their service on the part of
the people (vers. 3-5), so the Levite also, who came from one of
the towns of the land with all the desire of his soul, to the place of
the sanctuary, to minister there in the name of the Lord, was to
eat a similar portion to all his Levitical brethren who stood there in
service before the Lord. The verb "vw (sojourned) does not pre-
suppose that the Levites were houseless, but simply that they had
no hereditary possession in the land as the other tribes had, and
merely lived like sojourners among the Israelites in the towns which
were given up to them by the other tribes (see at chap. xii. 12).
"All his brethren tlie Levites" are the priests and those Levites
who officiated at the sanctuary as assistants to the priests. It is
assumed, therefore, that only a part of the Levites were engaged at
the sanctuary, and the others lived in their towns. The apodosis
follows in ver. 8, "part like part shall they eat" sc. the new-comer
and those already there. The former was to have the same share
to eat as the latter, and to be maintained from the revenues of the
sanctuary. These revenues are supposed to be already apportioned
by the previous laws, so that they by no means abolish the distinc-
tion between priests and Levites. We are not to think of those
portions of the sacrifices and first-fruits only which fell to the
lot of the priests, nor of the tithe alone, or of the property which
flowed into the sanctuary through vows or free-will offerings, or in
any other way, and was kept in the treasury and storehouse, but of
tithes, sacrificial portions, and free-will offerings generally, which
were not set apart exclusively for the priests. 'Ul I^SOD 13?, " beside
his sold with the fathers," i.e. independently of what he receives
from the sale of his patrimony. *i3l?p, the sale, then the- thing sold,
and the price or produce of what is sold, like 13D in Num. xx. 19.
*w is unusual without !», and Knobel would read I^BB, from
V®? and ip, in consequence. riiSNn ?V stands for rriSKTVa ?V (see
at Ex. vi. 25 ; Kara- ttjv irarpiav, LXX.), according to or with the
fathers' houses, i.e. the produce of the property which he possesses
according to his family descent, or which is with his kindred.
Whether ?? in this passage signifies " according to the measure
of," or " with," in the sense of keeping or administering, cannot be
decided. As the law in Lev. xxv. 33, 34, simply forbids the sale of
the pasture grounds belonging to the Levites, but permits the sale
Digitized by
Google
Digitizi
ed by GoOgl^
CHAP. XVIII. 9-22. 393
provision in ungodly ways. If Israel therefore was to be preserved
in faithfulness towards God, and attain the end of its calling as the
congregation of the Lord, it was necessary that the Lord should
make known His counsel .and will at the proper time through the
medium of prophets, and bestow upon it in sure prophetic words
what the heathen nations endeavoured to discover and secure by
means of augury and soothsaying. This is the point of view from
which Moses promises the sending of prophets in vers. 15-18, and
lays down in vers. 19-22 the criteria for distinguishing between
true and false prophets, as we may clearly see from the fact that
in vers. 9-14 he introduces this promise with a warning against
resorting to heathen augury, soothsaying, and witchcraft.
Vers. 9 sqq. When Israel came' into the land of Canaan, it
was " not to learn to do like the abominations of these nations" (the
Canaanites or heathen). There was not to be found in it any who
caused his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, i.e. any
worshipper of Moloch (see at Lev. xviii. 21), or one who practised
soothsaying (see at Num. xxiii. 23), or a wizard (see at Lev. xix.
26), or a snake-charmer (see at Lev. xix. 26), or a conjurer, or one
who pronounced a ban ("on *uh, probably referring to the custom
of binding or banning by magical knots), a necromancer and wise
man (see at Lev. xix. 31), or one who asked the dead, i.e. who
sought oracles from the dead. Moses groups together all the words
which the language contained for the different modes of exploring
the future and discovering the will of God, for the purpose of for-
bidding every description of soothsaying, and places the prohibition
of Moloch-worship at the head, to show the inward connection
between soothsaying and idolatry, possibly because februation, or
passing children through the fire in the worship of Moloch, was
more intimately connected with soothsaying and magic than any
other description of idolatry. — Ver. 12. Whoever did this was an
abomination to the Lord, and it was because of this abomination
that He rooted out the Canaanites before Israel (cf . Lev. xviii. 24
sqq.). — Vers. 13 and 14. Israel, on the other hand, was to be blame-
less with Jehovah (pV, in its intercourse with the Lord). Though
the heathen whom they exterminated before them hearkened to
conjurers and soothsayers, Jehovah their God had not allowed
anything of the kind to them, nntfl is placed first as a nominative
absolute, for the sake of emphasis : " but thou, so far as thou art
concerned, not so." 15, thus, just so, such things (cf. Ex. x. 14).
ro, to grant, to allow (as in Gen. xx. 6, etc.). — Ver. 15. "A
Digitizi
ed by Google
394 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
prophet out of the midst of thee, out of thy brethren, as I am, will
Jehovah thy God raise up to thee ; to him shall ye hearken'' When
Moses thus attaches to the prohibition against hearkening to"sooth-
sayers and practising soothsaying, the promise that Jehovah would
raise up a prophet, etc., and contrasts what the Lord would do for
His people with what He did not allow, it is perfectly evident from
this simple connection alone, apart from the further context of the
passage, in which Moses treats of the temporal and spiritual rulers
of Israel (chap. xvii. and xviii.), that the promise neither relates to
one particular prophet, nor directly and exclusively to the Messiah,
but treats of the sending of prophets generally. And this is also
confirmed by what follows with reference to true and false prophets,
which presupposes the rise of a plurality of prophets, and shows
most incontrovertibly that it is not one prophet only, nor the Messiah
exclusively, who is promised here. It by no means follows from the
use of the singular, " a prophet," that Moses is speaking of one
particular prophet only ; but the idea expressed is this, that at any
time when the people stood in need of a mediator with God like
Moses, God would invariably send a prophet. The words, " out of
the midst of thee, of thy brethren," imply that there would be no
necessity for Israel to turn to heathen soothsayers or prophets, but
that it would find the men within itself who would make known the
word of the Lord. The expression, " like unto me," is explained by
what follows in vers. 16-18 with regard to the circumstances, under
which the Lord had given the promise that He would send a
prophet. It was at Sinai ; when the people were filled with mortal
alarm, after hearing the ten words which God addressed to them out
of the fire, and entreated Moses to act as mediator between the Lord
and themselves, that God might not speak directly to them any more.
At that time the Lord gave the promise that He would raise up a
prophet, and put His words into his mouth, that he might speak to
the people all that the Lord commanded (cf. chap. v. 20 sqq.).
The promised prophet, therefore, was to resemble Moses in this
respect, that he would act as mediator between Jehovah and the
people, and make known the words or the will of the Lord. Conse-
quently the meaning contained in the expression " like unto me" was
not that the future prophet would resemble Moses in all respects, —
a meaning which has been introduced into it through an unwarrant-
able use of Num. xii. 6-8, Deut. xxxiv. 10, and Heb. iii. 2, 5, for
the purpose of proving the direct application of the promise to the
Messiah alone, to the exclusion of the prophets of the Old Testament
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XVIII. 9-22. 395
If the resemblance of the future prophet to Moses, expressed in the
words " like nnto me," be understood as indicating the precise form
in which God revealed Himself to Moses, speaking with him mouth
to mouth, and not in a dream or vision, a discrepancy is introduced
between this expression and the words which follow in ver. 18, " I
will put My words in his mouth ; " since this expresses not the par-
ticular mode in which Moses received the revelations from God,
in contrast with the rest of the prophets, but simply that form of
divine communication or inspiration which was common to all the
prophets (vid. Jet. i. 9, v. 14).
But whilst we are obliged to give up the direct and exclusive
reference of this promise to the Messiah, which was the prevailing
opinion in the early Church, and has been revived by Kurtz, Auber-
len, and Tholuck, as not in accordance with the context or the words
themselves, we cannot, on the other hand, agree with v. Hofmann,
Baur, and Knobel, in restricting the passage to the Old Testament
prophets, to the exclusion of the Messiah. There is no warrant for
this limitation of the word " prophet," since the expectation of the
Messiah was not unknown to Moses and the Israel of his time, but
was actually expressed in the promise of the seed of the woman,
and Jacob's prophecy concerning Skiloh ; so that 0. v. Gerlach is
perfectly right in observing, that " this is a prediction of Christ as
the true Prophet, precisely like that of the seed of the woman in
Gen. iii. 15." The occasion, also, on which Moses received -the
promise of the " prophet" from the Lord, which he here communi-
cated to the people, — namely, when the people desired a mediator
between themselves and the Lord at Sinai, and this desire on their
part was pleasing to Jhe Lord, — shows that the promise should be
understood in the full sense of the words, without any limitation
whatever ; that is to say, that Christ, in whom the prophetic cha-
racter culminated and was completed, is to be included. Even
Ewald admits, that " the prophet like nnto Moses, whom God
would raise up out of Israel and for Israel, can only be the true
prophet generally ;" and Baur also allows, that " historical expo-
sition will not mistake the anticipatory reference of this expression
to Christ, which is involved in the expectation that, in the future
completion of the plan of salvation, the prophetic gift would form
an essential element." And lastly, the comparison instituted be-
tween the promised prophet and Moses, compels us to regard the
words as referring to the Messiah. The words, " like unto me,"
" like unto thee," no more warrant us in excluding the Messiah on
Digitized by
Google
396 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
the one hand, than in excluding the Old Testament prophets on the
other, since it is unquestionably affirmed that the prophet of the
future would be as perfectly equal to his calling as Moses was to
his, 1 — that He would carry out the mediation between the Lord and
the people in the manner and the power of Moses. In this respect
not one of the Old Testament prophets was fully equal to Moses,
as is distinctly stated in chap, xxxiv. 10. All the prophets of the
Old Testament stood within the sphere of the economy of the law,
which was founded through the mediatorial office of Moses ; and
even in their predictions of the future, they simply continued to
build upon the foundation which was laid by Moses, and therefore
prophesied of the coming of the servant of the Lord, who, as the
Prophet of all prophets, would restore Jacob, and carry out the law
and right of the Lord to the nations, even to the end of the world
(Isa. xlii., xlix., 1., lxi.). This prophecy, therefore, is very properly
referred to Jesus Christ in the New Testament, as having been
fulfilled in Him. Not only had Philip this passage in his mind
when he said to Nathanael, u We have found Him of whom Moses
in the law did write, Jesus of Nazareth," whilst Stephen saw the
promise of the prophet like unto Moses fulfilled in Christ (Acts vii.
37) ; but Peter also expressly quotes it in Acts iii. 22, 23, as refer-
ring to Christ ; and even the Lord applies it to Himself in John v.
45-47, when He says to the Jews, " Moses, in whom ye trust, will
accuse you ; for if ye believed Moses, ye would also believe Me : for
Moses wrote of Me." In John xii. 48-50, again, the reference to
vers. 18 and 19 of this chapter is quite unmistakeable ; and in the
words, " hear ye Him," which were uttered from the cloud at the
transfiguration of Jesus (Matt. xvii. 5), the expression in ver. 15,
" unto Him shall ye hearken," is used verbatim with reference to .
Christ. Even the Samaritans founded their expectation of the
Messiah (John iv. 25) upon these words of Moses. 8
Vers. 16-22. With this assurance the Lord had fully granted
the request of the people, " according to all that thou desiredst of
the Lord thy God ;" and Israel, therefore, was all the more bound
to hearken to the prophets, whom God would raise up from the
midst of itself, and not to resort to heathen soothsayers. (On the
1 Let any one paraphrase the passage thus : " A prophet inferior indeed to
me, but yet the channel of divine revelations," and he will soon feel how un-
suitable it is" (Hengstenberg).
2 On the history of the exposition of this passage, see Hengstenberg '$ Chris-
tology.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIX 1-18. 397
fact itself, comp. chap. v. 20 sqq. with Ex. xx. 15-17.) " In the
day of the assembly" as in chap. ix. 10, x. 4. — The instructions as
to their behaviour towards the prophets are given by Moses (vers.
19, 20) in the name of the Lord, for the purpose of enforcing obe-
dience with all the greater emphasis. Whoever did not hearken
to the words of the prophet who spoke in the name of the Lord,
of him the Lord would require it, i.e. visit the disobedience with
punishment (cf . Ps. x. 4, 13). On the other hand, the prophet who
spoke in the name of the Lord what the Lord had not commanded
him, i.e. proclaimed the thoughts of his own heart as divine revela-
tions (cf . Nam. xvi. 28), should die, like the prophet who spoke in
the name of other gods. With TVD\ the predicate is introduced in
the form of an apodosis. — Vers. 21, 22. The false prophet was to
be discovered by the fact, that the word proclaimed by him did not
follow or come to pass, i.e. that his prophecy was not fulfilled. Of
him they were not to be afraid. By this injunction the occurrence
of what had been predicted is made the criterion of true prophecy,
and not signs and wonders, which false prophets could also per-
form (cf. chap. xiii. 2 sqq.).
Laws concerning the Cities of Refuge, the Sacredness of Landmarks,
and the Punishment of False Witnesses. — Chap. xix.
After laying down the most important features in the national
constitution, Moses glances at the manifold circumstances of civil
and family life, and notices in this and the two following chapters
the different ways in which the lives of individuals might be endan-
gered, for the purpose of awakening in the minds of the people a
holy reverence for human life.
Vers. 1-13. The laws concerning the cities OF refuge fob
unintentional MAN8LATEB8 are not a mere repetition of the laws
given in Num. xxxv. 9-34, but rather an admonition to carry out
those laws, with special reference to the future extension of the
boundaries of the land. — Vers. 1-7. As Moses had already set apart
the cities of refuge for the land on the east of the Jordan (chap,
iv. 41 sqq.), he is speaking here simply of the land on the west,
which Israel was to take possession of before long ; and supplements
the instructions in Num. xxxv. 14, with directions to maintain the
roads to the cities of refuge which were to be set apart in Canaan
itself, and to divide the land into three parts, viz. for the purpose
of setting apart these cities, so that one city might be chosen for
the purpose in every third of the land. For further remarks upon
Digitized by
Google
398 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
this point, as well as with regard to the use of these cities (vers.
4-7), see at Num. xxxv. 11 sqq. — In vers. 8-10 there follow the
fresh instructions, that if the Lord should extend the borders of
Israel, according to His promise given to the patriarchs, and should
give them the whole land from the Nile to the Euphrates, according
to Gen. xv. 18, they were to add three other cities of refuge to these
three, for the purpose of preventing the shedding of innocent blood.
The three new cities of refuge cannot be the three appointed in
Num. xxxv. 14 for the land on this side of the Jordan, nor the
three mentioned in ver. 7 on the other side of Jordan; as Knobel
and others suppose. Nor can we adopt Jfengstenberg's view, that the
three new ones are the same as the three mentioned in vers. 2 and
7, since they are expressly distinguished from " these three." The
meaning is altogether a different one. The circumstances supposed
by Moses never existed, since the Israelites did not fulfil the con-
ditions laid down in ver. 9, viz. that they should keep the law faith-
fully, and love the Lord their God (cf. chap. iv. 6, vi. 5, etc.). The
extension of the power of Israel to the Euphrates under David and
Solomon, did not bring the land as far as this river into their actual
possession, since the conquered kingdoms of Aram were still inha-
bited by the Aramaeans, who, though conquered, were only rendered
tributary. And the Tyrians and Phoenicians, who belonged to the
Oanaanitish population, were not even attacked by David. — Ver. 10.
Innocent blood would be shed if the unintentional manslayer was
not protected against the avenger of blood, by the erection of cities
of refuge in every part of the land. If Israel neglected this duty,
it would bring blood-guiltiness upon itself (" and so blood be upon
thee"), because it had not done what was requisite to prevent the
shedding of innocent blood. — Vers. 11-13. But whatever care was
to be taken by means of free cities to prevent the shedding of blood,
the cities of refuge were not to be asyla for criminals who were
deserving of death, nor to afford protection to those who had slain
a neighbour out of hatred. If such murderers should flee to the
free city, the elders (magistrates) of his own town were to fetch
him out, and deliver him up to the avenger of blood, that he might
die. The law laid down in. Num. xxxv.. 16-21 is here still more
minutely defined ; but this does not transfer to the elders the doty
of instituting a judicial inquiry, and deciding the matter, as Riehm
follows Vater and De Wette in maintaining, for the purpose of
proving that there is a discrepancy between Deuteronomy and the
previous legislation. They are simply commanded to perform the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XIX. 15-21. 399
duty devolving upon them as magistrates and administrators of
local affairs. (On ver. 13, see chap. xiii. 8 and 5.)
Ver. 14. The prohibition against removing a neighbour's
landmark, which his ancestors had placed, is inserted here, not
because landmarks were of special importance in relation to the
free cities, and the removal of them might possibly be fatal to the
unintentional manslayer (as Clericus and Rosenmixller assume), for
the general terms of the prohibition are at variance with this, viz.
" thy neighbour's landmark," and " in thine inheritance which thou
shalt inherit in the land ;" but on account of the close connection
in which a man's possession as the means of his support stood to
the life of the man himself, " because property by which life is
supported participates in the sacredness of life itself, just as in
chap. xx. 19, 20, sparing the fruit-trees is mentioned in connection
with the men who were to be spared" (Schultz). A curse was to
be pronounced upon the remover of landmarks, according to chap,
xxvii. 17, just as upon one who cursed his father, who led a blind
man astray, or peryerted the rights of orphans and widows (cf.
Hos. v. 10 ; Prov. xxii. 28, xxiii. 10). Landmarks were regarded
as sacred among other nations also ; by the Romans, for example,
they were held to be so sacred, that whoever removed them was to
be put to death.
Vers. 15-21. The Punishment of a False Witness. — To
secure life and property against false accusations, Moses lays down
the law in ver. 15, that one witness only was not " to rise up against
any one with reference to any crime or sin, with every sin that one
commits" (i.e. to appear before a Court of justice, or be accepted as
sufficient), but everything was to be established upon the testimony
of two or three witnesses. The rule laid down in chap. xvii. 6 and
Num. xxxv. 30 for capital crimes, is raised hereby into a law of
general application (see at Num. xxxv. 30). D*P (in ver. 156), to
stand, i.e. to acquire legal force. — But as it was not always possible
to bring forward two or three witnesses, and the statement of one
witness could not well be disregarded, in vers. 16-18 Moses refers
accusations of this kind to the higher tribunal at the sanctuary for
investigation and decision, and appoints the same punishment for a
false witness, which would have fallen upon the person accused, if
he had been convicted of the crime with which lie was charged.
HID ta rfojD, " to testify against his departure," sc. from the law of
God, not merely falling away into idolatry (chap. xiii. 6), but any
Digitized by
Google
400 THE FIFTH BOOK OF HOSES.
kind of crime, as we may gather from ver. 19, which would be
visited with capital punishment. — Ver. 17. The two men between
whom the dispute lay, the accused and the witness, were to come
before Jehovah, viz. before the priests and judges who should be in
those days, — namely, at the place of the sanctuary, where Jehovah
dwelt among His people (cf. chap. xvii. 9), and not before the local
courts, as Knobel supposes. These judges were to investigate the
case most thoroughly (cf. chap. xiii. 15) ; and if the witness had
spoken lies, they were to do to him as he thought to do to his
brother. The words from "behold" to "his brother" are paren-
thetical circumstantial clauses : " And, behold, is the witness a fake
witness, has he spoken a lie against his brother f Ye shall do," etc.
DOJ, generally to meditate evil. On ver. 20, see chap. xiii. 12.—
Ver. 21. The lex talionis was to be applied without reserve (see at
Ex. xxi. 23 ; Lev. xxiv. 20). According to Diod. Sic. (i. 77), the
same law existed in Egypt with reference to false accusers.
Instructions for future Wars. — Chap. xx.
The instructions in this chapter have reference to the wars
which Israel might wage in future against non-Canaanitish nations
(vers. 15 sqq.), and enjoin it as a duty upon the people of God to
spare as much as possible the lives of their own soldiers and also of
their enemies. All wars against their enemies, even though they
were superior to them in resources, were to be entered upon by them
without fear in reliance upon the might of their God ; and they were
therefore to exempt from military service not only those who had
just entered into new social relations, and had not enjoyed the
pleasures of them, but also the timid and fainthearted (vers. 1-9).
Moreover, whenever they besieged hostile towns, they were to offer
peace to their enemies, excepting only the Ganaanites ; and even if
it were not accepted, they were to let the defenceless (viz. women
and children) live, and not to destroy the fruit-trees before the
fortifications (vers. 10-20).
Vers. 1-9. Instructions relating to Military Service.
— If the Israelites went out to battle against their foes, and saw
horses and chariots, a people more numerous than they were, they
were not to be afraid, because Jehovah their God was with them.
Horses and chariots constituted the principal strength of the ene-
mies round about Israel ; not of the Egyptians only (Ex. xiv. 7),
and of the Canaanites and Philistines (Josh. xvii. 16 ; Judg. iv. 3,
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XX. 1-9. 401
1 Sam. xiii. 5), but of the Syrians also (2 Sam. viii. 4 ; 1 Chron.
xviii. 4, xix. 18; cf. Ps. xx. 8). — Vers. 2-4. If they were thus
drawing near to war, i.e. arranging themselves for war for the
purpose of being mastered and marching in order into the battle
(not just as the battle was commencing), the priest was to address
the warriors, and infuse courage into them by pointing to the help
of the Lord. " The priest " is not the high priest, but the priest
who accompanied the army, like Phinehas in the war against the
Midianites (Num. xxxi. 6 ; cf. 1 Sam. iv. 4, 11, 2 Chron. xiii. 12),
whom the Rabbins call npriTSri rPE>D (the anointed of the battle),
and raise to the highest dignity next to the high priest, no doubt
simply upon the ground of Num. xxxi. 6 (see Lundius, jud. Heiligth.
p. 523). — Vers. 5-9. Moreover, the shoterim, whose duty it was, as
the keepers of the genealogical tables, to appoint the men who were
bound to serve, were to release such of the men who had been
summoned to the war as had entered into domestic relations, which
would make it a harder thing for them to be exposed to death than
for any of the others : for example, any man who had built a new
house and had not yet consecrated it, or had planted a vineyard
and not yet eaten any of the fruit of it, or was betrothed to a wife
and had not yet married her, — that such persons might not die
before they had enjoyed the fruits of what they had done. " Who
is the man, who," i.e. whoever, every man who. " Consecrated the
house," viz. by taking possession and dwelling in it ; entrance into
the house was probably connected with a hospitable entertainment.
According to Josephus (Ant. iv. 8, 41), the enjoyment of them was
to last a year (according to the analogy of chap. xxiv. 5). The
Rabbins elaborated special ceremonies, among which Jonathan in
his Targum describes the fastening of slips with sentences out of
the law written upon them to the door-posts, as being the most
important (see at chap. vi. 9 : for further details, see Selden, de
St/nedriis 1. iii. c. 14, 15). Cerem is hardly to be restricted to
vineyards, but applied to olive-plantations as well (see at Lev. -xix.
10)- 'H 1 , to make common, is to be explained from the fact, that
when fruit-trees were planted (Lev. xix. 23 sqq.), or vines set (Judg.
xix. 24), the fruit was not to be eaten for the first three years,
and that of the fourth year was to be consecrated to the Lord ;
and it was only the fruit that was gathered in the fifth year which
could be applied by the owner to his own use, — in other words,
could be made common. The command to send away from the
army to his own home a man who was betrothed but had not yet
PENT. — VOL. III. 2 C
Digitized by
Google
402 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
taken his wife, is extended still further in chap. xxiv. 5, where it is
stated that a newly married man was to be exempt for a whole year
from military service and other public burdens. The intention of
these instructions was neither to send away all persons who were
unwilling to go into the war, and thus avoid the danger of their
interfering with the readiness and courage of the rest of the army
in prospect of the battle, nor to spare the lives of those persons to
whom life was especially dear ; but rather to avoid depriving any
member of the covenant nation of his enjoyment of the good things
of this life bestowed upon him by the Lord. — Ver. 8. The first
intention only existed in the case of the timid (the soft-hearted or
despondent). DB* t6l, that the heart of thy brethren" may not flow
away" i.e. may not become despondent (as in Gen. xvii. 15, etc.).
— Ver. 9. When this was finished, the shoterim were to appoint
captains at the head of the people (of war). Ipa, to inspect, to
muster, then to give the oversight, to set a person over anything
(Num. iii. 10, iv. 27). The meaning "to lead the command"
(Schultz) cannot be sustained ; and if " captains of the armies"
were the subject, and reference were made to the commanders in
the war, the article would not be omitted. If the shoterim had to
raise men for the war and organize the army, the division of the
men into hosts (zebaoth) and the appointment of the leaders would
also form part of the duties of their office.
Vers. 10-20. Instructions concerning Sieges. — Vers. 10,
11. On advancing against a town to attack it, they were "to call
to it for peace," i.e. to summon it to make a peaceable surrender
and submission (cf . Judg. xxi. 13). " If it answered peace" Le.
returned an answer conducing to peace, and "opened" (sc. its
gates), the whole of its inhabitants were to become tributary to
Israel, and serve it ; consequently even those who were armed were
not to be put to death, for Israel was not to shed blood unneces-
sarily. DO does not mean feudal service, but a feudal slave (see at
Ex. i. 11). — Vers. 12, 13. If the hostile town, however, did not
make peace, but prepared for war, the Israelites were to besiege it;
and if Jehovah gave it into their hands, they were to slay all the
men in it without reserve (" with the edge of the sword," see at
Gen. xxxiv. 26) ; but the women and children and all that was in
the city, all its spoil, they were to take as prey for themselves, and
to consume (eat) the spoil, i.e. to make use of it for their own
maintenance. — Vers. 15-18. It was in this way that Israel was to
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XX. 10-20. 403
act with towns that were far off ; but not with the towns of the
Canaanites {"these nations"), which Jehovah gave them for an
inheritance. In these no soul was to he left alive; but these nations
were to be laid under the ban, i.e. altogether exterminated, that
they might not teach the Israelites their abominations and sins (cf.
chap. vii. 1-4, xii. 31). not5b~73, lit. every breath, i.e. everything
living, by which, however, human beings alone are to be under-
stood (comp. Josh. x. 40, xi. 11, with chap. xi. 14). — Vers. 19, 20.
When they besieged a town a long time to conquer it, they were
not to destroy its trees, to swing the axe upon them. That we are
to understand by W the fruit-trees in the environs and gardens of
the town, is evident from the motive appended : "for of them (HBD
refers to YV as a collective) thou eatest, and thou shalt not hew them
down" The meaning is: thou mayest suppress and destroy the
men, but not the trees which supply thee with food. " For is tlie
tree of the field a man, that it should come into siege before thee ?"
This is evidently the only suitable interpretation of the difficult
words rnfe»n }*y D"isn *3 } and the one which has been expressed by
all the older commentators, though in different ways. But it is one
which can only be sustained grammatically by adopting the view
propounded by Clericus and others: viz. by pointing the noun DTKH
with n interrog., instead of DTK?, and taking D"1K as the object,
which its position in the sentence fully warrants (cf. Ewald, §
324, b. and 306, b.). The Masoretic punctuation is founded upon
the explanation given by Aben Ezra, " Man is a tree of the field,
ue. lives upon and is fed by the fruits of the trees," which Schultz
expresses in this way, " Man is bound up with the tree of the field,
i.e. has his life in, or from, the tree of the field," — an explanation,
however, which cannot be defended by appealing to chap. xxiv. 6,
Eccl. xii. 13, Ezek. xii. 10, as these three passages are of a different
kind. In no way whatever can MKn be taken as the subject of the
sentence, as this would not give any rational meaning. And if it
were rendered as the object, in such sense as this, The tree of the
field, is a thing or affair of man, it would hardly have the article.
— Ver. 20. " Only Hie trees which thou knowest that they are not
trees of eating (i.e. do not bear edible fruits), mayest thou hew down,
and build a rampart against the town till it come down" i.e. fall
down from its eminence. For "TV as applied to the falling or
sinking of lofty fortifications, see chap, xxviii. 52, Isa. xxxii. 19.
"iTSttp, compressing or forcing down ; hence, as applied to towns,
nVSHM Kia, to come into siege, i.e. to be besieged (ver. 19 ; 2 Kings
Digitized by
Google
404 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
xxiv. 10, xxv. 2). In ver. 20 it is used to denote the object, viz.
the means of hemming in a town, i.e. the besieging rampart (cf.
Ezek. iv. 2).
Expiation of an uncertain Murder. Treatment of a Wife wlw had been
taken captive. Right of the First-born. Punishment of a refrac-
tory Son. Burial of a Man who had been hanged. — Chap. xxi.
The reason for grouping together these five laws, which are
apparently so different from one another, as well as for attaching
them to the previous regulations, is to be found in the desire to
bring out distinctly the sacredness of life and of personal rights
from every point of view, and impress it upon the covenant nation.
Vers. 1-9. Expiation of a Mtjedee committed bt an
unknown Hand. — Vers. 1 and 2. If any one was found lying in
a field in the land of Israel (?Bi fallen, then lying, Judg. iii. 25,
iv. 22), having been put to death without its being known who had
killed him ('Ul info t6, a circumstantial clause, attached without a
copula, see Ewald, § 341, b. 3), the elders and judges, sc. of the
neighbouring towns, — the former as representatives of the com-
munities, the latter as administrators of right, — were to go out and
measure to the towns which lay round about the slain man, i.e.
measure the distance of the body from the towns that were lying
round about, to ascertain first of all which was the nearest town. —
Vers. 3, 4. This nearest town was then required to expiate the
blood-guiltiness, not only because the suspicion of the crime or of
participation in the crime fell soonest upon it, but because the guilt
connected with the shedding of innocent blood rested as a burden
upon it before all others. To this end the elders were to take a
heifer (young cow), with which no work had ever been done, and
which had not yet drawn in the yoke, i.e. whose vital force had not
been diminished by labour (see at Num. xix. 2), and bring it down
into a brook-valley with water constantly flowing, and there break
its neck. The expression, " it shall be that the city" is more fully
defined by " the elders of the city shall take." The elders were to
perform the act of expiation in the name of the city. As the
murderer was not to be found, an animal was to be put to death in
his stead, and suffer the punishment of the murderer. The slay-
ing of the animal was not an expiatory sacrifice, and consequently
there was no slaughtering and sprinkling of the blood ; but, as the
mode of death, viz. breaking the neck (yid. Ex. xiii. 13), clearly
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXI. 1-9. 405
shows, it was a symbolical infliction of the punishment that should
have been borne by the murderer, upon the animal which was
substituted for him. To be able to take the guilt upon itself and
bear it, the animal was to be in the full and undiminished pos-
session of its vital powers. The slaying was to take place in a
V?* ?™> a valley with water constantly flowing through it, which
was not worked (cultivated) and sown. This regulation as to the
locality in which the act of expiation was to be performed was
probably founded upon the idea, that the water of the brook-valley
would suck in the blood and clean it away, and that the blood
sucked in by the earth would not be brought to light again by the
ploughing and working of the soil. — Ver. 5. The priests were %o
come near during this transaction ; i.e. some priests from the nearest
Levitical town were to be present at it, not to conduct the affair,
but as those whom Jehovah had chosen to serve Him and to bless
in His name (cf. chap, xviii. 5), and according to whose mouth
(words) every dispute and every stroke happened (cf. chap. xvii.
8), i.e. simply as those who were authorized by the Lord, and as the
representatives of the divine right, to receive the explanation and
petition of the elders, and acknowledge the legal validity of the
act. — Vers. 6-8. The elders of the town were to wash their hands
over the slain heifer, i.e. to cleanse themselves by this symbolical
act from the suspicion of any guilt on the part of the inhabitants
of the town in the murder that had been committed (cf. Ps. xxvi.
6, lxxiii. 13 ; Matt, xxvii. 24), and then answer (to the charge in-
volved in what had taken place), and say, " Our hands have not shed
this blood (on the singular niJBE', see Ewald, § 317, a.), and our eyes
have not seen " (sc. the shedding of blood), i.e. we have neither any
part in the crime nor any knowledge of it: " grant forgiveness {lit.
'cover up,' viz- the blood-guiltiness) to Thy people . . . and give not
innocent blood in the midst of Thy people Israel" i.e. lay not upon
us the innocent blood that has been shed by imputation and
punishment. "And the blood shall be forgiven them," i.e. the
bloodshed or murder shall not be imputed to them. On ">fi3?, a
mixed form from the Niphal and Hithpael, see Ges. § 55, and
Ewald, § 132, e. — Ver. 9. In this way Israel was to wipe away
the innocent blood (the bloodshed) from its midst (cf. Num. xxxv.
33). If the murderer were discovered afterwards, of course the
punishment of death which had been inflicted vicariously upon the
animal, simply because the criminal himself could not be found,
would still fall upon him.
Digltizi
ed by Google
406 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Vers. 10-14. Treatment of a Wife who had been a
Prisoner of War. — If an Israelite saw among the captives, who
had been brought away in a war against foreign nations, a woman
of beautiful figure, and loved her, and took her as his wife, be was
to allow her a month's time in his house, to bewail her separation
from her home and kindred, and accustom herself to her new con-
dition of life, before he married her. What is said here does not
apply to the wars with the Ganaanites, who were to be cut off (vid.
chap. vii. 3), but, as a comparison of the introductory words in ver.
1 with chap. xx. 1 clearly shows, to the wars which Israel would
carry on with surrounding nations after the conquest of Canaan.
y 2& and <P3E*, the captivity, for the captives. — Vers. 12, 13. When
the woman was taken home to the house of the man who had loved
her, she was to shave her head, and make, i.e. cut, her nails (cf. 2
Sam. xix. 25), — both customary signs of purification (on this signi-
fication of the cutting of the hair, see Lev. xiv. 8 and Num. viii. 7),
— as symbols of her passing out of the state of a slave, and of her
reception into the fellowship of the covenant nation. This is per-
fectly obvious in her laying aside her prisoner's clothes. After
putting off the signs of captivity, she was to sit (dwell) in the
house, and bewail her father and mother for a month, i.e. console
herself for her separation from her parents, whom she had lost, that
she might be able to forget her people and her father's bouse (Ps.
xlv. 11), and give herself up henceforth in love to her husband
with an undivided heart. The intention of these laws was not to
protect the woman against any outbreak of rude passion on the
part of the man, but rather to give her time and leisure to loosen
herself inwardly from the natural fellowship of her nation and
kindred, and to acquire affection towards the fellowship of the
people of God, into which she had entered against her will, that
her heart might cherish love to the God of Israel, who had given
her favour in the eyes of her master, and had taken from her
the misery and reproach of slavery. By her master becoming her
husband, she entered into the rights of a daughter of Israel,
who had been sold by her father to a man to be his wife (Ex.
xxi. 7 sqq.). If after this her husband should find no pleasure in
her, he was to let her go fiBW, i.e. at her free will, and not sell
her for money (cf. Ex. xxi. 8). " Thou shalt not put constraint
upon her, because thou hast humbled her." "^V^V}, which only occurs
again in chap. xxiv. 7, probably signifies to throw oneself upon a
person, to practise violence towards him (cf. Get. thes. p. 1046).
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXI. 15-21. 407
Vers. 15-17. The Eight of the First-born. — Whilst the
previous law was intended to protect the slave taken in war against
the caprice of her Israelitish master, the law which follows is directed
against the abuse of paternal authority in favour of a favourite wife.
If a man had two wives, of whom one was beloved and the other hated,
— as was the case, for example, with Jacob, — and had sons by both
his wives, but the first-born by the wife he hated, he was not, when
dividing his property as their inheritance, to make the son of the
wife he loved the first-born, i.e. was not to give him the inheritance
of the first-born, but was to treat the son of the hated wife, who was
really the first-born son, as such, and to give him a double share of
all his possession. 133, to make or institute as first-born. 'U1 |3 ^B"7y,
over (by) the face of, i.e. opposite to the first-born son of the hated,
when he was present ; in other words, " during his lifetime " (cf .
Gen. xi. 28). "W, to regard as that which he is, the rightful first-
born. The inheritance of the first-born consisted in "a mouth of two"
{i.e. a mouthful, portion, shart of two) of all that was by him, all
that he possessed. Consequently the first-born inherited twice as
much as any of the other sons. " Beginning of his strength " (as in
Gen. xlix. 3). This right of primogeniture did not originate with
Moses, but was simply secured by him against arbitrary invasion.
It was founded, no doubt, upon hereditary tradition; just as we
find in many other nations, that certain privileges are secured to the
first-born sons above those born afterwards.
Vers. 18-21. Punishment op a refractory Son- — The laws
upon this point aim not only at the defence, but also at the limita-
tion, of parental authority. If any one's son was unmanageable and
refractory, not hearkening to the voice of his parents, even when they
chastised him, his father and mother were to take him and lead him
out to the elders of the town into the gate of the place. The elders
are not regarded here as judges in the strict sense of the word, but
as magistrates, who had to uphold the parental authority, and ad-
minister the local police. The gate of the town was the forum,
where the public affairs of the place were discussed (cf. chap. xxii.
15, xxv. 7); as it is in the present day in Syria (Seetzen, R. ii. p.
88), and among the Moors (ffdft, Nachrichten v. Marokkos, p. 239).
— Ver. 20. Here they were to accuse the son as being unmanage-
able, refractory, disobedient, as " a glutton and a drunkard." These
last accusations show the reason for the unmanageableness and re-
fractoriness. — Ver. 21. In consequence of this accusation, all the
Digitized by
Google
408 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
men of the town were to stone him, so that he died. By this the
right was taken away from the parents of putting an incorrigible
son to death (cf. Prov. xix. 18), whilst at the same time the parental
authority was fully preserved. Nothing is said about any evidence
of the charge brought by the parents, or about any judicial inquiry
generally. " In such a case the charge was a proof in itself. For
if the heart of a father and mother could be brought to such a point
as to give up their child to the judge before the community of the
nation, everything would have been done that a judge would need
to know " (Schnett, d. isr. Becht, p. 11). — On ver. 216, cf. chap. xiii.
6 and 12.
Vers. 22 and 23. Burial op those who had been hanged.
— If there was -a. sin upon a man, DID BBKT3, lit. a right of death,
i.e. a capital crime (cf. chap. xix. 6 and xxii. 26), and he was put
to death, and they hanged him upon a tree (wood), his body was
not to remain upon the wood over night, but they were to bury him
on the same day upon which he was hanged ; "for the /tanged man
is a curse of God," and they were not to defile the land which
Jehovah gave for an inheritance. The hanging, not of criminals
who were to be put to death, but of those who had been executed
with the sword, was an intensification of the punishment of death
(see at Num. xxv. 4), inasmuch as the body was thereby exposed to
peculiar kinds of abominations. Moses commanded the burial of
those who had been hanged upon the day of their execution, — that is
to say, as we may see from the application of this law in Josh. viii.
, 29, x. 26, 27, before sunset, — because the hanged man, being a curse
of God, defiled the land. The land was defiled not only by vices
and crimes (cf. Lev. xviii. 24, 28; Num. xxxv. 34), but also by the
exposure to view of criminals who had been punished with death,
and, thus had been smitten by the curse of God, inasmuch as their
shameful deeds were thereby publicly exposed to view. We are
not to think of any bodily defilement of the land through the de-
composition consequent upon death, as J. D. Mich, and Sornmer
suppose ; so that there is no ground for speaking of any discre-
pancy between this and the old law. — (On the application of this
law to Christ, see Gal. iii. 13.) — This regulation is appended very
loosely to what precedes. The link of connection is contained in
the thought, that with the punishment of the wicked the recollec-
tion of their crimes was also to be removed.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXII. 1-12. 409
The Duty to love one's Neighbour ; and Warning against a Violation
of the Natural Order of Things. Instructions to sanctify the
Marriage State. — Chap. xxii.
Going deeper and deeper into the manifold relations of the
national life, Moses first of all explains in vers. 1-12 the attitude of
an Israelite, on the one hand, towards a neighbour ; and, on the
other hand, towards the natural classification and arrangement of
things, and shows how love should rule in the midst of all these
relations. The different relations brought under consideration are
selected rather by way of examples, and therefore follow one
another without any link of connection, for the purpose of ex-
hibiting the truth in certain concrete cases, and showing how the
covenant people were to hold all the arrangements of God sacred,
whether in nature or in social life.
Vers. 1-12. In vers. 1-4 Moses shows, by a still further expan-
sion of Ex. xxiii. 4, 5, how the property of a neighbour was to be
regarded and preserved. If any man saw an ox or a sheep of his
brother's (fellow-countryman) going astray, he was not to draw
back from it, but to bring it back to his brother ; and if the owner
lived at a distance, or was unknown, he was to take it into his own
house or farm, till he came to seek it. He was also to do the same
with an ass or any other property that another had lost. — Ver. 4.
A fallen animal belonging to another he was also to help up (as in
Ex. xxiii. 5 : except that in this case, instead of a brother generally,
an enemy or hater is mentioned). — Ver. 5. As the property of a
neighbour was to be sacred in the estimation of an Israelite, so also
the divine distinction of the sexes, which was kept sacred in civil life
by the clothing peculiar to each sex, was to be not less but even more
sacredly observed. " There shall not be man's things upon a woman,
and a man sliall not put on a woman's clothes" y3 does not signify
clothing merely, nor arms only, but includes every kind of domestic
and other utensils (as in Ex. xxii. 6 ; Lev. xi. 32, xiii. 49). The
immediate design of this prohibition was not to prevent licentious-
ness, or to oppose idolatrous practices (the proofs which Spencer has
adduced of the existence of such usages among heathen nations are
very- far-fetched) ; but to maintain the sanctity of that distinction
of the sexes which was established by the creation of man and
woman, and in relation to which Israel was not to sin. Every viola-
tion or wiping out of this distinction — such even, for example, as the
emancipation of a woman — was unnatural, and therefore an abomi-
Digitized by
Google
410 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
nation in the sight of God. — Vers. 6, 7. The affectionate relation
of parents to their young, which God had established even in the
animal world, was also to be kept just as sacred. If any one found
a bird's nest by the road upon a tree, or upon the ground, with
young ones or eggs, and the mother sitting upon them, he was not
to take the mother with the young ones, but to let the mother fly,
and only take the young. K*ip3 for rnpj, as in Ex. v. 3. The com-
mand is related to the one in Lev. xxii. 28 and Ex. xxiii. 19, and
is placed upon a par with the commandment relating to parents, by
the fact that obedience is urged upon the people by the same pro-
mise in both instances (yid. chap. v»16 ; Ex. xx. 12). — Ver. 8. Still
less were they to expose human life to danger through carelessness.
" If thou build a new house, make a rim (maakeh) — i.e. a balus-
trade — to thy roof, that thou bring not blood-guiltiness upon thy house,
if any one fall from it" The roofs of the Israelitish houses were
flat, as they mostly are in the East, so that the inhabitants often
lived upon them (Josh. ii. 6 ; 2 Sam. xi. 2 ; Matt. x. 27). — In vers.
9—11, there follow several prohibitions against mixing together the
things which are separated in God's creation, consisting partly of a
verbal repetition of Lev. xix. 19 (see the explanation of this pas-
sage). — To this there is appended in ver. 12 the law concerning the
tassels upon the hem of the upper garment (Num. xv. 37 sqq.),
which were to remind the Israelites of their calling, to walk before
the Lord in faithful fulfilment of the commandments of God (see
the commentary upon this passage).
Vers. 13-29. Laws op Chastity and Mabriage. — Higher
and still holier than the order of nature stands the moral order of
marriage, upon which the well-being not only of domestic life, but
also of the civil commonwealth of nations, depends. Marriage must
be founded upon fidelity and chastity on the part of those who are
married. To foster this, and secure it against outbreaks of malice
and evil lust, was the design and object of the laws which follow.
The first (vers. 13-21) relates to the chastity of a woman on enter-
ing into the married state, which might be called in question by her
husband, either from malice or with justice. The former case is
that which Moses treats of first of all. If a man took a wife, and
came to her, and hated her, i.e. turned against her after gratifying
his carnal desires (like Amnon, for example, 2 Sam. xiii. 15), and
in order to get rid of her again, attributed u deeds or things of
words" to her, i.e. things which give occasion for words or talk, and
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXII. 13-29. 411
so brought an evil name upon her, saying, that on coming to her he
did not find virginity in her. DWI3, virginity, here the signs of it,
viz., according to ver. 17, the marks of a first intercourse upon the
bed-clothes or dress. — Vers. 15 sqq. In such a case the parents of
the young woman (">Jf!? for 'TJJfSii, as in Gen. xxiv. 14, 28, accord-
ing to the earliest usage of the books of- Moses, a virgin, then also
a young woman, e$. Ruth ii. 6, iv. 12) were to bring the matter
before the elders of the town into the gate (the judicial forum ; see
chap. xxi. 19), and establish the chastity and innocence of their
daughter by spreading the bed-clothes before them. It was not
necessary to this end that the parents should have taken possession
of the spotted bed-clothes directly after the marriage night, as is
customarily done by the Bedouins and the lower classes of the Mos-
lem in Egypt and Syria (cf. Niebuhr, Beschr. v. Arab. pp. 35 sqq. ;
Arvieux, merkw. Nachr. iii. p. 258 ; Burckhardt, Beduinen, p. 214,
etc.). It was sufficient that the cloth should be kept, in case such a
proof might be required. — Vers. 18 sqq. The elders, as the magis-
trates of the place, were then to send for the man who had so
calumniated his young wife, and to chastise him (">E>?, as in chap,
xxi. 18, used to denote bodily chastisement, though the limitation
of the number of strokes to forty save one, may have been a later
institution of the schools) ; and in addition to this they were to im-
pose a fine upon him of 100 shekels of silver, which he was to pay
to the father of the young wife for his malicious calumniation of an
Israelitish maiden, — twice as much as the seducer of a virgin was
to pay to her father for the reproach brought upon him by the
humiliation of his daughter (ver. 29); and lastly, they were to
deprive the man of the right of divorce from his wife. — Vers. 20,
21. In the other case, however, if the man's words were true, and
the girl had not been found to be a virgin, the elders were to bring
her out before the door of her father's house, and the men of the
town were to stone her to death, because she had committed a folly
in Israel (cf . Gen. xxxiv. 7), to commit fornication in her father's
house. The punishment of death was to be inflicted upon her, not
so much because she had committed fornication, as because not-
withstanding this she had allowed a man to marry her as a spotless
virgin, and possibly even after her betrothal had gone with another
man (cf . vers. 23, 24). There is no ground for thinking of unna-
tural wantonness, as Knobel does. — Ver. 22. If any one lay with a
married woman, they were both of them to be put to death as adul-
terers (cf. Lev. xx. 10).
Digitized by
Google
412 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Vers. 23-29. In connection with the seduction of a virgin (">??,
puella, a marriageable girl ; !wB, virgo immaculate, a virgin), two,
or really three, cases are distinguished ; viz. (1) whether she was
betrothed (vers. 23-27), or not betrothed (vers. 28, 29) ; (2) if she
were betrothed, whether it was (a) in the town (vers. 23, 24) or
(b) in the open field (vers. 25—27) that she had been violated by a
man. — Vers. 23, 24. If a betrothed virgin had allowed a man to
have intercourse with her (»'.«. one who was not her bridegroom),
they were both of them, the man and the girl, to be led out to the
gate of the town, and stoned that they might die : the girl, because
she had not cried in the city, i.e. had not called for help, and con-
sequently was to be regarded as consenting to the deed ; the man,
because he had humbled his neighbour's wife. The betrothed
woman was placed in this respect upon a par with a married woman,
and in fact is expressly called a wife in ver. 24. Betrothal was
the first step towards marriage, even if it was not a solemn act
attested by witnesses. Written agreements of marriage were not
introduced till a later period (Tobit vii. 14 ; Tr. Ketuboth i. 2). —
Vers. 25-27. If, on the other hand, a man met a betrothed girl in
the field, and laid hold of her and lay with her, the man alone was
to die, and nothing was to be done to the girl. " There is in the
damsel no death-sin (i.e. no sin to be punished with death) ; but as
when a man riseth against his neighbour and slayeth him, even so is
this matter." In the open field the girl had called for help, but no
one had helped her. It was therefore a forcible rape.— Vers. 28,
29. The last case : if a virgin was not betrothed, and a man seized
her and lay with her, and they were found, i.e. discovered or con-
victed of their deed, the man was to pay the father of the girl fifty
shekels of silver, for the reproach brought upon him and his house,
and to marry the girl whom he had humbled, without ever being
able to divorce her. This case is similar to the one mentioned in
Ex. xxii. 15, 16. The omission to mention the possibility of the
father refusing to give him his daughter for a wife, makes no essen-
tial difference. It is assumed as self-evident here, that such a right
was possessed by the father.
Ver. 30 (or chap, xxiii. 1). This verse, in which the prohibition
of incest is renewed by a repetition of the first provision in the
earlier law (Lev. xviii. 7, 8), is no doubt much better adapted to
form the close of the laws of chastity and marriage, than the intro-
duction to the laws which follow concerning the right of citizenship
in the congregation of the Lord.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIII. 1-8. 413
Regulations as to the Right of Citizenship in the Congregation of the
Lord. — Chap, xxiii.
From the sanctification of the house and the domestic relation,
to which the laws of marriage and chastity in the previous chapter
pointed, Moses proceeds to instructions concerning the sanctification
of their union as a congregation : he gives directions as to the exclu-
sion of certain persons from the congregation of the Lord, and the
reception of others into it (vers. 1-8) ; as to the preservation of the
purity of the camp in time of war (vers. 9-14) ; as to the reception
of foreign slaves into the land, and the removal of licentious persons
out of it (vers. 15-18) ; and lastly, as to certain duties of citizen-
ship (19-25).
Vers. 1-8. The Eight of Citizenship in the Congrega-
tion of the Lord. — Ver. 1. Into the congregation of the Lord
there was not to come, i.e. not to he received, any person who was
mutilated in his sexual member. nj^TRVB, literally wounded by
crushing, i.e. mutilated in this way; Vulg. eunitchus attritis ml
arnputatis testicuUs. Not only animals (see at Lev. xxii. 24), but
men also, were castrated in this way. n ?wf WO was one whose
sexual member was cut off-; Vulg. abscisso veretro. According to
Mishnah Jebam. vi. 2, " contusus HOT est omnis, eujus testiculi vul-
nerati sunt, vel eerie unus eorutn; exsecius (WO), cujus membrum
virile prcecisum est." In the modern East, emasculation is generally
performed in this way (see Tournefort, Raise, ii. p. 259, and Burck-
hardt, Nubien, pp. 450, 451). The reason for the exclusion of
emasculated persons from the congregation of Jehovah, i.e. not
merely from office (officio et publico magistratu, Luth.) and from
marriage with an Israelitish woman (Fag., C. a Lap., and others),
but from admission- into the covenant fellowship of Israel with the
Lord) is to be found in the mutilation of the nature of. man as
created by God, which was irreconcilable with the character of the
people of God. Nature is not destroyed by grace, but sanctified
and transformed. This law, however, was one of the ordinances
intended for the period of infancy, and has lost its significance with
the spread of the kingdom of God over all the nations of the earth
(Isa. lvi. 4). — Ver. 2. So also with the "iM?D, i.e. not persons begot-
ten out of wedlock, illegitimate children generally (LXX., Vulg.),
but, according to the Talmud and the Rabbins, those who were
begotten in incest or adultery (cf. Ges. thee. p. 781). The etymology
Digltizi
ed by Google
414 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
of the word is obscure. The only other place in which it occurs is
Zech. ix. 6 ; and it is neither contracted from WO and ">{ (according
to the Talmud, and Hitzig on Zech. ix. 6), nor from it Dltt? (Geiger
Urschr. p. 52), but in all probability is to be derived from a root TO,
synonymous with the Arabic word " to be corrupt, or foul." The
additional clause, " not even in the tenth generation" precludes all
possibility of their ever being received. Ten is the number of com-
plete exclusion. In ver. 3, therefore, "for ever" is added. The
reason is the same as in the case of mutilated persons, namely, their
springing from a connection opposed to the divine order of the crea-
tion. — Vers. 3—6. Also no Ammonite or Moabite was to be received,
not even in the tenth generation ; not, however, because their fore-
fathers were begotten in incest (Gen. xix. 30 sqq.), as Knohel sup-
poses, but on account of the hostility they had manifested to the
establishment of the kingdom of God. Not only had they failed to
give Israel a hospitable reception on its journey (see at chap. ii. 29),
but they (viz. the king of the Moabites)had even hired Balaam to
curse Israel. In this way they had brought upon themselves the
curse which falls upon all those who curse Israel, according to the
infallible word of God (Gen. xii. 3), the truth of which even
Balaam was obliged to attest in the presence of Balak (Num. xriv.
9) ; although out of love to Israel the Lord turned the curse of
Balaam into a blessing (cf. Num. xxii.-xxiv.). • For this reason
Israel was never to seek their welfare and prosperity, i.e. to make
this an object of its care (" to seek," as in Jer. xxix. 7) ; not indeed
from personal hatred, for the purpose of repaying evil with evil,
since this neither induced Moses to publish the prohibition, nor in-
stigated Ezra when he put the law in force, by compelling the sepa-
ration of all Ammonitish, Moabitish, and Canaanitish wives from
the newly established congregation in Jerusalem (Ezra ix. 12). How
far Moses was from being influenced by such motives of personal
or national revenge is evident, apart from the prohibition in chap.
ii. 9 and 19 against making war upon the Moabites and Am-
monites, from the command which follows in vers. 8 and 9 with
reference to the Edomites and Egyptians. These nations had also
manifested hostility to the Israelites. Edom had come against them
when they desired to march peaceably through his land (Num. n.
18 sqq.), and the Pharaohs of Egypt had heavily oppressed them.
Nevertheless, Israel was to keep the bond of kindred sacred ("he
is thy brother"), and not to forget in the case of the Egyptians the
benefits derived from their sojourn in their land. Their children
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIII. 9-18. 415
might come into the congregation of the Lord in the third gene-
ration, i.e. the great-grandchildren of Edomites or Egyptians, who
had lived as strangers in Israel (see at Ex. xx. 5). Such persons
might he incorporated into the covenant nation by circumcision.
Vers. 9-14. Preservation op the Purity op the Camp in
Time op War. — The bodily appearance of the people was also to
correspond to the sacredness of Israel as the congregation of the
Lord, especially when they gathered in hosts around their God.
" When thou marchest out as a camp against thine enemies, beware of
every evil thing" What is meant by an " evil thing " is stated in
vers. 10-13, viz. uncleanness, and uncleanliness of the body. — Vers.
10, 11. The person who had become unclean through a nightly
occurrence, was to go out of the camp and remain there till he had
cleansed himself in the evening. On the journey through the
desert, none but those who were affected with uncleanness of a longer
duration were to be removed from the camp (Num. v. 2); but when
they were encamped, this law was to apply to even lighter defile-
ments. — Vers. 12, 13. The camp of war was also not to be defiled
with the dirt of excrements. Outside the camp there was to be a
space or place (T, as in Num. ii. 17) for the necessities of nature,
and among their implements they were to have a spade, with which
they were to dig when they sate down, and then cover it up again.
*UV, generally a plug, here a tool for sticking in, i.e. for digging into
the ground. — Ver. 14. For the camp was to be (to be kept) holy,
because Jehovah walked in the midst of it, in order that He might
not see " nakedness of a thing" i.e. anything to be ashamed of (see
at chap. xxiv. 1) in the people, " and turn away from tliee." There
was nothing shameful in the excrement itself; but the want of
reverence, which the people would display through not removing
it, would offend the Lord and drive Him out of the camp of Israel.
Vera. 15-18. Toleration and Non-toleration in the
Congregation op the Lord. — Vers. 15, 16. A slave who had
escaped from his master to Israel was not to be given up, but to be
allowed to dwell in the land, wherever he might choose, and not to
be oppressed. The reference is to a slave who had fled to them
from a foreign country, on account of the harsh treatment which
he had received from his heathen master. The plural Wp* de-
notes the rule. — Vers. 17, 18. On the other hand, male and female
prostitutes of Israelitish descent were not to be tolerated ; i.e. it was
Digitized by
Google
416 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
not to be allowed, that either a male or female among the Israelites
should give himself up to prostitution as an act of religious worship.
The exclusion of foreign prostitutes was involved in the command
to root out the Canaanites. EH|? and HEhp were persons who pro-
stituted themselves in the worship of the Canaanitish Astarte (see
at Gen. xxxviii. 21). — " The wages of a prostitute and the' money of
dogs shall not come into the house of the Lord on account of (?. for
the more remote cause, Ewald, § 217) any vow; for even both thete
(viz. even the prostitute and dog, not merely their dishonourable
gains) are abomination unto the Lord thy God" " The hire of a
whore" is what the kedeshah was paid for giving herself up. "The
price of a dog " is not the price paid for the sale of a dog (Bochart,
Spencer, Iken, JBaumgarten, etc.), but is a figurative expression used
to denote the gains of the kadesh, who was called KivaiZos by the
Greeks, and received his name from the dog-like manner in which
the male kadesh debased himself (see Rev. xxii. 15, where the
unclean are distinctly called " dogs ").
Vers. 19-25. Different Theocratic Eights of Citizen-
ship. — Vers. 19, 20. Of his brother (i.e. his countryman), the
Israelite was not to take interest for money, food, or anything eke
that he lent to him ; but only of strangers (non-Israelites : cf. Ex.
xxii. 24 and Lev. xxv. 36, 37). — Vers. 21-23. Vows vowed to the
Lord were to be fulfilled without delay ; but omitting to vow was
not a sin. (On vows themselves, see at Lev. xxvii. and Num. xn.
2 sqq.) n3"l3 is an accusative defining the meaning more fully : in
free will, spontaneously. — Vers. 24, 25. In the vineyard and corn-
field of a neighbour they might eat at pleasure to still their hunger,
but they were not to put anything into a vessel, or swing a sickle
upon another's corn, that is to say, carry away any store <Jf grapes
or ears of corn. I?'???, according to thy desire, or appetite (cf.
chap. xiv. 26). " Pluck the ears:" cf. Matt. xii. 1 ; Luke vi. 1 —
The right of hungry persons, when passing through a field, to pluck
ears of corn, and rub out the grains and eat, is still recognised
' among the Arabs (vid. Rob. Pal. ii. 192).
On Divorce. Warnings against want of Affection or Injustice.—
Chap. xxiv.
Vers. 1-5 contain two laws concerning the relation of a man to
his wife. The first (vers. 1-4) has reference to divorce. In these
verses, however, divorce is not established as a right; all that is
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIV. 1-& 417
done is, that in case of a divorce a reunion with the divorced wife
is forbidden, if in the meantime she had married another man,
even though the second husband' had also put her away, or had
died. The fonr verses form a period, in which vers. 1-3 are the
clauses of the protasis, which describe the matter treated about ;
and ver. 4 contains the apodosis, with the law concerning the point
in question. If a man married a wife, and he" put her away with a
letter of divorce, because she did not please him any longer, and
the divorced woman married another man, and he either put her
away in the same manner or died, the first husband could not take
her as his wife again. The putting away (divorce) of a wife with
a letter of divorce, which the husband gave to the wife whom be •
put away, is assumed as a custom founded upon tradition. This
tradition left the question of divorce entirely at the will of the
husband : "if the wife does not find favour in his eyes (i.e. does not
please him), because he has found in her something shameful" (chap,
xxiii. 15). <wy>, nakedness, shame, disgrace (Isa. xx. 4 ; 1 Sam.
xx. 30) ; in connection with 13*, the shame of a thing, i.e. a shame-
ful thing (LXX. aa^fiov irparffw,; Vulg. aliquant foetiditatem).
The meaning of this expression as a ground of divorce was dis-
puted even among the Rabbins. HUleVs school interpret it in the
widest and mest lax manner possible, according to the explanation
of the Pharisees in Matt. xix. 8, "for every cause." They no
doubt followed the rendering of, Onkelos, DJJTB nvap, the transgres-
sion of a thing ; but this is contrary to the use of the word nj"}P, to
which the interpretation given by Shammai adhered more strictly.
His explanation of *£n Tfnv is "rem impudieam, Kbidinem, lasciviam,
impudicitiam" Adultery, to which some of the Rabbins would
restrict the expression, is certainly not to be thought of, because
this was to be punished with death. 1 AWna *>BE?, fSiffrdov amo-
trrao-lov, a letter of divorce ; nn v i3, hewing off, cutting off, se. from
the man, with whom the wife was to be one flesh (Gen. ii. 24).
The custom of giving letters of divorce was probably adopted by
the Israelites in Egypt, where the practice of writing had already
found its way into all the relations of life. 8 The law that the first
husband could not take his divorced wife back again, if she had
1 For the different views of the Rabbins upon this subject, see Mishnah
tract. Gittinix. 10; Buxtorf, de sponsal et divort. pp. 88 sqq.; Selden, uxor ebr.
1. iii. c. 18 and 20 ; and Lightfoot, horee ebr. et talm. ad Matth. v. 31 sq.
1 The rabbinical rules on the grounds of divorce and the letter of divorce,
according to Maimonides, have been collected by Surenhusius, ad Mishn. tr.
PENT. — VOL. III. 2 D
Digitized by
Google
418 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
married another husband in the meantime, even supposing that the
second husband was dead, would necessarily put a check upon
frivolous divorces. Moses could not entirely abolish the traditional
custom, if only "because of the hardness of the people's hearts"
(Matt. xix. 8). The thought, therefore, of the impossibility of
reunion with the first husband, after the wife had contracted a
second marriage, would put some restraint upon a frivolous rupture
of the marriage tie : it would have this effect, that whilst, on the
one hand, the man would reflect when inducements to divorce his
wife presented themselves, and would recall a rash act if it had
been performed, before the wife he had put away had married
another husband ; on the other hand, the wife would yield more
readily to the will of her husband, and seek to avoid furnishing
him with an inducement for divorce. But this effect would be still
more readily produced by the reason assigned by Moses, namely,
that the divorced woman was defiled (HKDtari, Hoihpael, as in Num.
i» 47) by her marriage with a second husband. The second
marriage of a woman who had been divorced is designated by
Moses a defilement of the woman, primarily no doubt with refer-
ence to the fact that the emissio seminis in sexual intercourse
rendered unclean, though not merely in the sense of such a defile-
ment as was removed in- the evening by simple washing, but as a
moral defilement, i.e. blemishing, desecration of the sexual com-
munion which was sanctified by marriage, in the same sense in
which adultery is called a defilement in Lev. xviii. 20 and Num.
v. 13, 14. Thus the second marriage of a divorced woman was
placed implicite upon a par with adultery, and some approach
made towards the teaching of Christ concerning marriage : " Who-
soever shall marry her that is divorced, committeth adultery" (Matt.
v. 32). — But if the second marriage of a divorced woman was a
moral defilement, of course the wife could not marry the first again
even after the death of her second husband, not only because such
a reunion would lower the dignity of the woman, and the woman
would appear too much like property, which could be disposed of
at one time and reclaimed at another (Schultz), but because the
defilement of the wife would be thereby repeated, and even in-
creased, as the moral defilement which the divorced wife acquired
through the second marriage was not removed by a divorce from
the second husband, nor yet by his death. Such defilement was
Gittin, c. 1 (T. iii. pp. 822 sq. of the Mishnali of Sur.), where different specimens
of letters of divorce are given ; the latter also in Lightfoot, I.e.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIV. 6-9. 419
an abomination before Jehovah, by which they would cause the
land to sin, i.e. stain it with sin, as much as by the sins of incest
and unnatural licentiousness (Lev. xviii. 25).
Attached to this law, which is intended to prevent a frivolous
severance of the marriage tie, there is another in ver. 5, which was
of a more positive character, and adapted to fortify the marriage
bond. The newly married man was not required to perform
military service for a whole year ; " and there shall not come (any-
thing) upon him with regard to any matter" The meaning of this
last clause is to be found in what follows : " Free shall he be for
his house for a year" i.e. they shall put no public burdens upon
him, that he may devote himself entirely to his newly established
domestic relations, and be able to gladden his wife (compare chap.
xx. 7).
Vers. 6-9. Various Prohibitions. — Ver. 6. " No man shall take
in pledge the handmill and millstone, for he (who does this) is
pawning life." BW, the handmill; 33T, lit. the runner, i.e. the
upper millstone. Neither the whole mill nor the upper millstone
was to be asked for as a pledge, by which the mill would be
rendered useless, since the handmill was indispensable for prepar-
ing the daily food for the house ; so that whoever took them away
injured life itself, by withdrawing what was indispensable to the
preservation of life. The mill is mentioned as one specimen of
articles of this kind, like the clothing in Ex. xxii. 25, 26, which
served the poor man as bed-clothes also. Breaches of this com-
mandment are reproved in Amos ii. 8 ; Job xxii. 6 ; Prov. xx. 16,
xxii. 27, xxvii. 19. — Ver. 7. Repetition of the law against man-
stealing (Ex. xxi. 16). — Vers. 8, 9. The command, " Take heed by
the plague of leprosy to observe diligently and to do according to all
that the priests teach thee" etc., does not mean, that when they saw
signs of leprosy they were to be upon their guard, to observe every-
thing that the priests directed them, as Knobel and many others
suppose. For, in the first place, the reference to the punishment
of Miriam with leprosy is by no means appropriate to such a
thought as this, since Miriam did not act in opposition to the
priests after she had been smitten with leprosy, but brought leprosy
upon herself as a punishment, by . her rebellion against Moses
(Num. xii. 10 sqq.). And in the second place, this view cannot
"be reconciled with W?3 " M ??' ! ! , } since I?!''? with 3, either to be upon
one's guard against (before) anything (2 Sam. xx. 10), or when
taken in connection with E'Mf, to beware by the soul, i.e. for the
Digitized by
Google
420 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
sake of the worth of the soul (Jer. xvii. 21). The thought here,
therefore, is, " Be on thy guard because of the plague of leprosy,"
i.e. that thou dost not get it,- have to bear it, as the reward for thy
rebellion against what the priests teach according to the command-
ment of the Lord. " Watch diligently, that thou do not incur the
plague of leprosy" (Vulgate) ; or, u that thou do not sio, so as to be
punished with leprosy" (J. H. Michaelis).
Vers. 10-15. Warning against oppressing the Poor. — Vers. 10,
11. If a loan of any kind was lent to a neighbour, the lender was
not to go into his house to pledge (take) a pledge, but was to let the
borrower bring the pledge out. The meaning is, that they were to
leave it to the borrower to give a pledge, and not compel him to
give up something as a. pledge that might be indispensable to him.
— Vers. 12, 13. And if the man was in distress (^V), the lender was
not to lie (sleep) upon his pledge, since the poor man had very often
nothing but his upper garment, in which he slept, to give as a pledge.
This was to be returned to him in the evening. (A repetition of
Ex. xxii. 25, 26.) On the expression, " it shall be righteousness
unto thee," see chap. vi. 25. — Vers. 14, 15. They were not to
oppress a poor and distressed labourer, by withholding his wages.
This command is repeated here from Lev. xix. 13, with special
reference to the distress of the poor man. "And to it (his wages)
he lifts up his soul:" i.e. he feels a longing for it. " Lifts up his
soul :" as in Ps. xxiv. 4; Hos. iv. 8; Jer. xxii. 27. On ver. 154,
see chap. xv. 9 and Jas. v. 4.
Vers. 16-18. Warning against Injustice. — Ver. 16. Fathers were
not to be put to death upon (along with) their sons, nor sons upon
(along with) their fathers, i.e. tbey were not to suffer the punishment
of death with them for crimes in which they had no share ; but every
one was to be punished simply for his own sin. This command was
important, to prevent an unwarrantable and abusive application of
the law which is manifest in the movements of divine justice to
the criminal jurisprudence of the land (Ex. xx. 5), since it was a
common thing among heathen nations — e.g. the Persians, Mace-
donians, and others — for the children and families of criminals to be
also put to death (cf. Esther ix. 13, 14 ; Herod, iii. 19 ; Ammian
Marcell. xxiii. 6 ; Curtius, vi. 11, 20, etc.). An example of the
carrying out of this law is to be found in 2 Kings xiv. 6, 2 Chron.
xxv. 4. In vers. 17, 18, the law against perverting the right of
strangers, orphans, and widows, is repeated from Ex. xxii. 20, 21,
and xxiii. 9 ; and an addition is made, namely, that they were not
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXV. 1-8. 421
to take a widow's raiment in pledge (cf. Lev.'xix. 33, 34). — Vers.
19—22. Directions to allow strangers, widows, and orphans to glean
in time of harvest (as in Lev. xix.-9, 10, andxxiii. 22). The reason
is given in ver. 22, viz. the same as in ver. 18 and chap. xv. 15.
Laws relating to Corporal Punishment ; Levirate Marriages ; and
Just Weights and Measures. — Chap. xxv.
Vers. 1-3. Corporal Punishment. — The rule respecting the
corporal punishment to be inflicted upon a guilty man is introduced
in ver. 1 with the general law, that in a dispute between two men
the court was to give right to the man who was right, and to pro-
nounce the guilty man guilty (cf. Ex. xxii. 8 and xxiii. 7). — Ver. 2. If
the guilty man was sentenced to stripes, he was to receive his punish-
ment in the presence of the judge, and not more than forty stripes,
that he might not become contemptible in the eyes of the people,
ntan JBj son of stripes, t\e. a man liable to stripes, like son (child)
of death) in 1 Sam. xx. 31. " According to the need of his crime in
number," i.e. as many stripes as his crime deserved. — Ver. 3. " Forty
shall ye beat him, and not add," i.e. at most forty stripes, and not
more. The strokes were administered with a stick upon the back
(Prov. x. 13, xix. 29, xxvi. 3, etc.). This was the Egyptian mode
of whipping, as we may see depicted upon the monuments, when the
culprits lie fiat upon the ground, and being held fast by the hands
and feet, receive their strokes in the presence of the judge {vid.
Wilkinson, ii. p. 11, and Jtosellini, ii. 3, p. 274, 78). The number
forty was not to be exceeded, because a larger number of strokes
with a stick would not only endanger health and life, but disgrace
the man : " that thy brother do not become contemptible in thine eyes."
If he had deserved a severer punishment, he was to be executed.
In Turkey the punishments inflicted are much more severe, viz.
from fifty to a hundred lashes with a whip ; and they are at the
same time inhuman (see v. Tornauw, Moslem. Recht, p. 234). The
number, forty, was probably chosen with reference to its symbolical
significance, which it had derived from Gen. vii. 12 onwards, as the
full measure of judgment. The Rabbins fixed the number at forty
save one (vid. 2 Cor. xi. 24), from a scrupulous fear of transgressing
the letter of the law, in case a mistake should be made in the
counting ; yet they felt no conscientious scruples about using a whip
of twisted thongs instead of a stick (vid. tract. Mace. iii. 12 ; Buxtorf,
Synag. Jud. pp. 522-3; and Lundius, Jud. HeiUgth. p. 472). — Ver. 4.
The command not to put a muzzle upon the ox when threshing, is
Digitizi
ed by Google
422 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
no doubt proverbial in its nature, and even in the context before us
is not intended to apply merely literally to an ox employed in thresh-
ing, but to be understood in the general sense in which the Apostle
Paul uses it in 1 Cor. ix. 9 and 1 Tim. v. 18, viz. that a labourer
was not to be deprived of his wages. As the mode of threshing
presupposed here — namely, with oxen yoked together, and driven
to and fro over the corn that had been strewn upon the floor, that
they might kick out the grains with their hoofs — has been retained
to the present day in the East, so has also the custom of leaving
the animals employed in threshing without a muzzle (yid. ffoest,
Marokos, p. 129; Wellst. ^.rabien, i. p. 194; Robinson, Pal. ii.
pp. 206-7, iii. p. 6), although the Mosaic injunctions are not so
strictly observed by the Christians as by the Mohammedans (Kobin-
son, ii. p. 207).
Vers. 5-10. On Levirate Marriages. — Vers. 5, 6. If
brothers lived together, and one of them died childless, the wife
of the deceased was not to be married outside (i.e. away from the
family) to a strange man (one not belonging to her kindred) ; her
brother-in-law was to come to her and take her for his wife, and
perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her. D|J, denotn. from
D3J, a brother-in-law, husband's brother, lit. to act the brother-in-
law, i.e. perform the duty of a brother-in-law, which consisted in
his marrying his deceased brother's widow, and begetting a son or
children with her, the first-born of whom was " to stand upon the
name of his deceased brother," i.e. be placed in the family of the
deceased, and be recognised as the heir of his property, that his
name (the name of the man who had died childless) might not be
wiped out or vanish out of Israel. The provision, "without having
a son" (ben), has been correctly interpreted by the LXX., Vvlg.,
Josephus (Ant. iv. 8, 23), and the Rabbins, as signifying childless
(having no seed, Matt. xxii. 25) ; for if the deceased had simply a
daughter, according to Num. xxvii. 4 sqq., the perpetuation of his
house and name was to be ensured through her. The obligation
of a brother-in-law's marriage only existed in cases where the
brothers had lived together, i.e. in one and the same place, not
necessarily in one house or with a common domestic establishment
and home (yid. Gen. xiii. 6, xxxvi. 7). — This custom of a brother-
in-law's (Levirate) marriage, which is met with in different nations,
and was an old traditional custom among the Israelites (see at Gen.
xxxviii. 8 sqq.), had its natural roots in the desire inherent in man,
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXV. 5-10. 423
who is formed for immortality, and connected with the hitherto
undeveloped belief in an eternal life, to secure a continued personal
existence for himself and immortality for his name, through the
perpetuation of his family and in the life of the son who took his
place. This desire was not suppressed in Israel by divine revela-
tion, but rather increased, inasmuch as the promises given to the
patriarchs were bound up with the preservation and propagation of
their seed and name. The promise given to Abraham for his seed
would of necessity not only raise the begetting of children in the
religious views of the Israelites into a work desired by God and
well-pleasing to Him, but would also give this significance to the
traditional custom of preserving the name and family by the sub-
stitution of a marriage of duty, that they would thereby secure to
themselves and their family a share in the blessing of promise.
Moses therefore recognised this custom as perfectly justifiable ; but
he sought to restrain it within such limits, that it should not pre-
sent any impediment to the sanctification of marriage aimed at by
the law. He took away the compulsory character, which it hitherto
possessed, by prescribing in vers. 7 sqq., that if the surviving brother
refused to marry his widowed sister-in-law, she was to bring the
matter into the gate before the elders of the town (vid. chap. xxi.
19), i.e. before the magistrates ; and if the brother-in-law still per-
sisted in his refusal, she was to take his shoe from off his foot and
spit in his face, with these words : " So let it be done to the man who
does not build up his brother's house." The taking off of the shoe
wa& an ancient custom in Israel, adopted, according to Euth iv. 7,
in cases of redemption and exchange, for the purpose of confirm-
ing commercial transactions. The usage arose from the fact, that
when any one took possession of landed property he did so by
treading upon the soil, and asserting his right of possession by
standing upon it in his shoes. In this way the taking off of the
shoe and handing it to another became a symbol of the renuncia-
tion of a man's position and property, — a symbol which was also
common among the Indians and the ancient Germans (see my
Archdologie, ii. p. 66). But the custom was an ignominious one
in such a case as this, when the shoe was publicly taken off the
foot of the brother-in-law by the widow whom he refused to marry.
He was thus deprived of the position which he ought to have
occupied in relation to her and to his deceased brother, or to his
paternal house ; and the disgrace involved in this was still further
heightened by the fact that his sister-in-law spat in his face. This
Digltizi
ed by Google
424 THE FIFTH BOOK OF HOSES.
is the meaning of the words (cf. Num. xii. 14), and not merely spit
on the ground before his eyes, as Saalschatz and others as well as the
Talmudists (tr. Jebam. xii. 6) render it, for the purpose of diminishing
the disgrace. " Build up his brotJter's Itouse" i.e. lay the foundation
of a family or posterity for him (cf. Gen. xvi. 2). — In addition to
this, the unwilling brother-in-law was to receive a name of ridicule
in Israel: "House of the shoe taken off" (-WIO T&U, taken off as to his
shoe ; cf . Ewald, § 288, b.), i.e. of the barefooted man, equivalent to
" the miserable fellow ;" for it was only in miserable circumstances
that the Hebrews went barefoot (vid. Isa. xx. 2, 3 ; Micah i. 8 ; 2
Sam. xv. 30). If the brother-in-law bore this reproach upon him-
self and his house, he was released from his duty as a brother-in-law.
By these regulations the brother-in-law's marriage was no doubt
recognised as a duty of affection towards his deceased brother, but it
was not made a command, the neglect of which would involve guilt
and punishment. Within these limits the brother-in-law's marriage
might co-exist with the prohibition of marriage with a brother's
wife; " whereas, if the deceased brother had a son or children,
such a marriage was forbidden as prejudicial to the fraternal rela-
tion. In cases where the deceased was childless, it was commanded
as a duty of affection for the building up of the brother's house,
and the preservation of his family and name. By the former pro-
hibition, the house (family) of the brother was kept in its integrity,
whilst by the latter command its permanent duration was secured.
In both cases the deceased brother was honoured, and the fraternal
affection preserved as the moral foundation of his house " {vid. my
Archdologie, pp. 64, 65).
Vers. 11 and 12. "But in order that the great independence
which is here accorded to a childless widow in relation to her
brother-in-law, might not be interpreted as a false freedom granted
to the female sex" (Baumgarten), the law is added immediately
afterwards, that a woman whose husband was quarrelling with
another, and who should come to his assistance by laying hold of
the secret parts of the man who was striking her husband, should
have her hand cut off.
Vers. 13-19. The duty of integrity in trade is once more en-
forced in vers. 13-16 (as in Lev. xix. 35, 36). " Stone and stone,"
i.e. two kinds of stones for weighing (cf. Ps. xii. 3), viz. large ones
for buying and small ones for selling. On the promise in ver. 156,
see chap. iv. 26, v. 16 ; ver. 16a, as in chap. xxii. 5, xviii. 12, etc.
In the concluding words, ver. 166, " all that do unrighteously" Moses
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVL 1-1L 425
sums up all breaches of the law. — Vers. 17-19, But whilst the
Israelites were to make love the guiding principle of their conduct
in their dealings with a neighbour, and even with strangers and
foes, this love was not to degenerate into weakness or indifference
towards open ungodliness. To impress this truth upon the people,
Moses concludes the discourse on the law by reminding them of the
crafty enmity manifested towards them by Amalek on their march
out of Egypt, and with the command to root out the Amalekites
(cf. Ex. xvii. 9-16). This heathen nation had come against Israel
on its journey, viz. at Eephidim in Horeb, and had attacked its
rear : " All the enfeebled behind thee, whilst thou 'wast faint and
weary, without fearing God." 3?t> &'*• to tail, hence to attack or
destroy the rear of an army or of a travelling people (cf. Josh. x.
19). For this reason, when the Lord should have given Israel rest
in the land of its inheritance, it was to root out the remembrance
of Amalek under heaven. (On the execution of this command, see
1 Sam. xv.) " Thou shalt not forget it ;" an emphatic enforcement
of the " remember" in ver. 17. .
Thanksgiving and Prayer at the Presentation of First-fruits and
Tithes. — Chap. xxvi.
To the exposition of the commandments and rights of Israel
Moses adds, in closing, another ordinance respecting those gifts,
which were most intimately connected with social and domestic life,
viz. the first-fruits and second tithes, for the purpose of giving the
proper consecration to the attitude of the nation towards its Lord
and God.
Vers. 1-11. Of the first of the fruit of the ground, which was
presented from the land received from the Lord, the Israelite was
to take a portion (JVBtoOD with ]? partitive), and bring it in a
basket to the place of the sanctuary, and give it to the priest who
should be there, with the words, " / have made known to-day to the
Lord thy God, that I lutve come into the land which the Lord swore
to our fathers to give us" upon which the priest should take the
basket and put it down before the altar of Jehovah (vers. 1-4).
From the partitive TtvfartD we cannot infer, as Schultz supposes,
that the first-fruits were not to be all delivered at the sanctuary,
any more than this can be inferred from Ex. xxiii. 19 (see the expla-
nation of this passage). All that is implied is, that, for the purpose
described afterwards, it was not necessary to put all the offerings of
first-fruits into a basket and set them down before the altar, tut?
Digitized by
Google
426 THE FIFTH BOOK OF HOSES.
(vers. 2, 4, and chap, xxviii. 5, 17) is a basket of wicker-work, and
not, as Knobel maintains, the Deuteronomist's word for rU-B? (Ex.
xvi. 33). u The priest" is not the high priest, but the priest who
had to attend to the altar-service and receive the sacrificial gifts. —
The words, " I have to-day made known to the Lord thy God,"
refer to the practical confession which was made by the presentation
of the first-fruits. The fruit was the tangible proof that they were
in possession of the land, and the presentation of the first of this
fruit the practical confession that they were indebted to the Lord
for the land. This confession the offerer was also to embody in a
prayer of thanksgiving, after the basket had been received by the
priest, in which he confessed that he and his people owed their
existence and welfare to the grace of God, manifested in the
miraculous redemption of Israel out of the oppression of Egypt
and their guidance into Canaan. — Ver. 5. ^K "UK ^^ "« lost
(perishing) Aramcean was my father" (not the Aramaean, Laban,
wanted to destroy my father, Jacob, as the Chald., Arab., Luther,
and others render it). "UK signifies not only going astray, wander-
ing, but perishing, in danger of perishing, as in Job xxix. 13, Prov.
xxxi. 6, etc. Jacob is referred to, for it was he who went down to
Egypt in few men. He is mentioned as the tribe-father of the
nation, because the nation was directly descended from his sons,
and also derived its name of Israel from him. Jacob is called an
Aramaean, not only because of his long sojourn in Aramaea (Gen.
xxix.- xxxi.), but also because he got his wives and children there
(cf. Hos. xii. 13) ; and the relatives of the patriarchs had accom-
panied Abraham from Chaldaea to Mesopotamia (Aram ; see Gen.
xi. 30). oyo 'npa, consisting of few men (a, the so-called betk
essent., as in chap. x. 22, Ex. vi. 3, etc. ; via". Ewald, § 299, q.).
Compare Gen. xxxiv. 30, where Jacob himself describes his family
as " few in number." On the number in the family that migrated
into Egypt, reckoned at seventy souls, see the explanation at Gen.
xlvi. 27. On the multiplication in Egypt into a great and strong
people, see Ex. i. 7, 9 ; and on the oppression endured there, Ex. i.
11-22, and ii. 23 sqq. — The guidance out of Egypt amidst great
signs (ver. 8), as in chap. iv. 34. — Ver. 10. " So shalt thou set U
down (the basket with the first-fruits) before Jehovah." These
words are not to be understood, as Clericus, Knobel, and others
suppose, in direct opposition to vers. 4 and 5, as implying that the
offerer had held the basket in his hand during the prayer, but simply
as a remark which closes the instructions. — Ver. 11. Rejoicing in
Digltizi
ed by Google
CHAP. XXVI. 12-16. 427
all the good, etc., points to the joy connected with the sacrificial
meal, which followed the act of worship (as in chap. xii. 12). The
presentation of the first-fruits took place, no doubt, on their pil-
grimages to the sanctuary at the three yearly festivals (chap, xvi.) ;
but it is quite without ground that Riehm restricts these words to
the sacrificial meals to be prepared from the tithes, as if they had
been the only sacrificial meals (see at chap, xviii. 3).
Vers. 12-15. The delivery of the tithes, like the presentation
of the first-fruits, was also to be sanctified by prayer before the
Lord. It is true that only a prayer after taking the second tithe
in the third year is commanded here ; but that is simply because
this tithe was appropriated everywhere throughout the land to festal
meals for the poor and destitute (chap. xiv. 28), when prayer before
the Lord would not follow per analogiam from the previous injunc-
tion concerning the presentation of first-fruits, as it would in the
case of the tithes with which sacrificial meals were prepared at the
sanctuary (chap. xiv. 22 sqq.). "ife'V? is the infinitive Hiphil for
nfc^n^ as in Neh. x. 39 (on this form, vid. Ges. § 53, 3 Anm. 2
and 7, and Ew. § 131, b. and 244, b.). " Saying before the Lord "
does not denote prayer in the sanctuary (at the tabernacle), but, as
in Gen. xxvii. 7, simply prayer before God the omnipresent One,
who is enthroned in heaven (ver. 15), and blesses His people from
above from His holy habitation. The declaration of having fulfilled
the commandments of God refers primarily to the directions con-
cerning the tithes, and was such a rendering of an account as
springs from the consciousness that a man very easily transgresses
the commandments of God, and has nothing in common with the
blindness of pharisaic self-righteousness. " / have cleaned out the
holy out of my house :" the holy is that which is sanctified to God,
that which belongs to the Lord and His servants, as in Lev. xxi. 22.
"i?3 signifies not only to remove, but to clean out, wipe out. That
which was sanctified to God appeared as a debt, which was to be
wiped out of a man's house (Schultz). — Ver. 14. " i" have not eaten
thereof in my sorrow." 'ife, from JW, tribulation, distress, signifies
here in all probability mourning, and judging from what follows,
mourning for the dead, equivalent to " in a mourning condition,"
i.e. in a state of legal (Levitical) uncleanness ; so that 'ita really
corresponded to the 8DB3 which follows, except that KDO includes
every kind of legal uncleanness. " I have removed nothing thereof
as unclean" i.e. while in the state of an unclean person. Not only
not eaten of any, but not removed any of it from the house, carried
Digitized by
Google
428 THE FIFTH BOOK OF HOSES.
it away in an unclean state, in which they were forbidden to touch
the holy gifts (Lev. xxii. 3). " And not given (any) of it on account
of the dead." This most probably refers to the custom of sending
provisions into a house of mourning, to prepare meals for the
mourners (2 Sam. iii. 25 ; Jer. xvi. 7 ; Hos. be. 4 ; Tobit iv. 17).
A house of mourning, with its inhabitants, was regarded as unclean;
consequently nothing could be carried into it of that which was sanc-
tified. There is no good ground for thinking of idolatrous customs,
or of any special superstition attached to the bread of mourning ;
nor is there any ground for understanding the words as referring to
the later Jewish custom of putting provisions into the grave along
with the corpse, to which the Septuagint rendering, ovk ISwaco ari
airSiv t$ redvnKOTi, points. (On ver. 15, see Isa. lxiii. 15.)
Vers. 16-19. At the close of his discourse, Moses sums up the
whole in the earnest admonition that Israel would give the Lord its
God occasion to fulfil the promised glorification of His people, by
keeping His commandments with all their heart and soul. — Ver. 16.
On this day the Lord commanded Israel to keep these laws and
rights with all the heart and all the soul (cf. chap. vi. 5, x. 12 sqq.).
There are two important points contained in this (vers. 17 sqq.).
The acceptance of the laws laid before them on the part of the
Israelites involved a practical declaration that the nation would
accept Jehovah as its God, and walk in His way (ver. 17) ; and the
giving of the law on the part of the Lord was a practical confirma-
tion of His promise that Israel should be His people of possession,
which He would glorify above all nations (vers. 18, 19). u Thm
hast let the Lord say to-day to be thy God" i.e. hast given Him
occasion to say to thee that He will be thy God, manifest Himself to
thee as thy God. " And to walk in His ways, and to keep Hie laws,
etc., for "and that thou wouldst walk in His ways, and keep His
laws." The acceptance of Jehovah as its God involved eo ipso a
willingness to walk in His ways. — Vers. 18, 19. At the same time,
Jehovah had caused the people to be told that they were His
treasured people of possession, as He had said in Ex. xix. 5, 6; and
that if they kept all His commandments, He would set them highest
above all nations whom He had created, " for praise, and for a
name, and for glory," i.e. make them an object of praise, and
renown, and glorification of God, the Lord and Creator of Israel,
among all nations (vid. Jer. xxxiii. 9 and xiii. 11 ; Zeph. iii. 19, 20).
" And that it should become a holy people unto the Lord," as He had
already said in Ex. xix. 6. The sanctification of Israel was the
Digitized by
Google
chap, xxvii. 429
design and end of its divine election, and would be accomplished in
the glory to which the people of God were to be exalted (see the
commentary on Ex. xix. 5, 6). The Hiphil "^OKn, which is only
found here, has no other meaning than this, " to cause a person to
say," or " give him occasion to say ;" and this is perfectly appro-
priate here, whereas the other meaning suggested, " to exalt," has
no tenable support either in the paraphrastic rendering of these
verses in the ancient versions, or in the Hithpael in Fs. xciv. 4, and
moreover is altogether unsuitable in ver. 17.
HI.— THIRD DISCOURSE, OR RENEWAL OF THE COVENANT.
Chap, xxvn.-xxx.
The conclusion of the covenant in the land of Moab, as the last
address in this section (chap. xxix. and xxx.) is called in the heading
(chap, xxviii. 69) and in the introduction (chap. xxix. 9 sqq.), i.e.
the renewal of the covenant concluded at Horeb, commences with
instructions to set up the law in a solemn manner in the land of
Canaan after crossing over the Jordan (chap, xxvii.). After this
there follows an elaborate exposition of the blessings and curses
which would come upon the people according to their attitude
towards the law (chap, xxviii.). And lastly, Moses places the
whole nation with a solemn address before the face of the Lord,
and sets before it once more the blessing and the curse in powerful
and alarming words, with the exhortation to choose the blessing and
life (chap. xxix. and xxx.).
ON THE SETTING UP OP THE LAW IK THE LAND OF CANAAN. —
CHAP. XXVII.
The instructions upon this point are divisible into two : viz. (a)
to set up large stones covered with lime upon Mount Ebal, after
crossing into Canaan, and to build an altar there for the presenta-
tion of burnt-offerings and slain-offerings, and to write the law upon
these stones (vers. 1-8) ; and (6) to proclaim the blessing and curse
of the law upon Mount Gerizim and Mount Ebal (vers. 11-26).
These two instructions are bound together by the command to
observe the law (vers. 9 and 10), in which the internal or essential
connection of the two is manifested externally also. The fulfilment
Digitized by
Google
430 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
of these directions after the entrance of Israel into Canaan is de-
scribed in Josh. viii. 30-35. The act itself had a symbolical mean-
ing. The writing of the law upon stones, which were erected on a
mountain in the midst of the land, with the solemn proclamation
of blessings and curses, was a practical acknowledgment of the law
of the Lord on the part of Israel, — a substantial declaration that they
would make the law the rule and standard of their life and conduct
in the land which the Lord had given them for an inheritance.
Vers. 1—10. The command in ver. 1 to keep the whole law
("ibE*, inf. abs. for the imperative, as in Ex. xiii. 3, etc.), with which
the instructions that follow are introduced, indicates at the very
outset the purpose for which the law written upon stones was to be
set up in Canaan, namely, as a public testimony that the Israelites
who were entering into Canaan possessed in the law their rule and
source of life. The command itself is given by Moses, together
with the elders, because the latter had to see to the execution of it
after Moses' death ; on the other hand, the priests are mentioned
along with Moses in ver. 9, because it was their special duty to
superintend the fulfilment of the commands of God. — Vers. 2 and
3 contain the general instructions ; vers. 4-8, more minute details.
In the appointment of the time, u on the day when ye shall pass
over Jordan into the land," etc., the word "day" must not be
pressed, but is to be understood in a broader sense, as signifying the
time when Israel should have entered the land and taken possession
of it. The stones to be set up were to be covered with lime, or
gypsum (whether sid signifies lime or gypsum cannot be deter-
mined), and all the words of the law were to be written upon them.
The writing, therefore, was not to be cut into the stones and then
covered with lime (as J. D. Mich., Ros.), but to be inscribed upon
the plaistered stones, as was the custom in Egypt, where the walls
of buildings, and even monumental stones, which they were about
to paint with figures and hieroglyphics, were first of all covered
with a coating of lime or gypsum, and then the figures painted
upon this (see the testimonies of Minutoli, Heeren, Prokeseh in
Hengstenbertfs Dissertations, i. 433, and Egypt and the Books of
Moses, p. 90). The object of this writing was not to hand down
the law in this manner to posterity without alteration, but, as has
already been stated, simply to set forth a public acknowledgment of
the law on the part of the people, first of all for the sake of the
generation which took possession of the land, and for posterity, only
so far as this act was recorded in the book of Joshua and thus trans-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVII. 1-10. 431
mitted to future generations. — Ver. 3. Upon the stones there were
to be written u all the words of this law : " obviously, therefore, not
only the blessings and curses in vers. 15-26 (as Josephus, Ant. iv.
8, 44, Masius, Clericus, and others maintain), nor only Deuteronomy
(J. Gerhard, A. Osiander, Voter, etc.), since this contained no in-
dependent " second law," but the whole of the Mosaic law ; not,
indeed, the entire Pentateuch, with its historical narratives, its
geographical, ethnographical, and other notices, but simply the legal
part of it, — the commandments, statutes, and rights of the Thorah.
But whether all the 613 commandments contained in the Penta-
teuch, according to the Jewish reckoning (vid. Bertheau, die 7
Gruppen Mos. Ges. p. 12), or only the quintessence of them, with
the omission of the numerous repetitions of different commands,
cannot be decided, and is of no importance to the matter .in hand.
The object aimed at would be attained by writing the essential
kernel of the whole law ; though the possibility of all the com-
mandments being written, of course without the reasons and exhor-
tations connected with them, cannot be denied, since it is not stated
how many stones were set up, but simply that large stones were to
be taken, which would therefore contain a great deal. In the
clause, " that thou may est come into the land which Jehovah thy God
giveth thee" etc., the coming involves the permanent possession of
the land. Not only the treading or conquest of Canaan, but the
maintenance of the conquered land as a permanent hereditary pos-
session, was promised to Israel; but it would only permanently
rejoice in the fulfilment of this promise, if it set up the law of its
God in the land, and observed it. — Vers. 4-8. In the further ex-
pansion of this command, Moses first of all fixes the place where
the stones were to be set up, namely, upon Mount Ebal (see at
chap. xi. 29), — not upon Gerizim, according to the reading of the
Samaritan Pentateuch; for since the discussion of the question
by Verschuir (dissertt. phil. exeg. diss. 3) and Gesenius (de Pent.
Samar. p. 61), it may be regarded as an established fact, that this
reading is an arbitrary alteration. The following clause, "thou
shalt plaister" etc., is a repetition in the earliest form of historical
writing among the Hebrews. To this there are appended in vers.
5-7 the new and further instructions, that an altar was to be built
upon Ebal, and burnt-offerings and slain-offerings to be sacrificed
upon it. The notion that this altar was to be built of the stones
with the law written upon them, or even with a portion of them,
needs no refutation, as it has not the slightest support in the words
Digitized by
Google
432 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
of the text. For according to these the altar was to be built of
unhewn stones (therefore not of the stones covered with cement),
in obedience to the law in Ex. xx. 22 (see the exposition of this
passage, where the reason for this is discussed). The spot selected
for the setting up of the stones with the law written upon it, as
well as for the altar and the offering of sacrifice, was Ebal, the
mountain upon which the curses were to be proclaimed ; not Geri-
zim, which was appointed for the publication of the blessings, for
the very same reason for which only the curses to be proclaimed are
given in vers. 14 sqq. and not the blessings, — not, as Schulte sup-
poses, because the law in connection with the curse speaks more
forcibly to sinful man than in connection with the blessing, or
because the curse, which manifests itself on every hand in human
life, sounds more credible than the promise ; but, as the Berleburger
Bible expresses it, " to show how the law and economy of the Old
Testament would denounce the curse which rests upon the whole
human race because of sin, to awaken a desire for the Messiah, who
was to take away the curse and bring the true blessing instead." For
however remote the allusion to the Messiah may be here, the truth
is unquestionably pointed out in these instructions, that the law pri-
marily and chiefly brings a curse upon man because of the sinfulness
of his nature, as Moses himself announces to the people in chap,
xxxi. 16, 17. And for this very reason the book of the law was to
be laid by the side of the ark of the covenant as a " testimony
against Israel " (chap. xxxi. 26). But the altar was built for the
offering of sacrifices, to mould and consecrate the setting up of the
law upon the stones into a renewal of the covenant. In the burnt-
offerings Israel gave itself up to the Lord with all its life and labour,
and in the sacrificial meal it entered into the enjoyment of the bless-
ings of divine grace, to taste of the blessedness of vital communion
with its God. By connecting the sacrificial ceremony with the
setting up of the law, Israel gave a practical testimony to the fact
that its life and blessedness were founded upon its observance of
the law. The sacrifices and the sacrificial meal have the same sig-
nification here as at the conclusion of the covenant at Sinai (Ex.
xxiv. 11). — In ver. 8 the writing of the law upon the stones is com-
manded once more, and the further injunction is added, "very
plainly." — The writing of the law is mentioned last, as being the
most important, and not because it was to take place after the sacri-
ficial ceremony. The different instructions are arranged according
to their character, and not in chronological order.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVU 11-26. 433
The words of Moses which follow in vers. 9 and 10, u Be silent,
and hearken, Israel; To-day thou hast become the people of the Lord
thy God" show the significance of the act enjoined ; although
primarily they simply summon the Israelites to listen attentively to
the still further commands. When Israel renewed the covenant
with the Lord, by solemnly setting up the law in Canaan, it became
thereby the nation of God, and bound itself, at the same time, to
hearken to the voice of the Lord and keep His commandments, as
it had already done (cf. chap. xxvi. 17, 18).
Vers. 11-26. With the solemn erection of the stones with the
law written upon them, Israel was to transfer to the land the bless-
ing and curse of the law, as was already commanded in chap. xi.
29 ; that is to say, according to the more minute explanation of the
command which is given here, the people themselves were solemnly
to give expression to the blessing and the curse : to the former
upon Mount Gerizim, and to the latter upon Ebal. On the situa-
tion of these mountains, see at chap. xi. 29. To this end six tribes
were to station themselves upon the top or side of Gerizim, and six
upon the top or side of Ebal. The blessing was to be uttered by
the tribes of Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Joseph, and Benjamin,
who sprang from the two wives of Jacob ; and the curse by Reuben,
with the two sons of Leah's maid Zilpah, and by Zebulun, with
Dan and Naphtali, the sons of Rachel's maid Bilhah. It was
natural that the utterance of the blessing should be assigned to the
tribes which sprang from Jacob's proper wives, since the sons of
the wives occupied a higher position than the sons of the maids, —
just as the blessing had pre-eminence over the curse. But in order
to secure the division into two sixes, it was necessary that two of
the eight sons of the wives should be associated with those who
pronounced the curses. The choice fell upon Reuben, because he
had forfeited his right of primogeniture by his incest (Gen. xlix.
4), and upon Zebulun, as the youngest son of Leah. " They shall
stand there upon the curse :" i.e. to pronounce the curse. — Ver. 14.
" And the Levites shall lift up and speak to all the men of Israel
with a high (loud) voice:" i.e. they shall pronounce the different
formularies of blessing and cursing, turning towards the tribes to
whom these utterances apply ; and all the men of Israel shall an-
swer " Amen," to take to themselves the blessing and the curse, as
uttered by them ; just as in the case of the priestly blessing in
Num. v. 22, and in connection with every oath, in which the person
swearing took upon himself the oath that was pronounced, by reply-
PENT. — VOL. III. 2 E
Digitjz:
ed by Google
434 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
ing " Amen." " The Levites " are not all the members of the
tribe of Levi, but those " in whom the spiritual character of Levi
was most decidedly manifested" (Baumgarteri), i.e. the Levitical
priests, as the guardians and teachers of the law, and those who
carried the ark of the covenant (Josh. viii. 33). From the passage
in Joshua, where the fulfilment of the Mosaic injunctions is re-
corded, we learn that the Levitical priests stationed themselves in
the centre between the two mountains, with the ark of the cove-
nant, and that the people took up their position, on both sides, oppo-
site to the ark, viz. six tribes on Gerizim, and six on Ebal. The
priests, who stood in the midst, by the ark of the covenant, then
pronounced the different formularies of blessing and cursing, to
which the six tribes answered " Amen." From the expression
" all the men of Israel," it is perfectly evident that in this particu-
lar ceremony the people were not represented by their elders or
heads, but were present in the persons of all their adult men who
were over twenty years of age ; and with this Josh. viii. 33, when
rightly interpreted, fully harmonizes.
In vers. 15—26 there follow twelve curses, answering to the
number of the tribes of .Israel. The first is directed against those
who make graven or molten images of Jehovah, and set them up in
secret, that is to say, against secret breaches of the second com-
mandment (Ex. xx. 4) ; the second, against contempt of, or want of
reverence towards, parents (Ex. xxi. 17) ; the third against those
who remove boundaries (chap. xix. 14) ; the fourth against the
man who leads the blind astray (Lev. xix. 14) ; the fifth against
those who pervert the right of orphans and widows (chap. xxiv. 17) ;
the sixth against incest with a mother (chap, xxiii. 1 ; Lev. xviii.
8) ; the seventh against unnatural vices (Lev. xviii. 23) ; the eighth
and ninth against incest with a sister or a mother-in-law (Lev. xviii.
9 and 17) ; the tenth against secret murder (Ex. xx. 13 ; Num.
xxxv. 16 sqq.) ; the eleventh against judicial murder (" he that
taketh reward to slay a soul, namely, innocent blood :" Ex. xxiii.
7, 8) ; the twelfth against the man who does not set up the words
of this law to do them, who does not make the laws the model and
standard of his life and conduct. From this last curse, which
applied to every breach of the law, it evidently follows, that the
different sins and transgressions already mentioned were only
selected by way of example, and for the most part were such as
could easily be concealed from the judicial authorities. At the
same time, " the office of the law is shown in this last utterance,
Digitizi
ed by Google
CHAP. XXVIIL 1-14. 435
the summing up of all the rest, to have been pre-eminently to pro-
claim condemnation. Every conscious act of transgression subjects
the sinner to the curse of God, from which none but He who has
become a curse for us can possibly deliver us" (Gal. iii. 10, 13.
0. v. Gerlacli).— On the reason why the blessings are not given,
see the remarks on ver. 4. As the curses against particular trans-
gressions of the law simply mention some peculiarly grievous sins
by way of example, it would be easy to single out corresponding
blessings from the general contents of the law : e.g. " Blessed be
he who faithfully follows the Lord his God, or loves Him with the
heart, who honours his father and his mother," etc. ; and lastly, all
the blessings of the law could be summed up in the words, " Blessed
be he who setteth up the words of this law, to do them."
BLESSING AND CUESE. — CHAP. XXVIII. 1-68.
For the purpose of impressing upon the hearts of all the people
in the most emphatic manner both the blessing which Israel was to
proclaim upon Gerizim, and the curse which it was to proclaim upon
Ebal, Moses now unfolds the blessing of fidelity to the law and the
curse of transgression in a longer address, in which he once more
resumes, sums up, and expands still further the promises and threats
of the law in Ex. xxiii. 20-33, and Lev. xxvi.
Vers. 1-14. The Blessing. — Ver. 1. If Israel would hearken
to the voice of the Lord its God, the Lord would make it the highest
of all the nations of the earth. This thought, with which the dis-
course on the law in chap. xxvi. 19 terminated, forms the theme,
and in a certain sense the heading, of the following description of
the blessing, through which the Lord, according to the more distinct
declaration in ver. 2, would glorify His people above all the nations
of the earth. The indispensable condition for obtaining this blessing,
was obedience to the word of the Lord, or keeping His command-
ments. To impress this conditio sine qua non thoroughly upon the
people, Moses not only repeats it at the commencement (ver. 2), and
in the middle (ver. 9), but also at the close (vers. 13, 14), in both a
positive and a negative form. In ver. 2, " the way in which Israel
was to be exalted is pointed out" (Schulte) ; and thus the theme is
more precisely indicated, and the elaboration of it is introduced.
" All these blessings (those mentioned singly in what follows) will
come upon thee and reach thee." The blessings are represented as
actual powers, which follow the footsteps of the nation, and over-
Digitized by
Google
436 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
take it. In vers. 3-6, the fulness of the blessing of God in all
the relations of life is depicted in a sixfold repetition of the word
" blessed." Israel will be blessed in the town and in the field, the
two spheres in which its life moves (ver. 3) ; blessed will be the
fruit of the body, of the earth, and of the cattle, i.e. in all its pro-
ductions (ver. 4 ; for each one, see chap. vii. 13, 14) ; blessed will
be the basket (chap. xxvi. 2) in which the fruits are kept, and the
kneading-trough (Ex. xii. 34) in which the daily bread is prepared
(ver. 5) ; blessed will the nation be in all its undertakings (" coming
in and going out;" vid. Num. xxvii. 17). — Vers. 7-14 describe the
influence and effect of the blessing upon all the circumstances and
situations in which the nation might be placed : in vers. 7-10, with
reference (a) to the attitude of Israel towards its enemies (ver. 7) ;
(b) to its trade and handicraft (ver. 8) ; (c) to its attitude towards
all the nations of the earth (vers. 9, 10). The optative forms, |W and
W (in vers. 7 and 8), are worthy of notice. They show that Moses
not only proclaimed the blessing to the people, but desired it for
them, because he knew that Israel would not always or perfectly
fulfil the condition upon which it was to be bestowed. " May th
Lord be pleated to give thine enemies . . . smitten before thee," i.e. give
them up to thee as smitten Q)E? jro, to give up before a person, to
deliver up to him : cf . chap. i. 8), so that they shall come out against
thee by one way, and flee from thee by seven ways, i.e. in wild dis-
persion (cf . Lev. xxvi. 7, 8). — Ver. 8. " May the Lord command the
blessing with thee (put it at thy disposal) in thy barns (granaries,
store-rooms) and in all thy business" (" to set the hand ;" see chap.
xii. 7). — Vers. 9, 10. " The Lord will exalt tliee for a holy nation to
Himself } . . . so that all the nations of the earth shall see that the name
of Jehovah is named upon thee, and shall fear before thee." The Lord
had called Israel as a holy nation, when He concluded the covenant
with it (Ex. xix. 5, 6). This promise, to which the words " as He
hath sworn unto thee" point back, and which is called an oath,
because it was founded upon the promises given to the patriarchs
on oath (Gen. xxii. 16), and was given implicite in them, the Lord
would fulfil to His people, and cause the holiness and glory of Israel
to be so clearly manifested, that all nations should perceive or see
" that the name of the Lord is named upon Israel" The name of the
Lord is the revelation of His glorious nature. It is named upon
Israel, when Israel is transformed into the glory of the divine nature
(cf. Isa. lxiii. 19 ; Jer. xiv. 9). It was only in feeble commence-
ments that this blessing was fulfilled upon Israel under the Old Tes»
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVIJI. 15-68. 437
tameut ; and it is not till the restoration of Israel, which is to take
place in the future according to Rom. xi. 25 sqq., that its complete
fulfilment will be attained. In vers. 11 and 12, Moses returns to
the earthly blessing, for the purpose of unfolding this still further.
" Superabundance will the Lord give thee for good {i.e. for happiness
and prosperity ; vid. chap. xxx. 9), in fruit of thy body" etc. (cf .
ver. 4). He would open His good treasure-house, the heaven, to
give rain to the land in its season (cf. chap. xi. 14 ; Lev. xxvi. 4, 5),
and bless the work of the hands, i.e. the cultivation of the soil, so
that Israel would be able to lend to many, according to the prospect
already set before it in chap. xv. 6. — Vers. 13, 14. By such blessings
He would " make Israel the head, and not the tail" — a figure taken
from life (vid. Isa. ix. 13), the meaning of which is obvious, and is
given literally in the next sentence, " thou wilt be above only, and not
beneath" i.e. thou wilt rise more and more, and increase in wealth,
power, and dignity. With this the discourse returns to its com-
mencement ; and the promise of blessing closes with another em-
phatic repetition of the condition on which the fulfilment depended
(vers. 136 and 14. On ver. 14, see chap. v. 29, xi. 28).
Vers. 15-68. The Curse, in case Israel should not hearken to
the voice of its God, to keep His commandments. After the an-
nouncement that all these (the following) curses would come upon
the disobedient nation (ver. 15), the curse is proclaimed in all its
extent, as covering all the relations of life, in a sixfold repetition
of the word " cursed" (vers. 16-19, as above in vers. 3-6) ; and the
fulfilment of this threat in plagues and diseases, drought and famine,
war, devastation of the land, and captivity of the people, is so de-
picted, that the infliction of these punishments stands out to view
xa ever increasing extent and fearf ulness. We are not to record
this, however, as a gradual heightening of the judgments of God,
in proportion to the increasing rebellion of Israel, as in Lev. xxvi.
14 sqq., although it is obvious that the punishments threatened did
not fall upon the nation all at once. — Vers. 16-19 correspond pre-
cisely to vers. 3-6, so as to set forth the curse as the counterpart of
the blessing, except that the basket and kneading-trough are men-
tioned before the fruit of the body.
Vers. 20-26. The first view, in which the bursting of the threat-
ened curse upon the disobedient people is proclaimed in all its forms.
First of all, quite generally in ver. 20. " The Lord will send the
curse against thee, consternation and threatening in every undertaking
Digitized by
Google
438 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
of thy hand which thou earnest out (see chap. xii. 7), till thou be
destroyed, till thou perish quickly, because of the wickedness of thy
doings, because thou hast forsaken Me." The three words, n^KD,
HOiriD, and ^!PP, are synonymous, and are connected together to
strengthen the thought. "TWO, curse or malediction ; nwrnan, the
consternation produced by the curse of God, namely, the confusion
with which God smites His foes (see at chap. vii. 23) ; nnyjQn is the
threatening word of the divine wrath. — Then vers. 21 sqq. in detail.
" The Lord will make the pestilence fasten upon (cleave to) thee, till
He hath destroyed thee out of the land ... to smite thee with giddiness
and fever (cf. Lev. xxvi. 16), inflammation, burning, and sword,
blasting of corn, and mildew (of the seed) ;" seven diseases there-
fore (seven as the stamp of the works of God), whilst pestilence in
particular is mentioned^ first, as the most terrible enemy of life.
n i??% from pfa to burn, and ""Tin, from "fin to glow, signify inflam-
matory diseases, burning fevers ; the distinction between these and
T\mp cannot be determined. Instead of 3in, the sword as the in-
strument of death, used to designate slaughter and death, the
Vulgate, Arabic, and Samaritan have adopted the reading S'lh,
cestus, heat (Gen. xxxi. 40), or drought, according to which there
would be four evils mentioned by which human life is attacked,
and three which are injurious to the corn. But as the LXX.,
Jon., Syr., and others read 3"jn, this alteration is very questionable,
especially as the reading can be fully defended in this connection ;
and one objection to the alteration is, that drought is threatened for
the first time in vers. 23, 24. tfB'J?', from *|*N0 to singe or blacken,
and tfp}1, from pv to be yellowish, refer to two diseases which attack
the corn : the former to the withering or burning of the ears, caused
by the east wind (Gen. xli. 23) ; the other to the effect produced by
a warm wind in Arabia, by which the green ears are turned yellow,
so that they bear no grains of corn. — Vers. 23, 24. To this should
be added terrible drought, without a drop of rain from heaven (cf.
Lev. xxvi. 19). Instead of rain, dust and ashes should fall from
heaven. JTO construed with a double accusative : to make the rain
of the land into dust and ashes, to give it in the form of dust and
ashes. When the heat is very great, the air in Palestine is often
full of dust and sand, the wind assuming the form of a burning
sirocco, so that the air resembles the glowing heat at the mouth of
a furnace (Robinson, ii. 504). — Vers. 25, 26. Defeat in battle, the
very opposite of the blessing promised in ver. 7. Israel should
become fWp, u a moving to and fro," i.e. so to speak, " a ball for
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVIJI. 15-68. 439
all the kingdoms of the earth to play with" (Schultz). <W[, here
and at Ezek. xxiii. 46, is not a transposed and later form of Wf,
which has a different meaning in Isa. xxviii. 19, but the original,
uncontracted form, which was afterwards condensed into njrtT ; for
this, and not W?, is the way in which the Chethib should be read
in Jer. xv. 4, xxiv. 9, xxix. 18, xxxiv. 17, and 2 Ohron. xxix. 8,
where this threat is repeated (vid. Ewald, § 53, b.). The corpses
of those who were slain by the foe should serve as food for the birds
of prey and wild beasts — the greatest ignominy that could fall upon
the dead, and therefore frequently held out as a threat against the
ungodly (Jer. vii. 33, xvi. 4 ; 1 Kings xiv. 11, etc.).
Vers. 27-34. The second view depicts still further the visitation
of God both by diseases of body and soul, and also by plunder and
oppression on the part of their enemies. — In ver. 27 four incurable
diseases of the body are threatened : the ulcer of Egypt (see at
Ex. ix. 9), i.e. the form of leprosy peculiar to Egypt, elephantiasis
{Aegypti peculiare malum : Plin. xxvi. c. 1, s. 5), which differed
from lepra tuberosa, however, or tubercular leprosy (ver. 35 ; cf.
Job ii. 7), in degree only, and not in its essential characteristics
(see Tobler, mediz. Topogr. v. Jems. p. 51). q yW, from ?BV, a
swelling, rising, signifies a tumour, and according to the Rabbins a
disease of the anus : in men, tumor in posticis partibus ; in women,
durius quoddam olBrj/ia in utero. It was with this disease that the
Philistines were smitten (1 Sam. v.). 3"i3 (see Lev. xxi. 20) and
D"in, from Din, to scrape or scratch, also a kind of itch, of which
there are several forms in Syria and Egypt. — Vers. 28, 29. In
addition to this, there would come idiocy, blindness, and confusion
of mind, — three psychical maladies; for although JilJV signifies
primarily bodily blindness, the position of the word between idiocy
and confusion of heart, i.e. of the understanding, points to mental
blindness here. — Ver. 29 leads to the same conclusion, where it
is stated that Israel would grope in the bright noon-day, like a
blind man in the dark, and not make his ways prosper, i.e. not
hit upon the right road which led to the goal and to salvation,
would have no good fortune or success in its undertakings (cf. Ps.
xxxvii. 7). Being thus smitten in body and soul, it would be only
(?|K as in chap. xvi. 15), i.e. utterly, oppressed and spoiled evermore.
These words introduce the picture of the other calamity, viz. the
plundering of the nation and the land by enemies (vers. 30-33).
Wife, house, vineyard, ox, ass, and sheep would be taken away by
the foe ; sons and daughters would be carried away into captivity
Digitized by
Google
440 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
before the eyes of the people, who would see it and pine after the
children, t.e. with sorrow and longing after them ; " and thy hand
shall not be to iliee towards God" i.e. all power and help will fail
thee. (On this proverbial expression, see Gen. xxxi. 29 ; and oh
/?n, in ver. 30, see at chap. xx. 6.) — In vers. 33, 34, this threat is
summed up in the following manner : the fruit of the field and all
their productions would be devoured by a strange nation, and Israel
would be only oppressed and crushed to pieces all its days, and
become mad on account of what its eyes would be compelled to see.
Vers. 35-46. The third view. — With the words, "the Lord will
smite thee" Moses resumes in ver. 35 the threat of ver. 27, to set
forth the calamities already threatened under a new aspect, namely,
as signs of the rejection of Israel from covenant fellowship with
the Lord. — Ver. 35. The Lord would smite the people with
grievous abscesses in the knees and thighs, that should be incur-
able, even from the sole of the foot to the crown of the head.
JTJ prtB* is the so-called joint-leprosy, a form of the lepra tuberosa
(vid. Primer, p. 167). From the clause, however, "from the sole of
thy foot unto the top of thy head" it is evident that the threat is not
to be restricted to this species of leprosy, since " the upper parts
of the body often remain in a perfectly normal state in cases of
leprosy in the joints ; and after the diseased parts have fallen off,
the patients recover their previous health to a certain degree"
(Pruner). Moses mentions this as being a disease of such a nature,
that it would render it utterly impossible for those who were
afflicted with it either to stand or walk, and then heightens the
threat by adding the words, " from the sole of the foot to the top of
the head." Leprosy excluded from fellowship with the Lord, and
deprived the nation of the character of a nation of God. — Vers. 36,
37. The loss of their spiritual character would be followed by the
dissolution of the covenant fellowship. This thought connects ver.
36 with ver. 35, and not the thought that Israel being afflicted with
leprosy would be obliged to go into captivity, and in this state
would become an object of abhorrence to the heathen (Schultz).
Tha Lord would bring the nation and its king to a foreign nation
that it did not know, and thrust them into bondage, so that it
would be obliged to serve other gods, — wood and stone (vid. chap,
iv. 28), — and would become an object of disgust, a proverb, and a
byword to all nations whither God should drive it (vid. 1 Kings
ix. 7 ; Jer. xxiv. 9). — Vers. 38 sqq. Even in their own land the
curse would fall upon every kind of labour and enterprise. Much
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVIII. 15-68. 441
seed would give little to reap, because the locust would devour the
seed ; the planting and dressing of the vineyard would furnish no
wine to drink, because the worm would devour the vine, ny^n is
probably the ?^r or ?| of the Greeks, the convolvulus of the Romans,
our vine-weevil. — Ver. 40. They would have many olive-trees in
the land, but not anoint themselves with oil, because the olive-tree
would be rooted out or plundered (??*, Niphal of iw, as in chap.
xix. 5, not the Kal of ?&, which cannot be shown to have the in-
transitive meaning elabi). — Ver. 41. Sons and daughters would they
beget, but not keep, because they would have to go into captivity. —
Ver. 42. All the trees and fruits of the land would the buzzer take
possession of. 7WV, from ??X to buzz, a rhetorical epithet applied to
locusts, not the grasshopper, which does not injure the fruits of the
tree or ground sufficiently for fhe term Bn*., " to take possession
of," to be applicable to it. — Ver. 43. Israel would be utterly im-
poverished, and would sink lower and lower, whilst the stranger in
the midst of it would, on the contrary, get above it very high ; not
indeed "because he had no possession, but was dependent upon
resources of other kinds " (Schultz), but rather because he would
be exempted with all his possessions from the curse of God, just as
the Israelites had been exempted from the plagues which came
upon the Egyptians (Ex. ix. 6, 7, 26). — Ver. 44. The opposite of
vers. 12 and 13 would come to pass. — In ver. 46 the address
returns to its commencement in ver. 15, with the terrible threat,
" These curses shall be upon thee for a sign and for a wonder, and
upon thy seed for ever" for the purpose of making a pause, if not of
bringing the whole to a close. The curses were for a sign and
wonder (HBto, that which excites astonishment and terror), inas-
much as their magnitude and terrible character manifested most
clearly the supernatural interposition of God (yid. chap. xxix. 23).
"For ever" applies to the generation smitten by the curse, which
would remain for ever rejected, though without involving the per-
petual rejection of the whole nation, or the impossibility of the con-
version and restoration of a remnant, or of a holy seed (Isa. x. 22,
vi. 13 ; Rom. ix. 27, xi. 5).
Vers. 47-57. The fourth view. — Although in what precedes
every side of the national life has been brought under the curse,
yet love to his people, and the desire to 'preserve them from the
curse, by holding up before them the dreadful severity of the wrath
of God, impel the faithful servant of the Lord to go still further,
and depict more minutely still the dreadful horrors consequent upon
Digitized by
Google
442 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Israel being given up to the power of the heathen, and first of all
in vers. 47-57 the horrible calamities which would burst upon Israel
on the conquest of the land and its fortresses by its foes. — Vers.
47, 48. Because it had not served the Lord its God with joy and
gladness of heart, u for the abundance of all" i.e. for the abundance
of all the blessings bestowed upon it by its God, it would serve its
enemies in hunger, and thirst, and nakedness, and want of every-
thing, and wear an iron yoke, i.e. be obliged to perform the hardest
tributary service till it was destroyed (TOPil for "VDEfy as in chap,
vii. 24). — Vers. 49, 50. The Lord would bring against it from afar
a barbarous, hardhearted nation, which knew no pity. " From
afar" is still further strengthened by the addition of the words,
"from the end of the earth." The greater the distance off, the more
terrible does the foe appear. He flies thence like an eagle, which
plunges with violence upon its prey, and carries it off with its
claws ; and Israel does not understand its language, so as to be able
to soften its barbarity, or come to any terms. A people "firm,
hard of face" i.e. upon whom nothing makes an impression (yid.
I3a. 1. 7), — a description of the audacity and shamelessness of its
appearance (Dan. viii. 23 ; cf. Prov. vii. 13, xxi. 29), which spares
neither old men nor boys. This description no doubt applies to
the Chaldeans, who are described as flying eagles in Hab. i. 6 sqq.,
Jer. xlviii. 40, xlix. 22, Ezek. xvii. 3, 7, as in the verses before us ;
but it applies to other enemies of Israel beside these, namely to the
great imperial powers generally, the Assyrians, Chaldeans, and
Romans, whom the Lord raised up as the executors of His curse
upon His rebellious people. Isaiah therefore depicts the Assyrians
in a similar manner, namely, as a people with an unintelligible lan-
guage (chap. v. 26, xxviii. 11, xxxiii. 19), and describes the cruelty
of the Medes in chap, xiii.,17, 18, with an unmistakeable allusion
to ver. 50 of the present threat. — Vers. 51 sqq. This foe would
consume all the fruit of the cattle and the land, i.e. everything
which the nation had acquired through agriculture and the breed-
ing of stock, without leaving it anything, until it was utterly de-
stroyed (see chap. vii. 13), and would oppress, i.e. besiege it in all
its gates (towns, vid. chap. xii. 12), till the lofty and strong walls
upon which they relied should fall (TV as in chap. xx. 20). — Ver.
53. It would so distress Israel, that in their distress and siege they
would be driven to eat the fruit of their body, and the flesh of their
own children (with regard to the fulfilment of this, see the remarks
on Lev. xxvi. 29). — This horrible distress is depicted still more fully
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXVIII. 15-68. 443
in vers. 54-57, where the words, " in the siege and in the straitness,"
etc. (ver. 536), are repeated as a refrain, with their appalling sound,
in vers. 55 and 57. — Vers. 54, 55. The effeminate and luxurious
man would look with ill-favour upon his brother, the wife of his
bosom, and his remaining children, " to give" (so that he would not
give) to one of them of the flesh of his children which he was con-
suming, because there was nothing left to him in the siege. " Sis
eye shall be evil" i.e. look with envy or ill-favour (cf. chap. xv. 9).
TKB'n ^SO, on account of there not being anything left for himself.
?3 with v3 signifies literally " all not" i.e. nothing at all. "I'Kti'n,
an infinitive, as in chap. iii. 3 (see at ver. 48). — Vers. 56, 57. The
delicate and luxurious woman, who had not attempted to put her
feet to the ground (had always been carried therefore either upon a
litter or an ass : cf. Judg. v. 10, and Arvieux, Sitten der Beduinen
At. p. 143), from tenderness and delicacy — her eye would look
with envy upon the husband of her bosom and her children, and
that (yav expl.) because of (for) her after-birth, which cometh out
from between her feet, and because of her children which she bears
(sc. during the siege) ; 'for she will eat them secretly in the want of
everything," that is to say, first of all attempt to appease her hunger
with the after-birth, and then, when there was no more left, with
her own children. To such an awful height would the famine rise 1
Vers. 58—68. The fifth and last view. — And yet these horrible
calamities would not be the end of the distress. The full measure
of the divine curse would be poured out upon Israel, when its dis-
obedience had become hardened into disregard of the glorious and
fearful name of the Lord its God. To point this out, Moses describes
the resistance of the people in ver. 58 ; not, as in vers. 15 and 45,
as not hearkening to the voice of the Lord to keep all His com-
mandments, which he (Moses) had commanded this day, or which
Jehovah had commanded (ver. 45), but as " not observing to do all
the words which are written in this book, to fear the glorified and
fearful name," (viz.) Jehovah its God. " This book" is not Deu-
teronomy, even if we should assume that Moses had not first of all
delivered the discourses in this book to the people and then written
them down, but had first of all written them down and then read
them to the people (see at chap. xxxi. 9), but the book of the law,
i.e. the Pentateuch, so far as it was already written. This is evi-
dent from vers. 60, 61, according to which the grievous diseases of
Egypt were written in this book of the law, which points to the
book of Exodus, where grievous diseases occur among the Egyptian
Digitized by
Google
444 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
plagues. In fact, Moses could not have thought of merely laying
the people under the obligation to keep the laws of the book of
Deuteronomy, since this book does not contain all the essential laws
of the covenant, and was never intended to form an independent
book of the law. The infinitive clause, " to fear" etc., serves to
explain the previous clause, " to do" etc., whether we regard the
two clauses as co-ordinate, or the second as subordinate to the first.
Doing all the commandments of the law must show and prove itself
in fearing the revealed name of the Lord. Where this fear is
wanting, the outward observance of the commandments can only
be a pharisaic work-righteousness, which is equivalent to a trans-
gression of the law. But the object of this fear was not to be a
God, according to human ideas of the nature and working of God;
it was to be " this glorified and fearful name" i.e. Jehovah the abso-
lute God, as He glorifies Himself and shows Himself to be fearful
in His doings upon earth. " The name" as in Lev. xxiv. 11. 1333
in a reflective sense, as in Ex. xiv. 4, 17, 18 ; Lev. x. 3. — Ver. 59.
If Israel should not do this, the Lord would make its strokes and
the strokes of its seed wonderful, i.e. would visit the people and
their descendants with extraordinary strokes, with great and lasting
strokes, and with evil and lasting diseases (ver. 60), and would
bring all the pestilences of Egypt upon it. ^'EPn, to tarn back,
inasmuch as Israel was set free from them by the deliverance out
of Egypt, nj"|D is construed with the plural as a collective noun.
— Ver. 61. Also every disease and every stroke that was not written
in this book of the law, — not only those that were written in the
book of the 'law, but those also that did not stand therein. The
diseases of Egypt that were written in the book of the law include
the murrain of cattle, the boils and blains, and the death of the
first-born (Ex. ix. 1—10, xii. 29) ; and the strokes ( n ?D) the rest
of the plagues, viz. the frogs, gnats, dog-flies, hail, locusts, and
darkness (Ex. viii.-x.). D«P, an uncommon and harder form of
BfK (Jndg. xvi. 3 ; cf. Ewald, § 138, a.).— Ver. 62. Israel would
be almost annihilated thereby. " Ye will be left in few people (a
small number ; cf . chap. xxvi. 5), whereas ye were as numerous as
the stars of heaven?
Vers. 63 sqq. Yea, the Lord would find His pleasure in the
destruction and annihilation of Israel, as He had previously rejoiced
in blessing and multiplying it. With this bold anthropomorphic
expression Moses seeks to remove from the nation the last prop of
false confidence in the mercy of God. Greatly as the sin of man
Digltizi
ed by Google
CHAP. XXVIII. 15-68. 445
troubles God, and little as the pleasure may be which He has in
the death of the wicked, yet the holiness of His love demands the
punishment and destruction of those who despise the riches of His
goodness and long-suffering ; so that He displays His glory in the
judgment and destruction of the wicked no less than in blessing
and prospering the righteous. — Vers. 63i and 64. Those who had
not succumbed to the plagues and strokes of God, would be torn
from the land of their inheritance, and scattered among all nations
to the end of the earth, and there be compelled to serve other gods,
which are wood and stone, which have no life and no sensation, and
therefore can hear no prayer, and cannot deliver out of any distress
(cf. chap. iv. 27 sqq.). — Vers. 65, 66. When banished thus among
all nations, Israel would find no ease or rest, not even rest for the
sole of its foot, t'.e. no place where it could quietly set its foot, and
remain and have peace in its heart. To this extreme distress of
homeless banishment there would be added " a trembling heart, fail-
ing of the eyes (the light of life), and despair of soul " (vid. Lev.
xxvi. 36 sqq.). — Ver. 66. " Thy life will be hung up before thee"
i.e. will be like some valued object, hanging by a thin thread before
thine eyes, which any moment might tear down (Knobel), that is to
say, will be ever hanging in the greatest danger. " Thou wilt not
believe in thy life" i.e. thou wilt despair of its preservation (cf . Job
xxiv. 22). 1 — Ver. 67. In the morning they would wish it were
evening, and in the evening would wish it were morning, from
perpetual dread of what each day or night would bring. — Ver. 68.
Last of all, Moses mentions the worst, namely, their being taken
back to Egypt into ignominious slavery. "If the exodus was the
birth of the nation of God as such, return would be its death"
(Schultz). "In ships:" i.e. in a way which would cut off every
possibility of escape. The clause, " by the way whereof I spake unto
thee, thou shalt see it no more again," is not a more precise explana-
tion of the expression " in ships," for it was not in ships that Israel
came out of Egypt, but by land, through the desert ; on the con-
trary, it simply serves to strengthen the announcement, " The Lord
shall bring thee into Egypt again," namely, in the sense that God
would cause them to take a road which they would never have seen
again if they had continued in faithful dependence upon the Lord.
1 "I have never seen a passage which describes more clearly the misery of a
guilty conscience, in words and thoughts so fitting and appropriate. For this
is just the way in whioh a man is affected, who knows that God is offended, i.e.
who is harassed with the consciousness of sin " (Luther).
Digitized by
Google
446 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
This was the way to Egypt, in reality such a return to this land as
Israel ought never to have experienced, namely, a return to slavery.
" There shall ye be sold to your enemies as servants and maids, and
there shall be no buyer," i.e. no one will buy you as slaves. This
clause, which indicates the utmost contempt, is quite sufficient to
overthrow the opinion of Ewald, Riehm, and others, already referred
to at pp. 385-6, namely, that this verse refers to Psammetichus,
who procured some Israelitish infantry from Manasseh. Egypt is
simply mentioned as a land where Israel had lived in ignominious
bondage. " As a fulfilment of a certain kind, we might no doubt
adduce the fact that Titus sent 17,000 adult Jews to Egypt to
perform hard labour there, and had those who were under 17 years
of age publicly sold (Josephus, de bell. Jud. vi. 9, 2), and also that
under Hadrian Jews without number were sold at Rachel's grave
{Jerome, ad Jer. 31). But the word of God is not so contracted,
that it can be limited to one single fact. The curses were fulfilled
in the time of the Romans in Egypt (yid. Philo in Flacc, and leg.
ad Caium), but they were also fulfilled in a horrible manner during
the middle ages (yid. Depping, die Juden im Mittelalter) ; and they
are still in course of fulfilment, even though they are frequently less
sensibly felt" (Schultz). — Ver. 69 (or chap. xxix. 1) is not the close
of the address in chap, v.-xxviii., as Schultz, Knobel, and others sup-
pose; but the heading to chap. xxix. xxx., which relate to the making
of the covenant mentioned in this verse (yid. chap. xxix. 12, 14).
CONCLUSION OF THE COVENANT IN THE LAND OF MOAB. —
CHAP. XXIX. AND XXX.
The addresses which follow in chap. xxix. and xxx. are an-
nounced in the heading in chap. xxix. 1 as " words (addresses) of
the covenant which Jehovah commanded Moses to make with ilie chil-
dren of Israel, beside the covenant which He made with them in
Horeb," and consist, according to vers. 10 sqq., in a solemn appeal
to all the people to enter into the covenant which the Lord made
with them that day ; that is to say, it consisted literally in a renewed
declaration of the covenant which the Lord had concluded with the
nation at Horeb, or in a fresh obligation imposed upon the nation
to keep the covenant which had been concluded at Horeb, by the
offering of sacrifices and the sprinkling of the people with the sacri-
ficial blood (Ex. xxiv.). There was no necessity for any repetition
of this act, because, notwithstanding the frequent transgressions on
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIX. 2-16. 447
the part of the nation, it had not been abrogated on the part of
God, but still remained in full validity and force. The obligation
binding upon the people to fulfil the covenant is introduced by
Moses with an appeal to all that the Lord had done for Israel
(chap. xxix. 2-9) ; and this is followed by a summons to enter into
the covenant which the Lord was concluding with them now, that
He might be their God, and fulfil His promises concerning them
(vers. 10-15), with a repeated allusion to the punishment which
threatened them in case of apostasy (vers. 16-29), and the eventual
restoration on the ground of sincere repentance and return to the
Lord (chap. xxx. 1-14), and finally another solemn adjuration, with
a blessing and a curse before them, to make choice of the blessing
(vers. 15-20).
Chap. xxix. 2-9. The introduction in ver. 2a resembles that in
chap. v. 1. " All Israel" is the nation in all its members (see vers.
10, 11). — Israel had no doubt seen the mighty acts of the Lord in
Egypt (vers. 2b and 3 ; cf. chap. iv. 34, vii. 19), but Jehovah had
not given them a heart, i.e. understanding, to perceive, eyes to see,
and ears to hear, until this day. With this complaint, Moses does
not intend to excuse the previous want of susceptibility on the part
of the nation to the manifestations of grace on the part of the Lord,
but simply to explain the necessity for the repeated allusion to the
gracious acts of God, and to urge the people to lay them truly to
heart. " By reproving the dulness of the past, he would stimulate
them to a desire to understand : just as if he had said, that for a
long time they had been insensible to so many miracles, and there-
fore they ought not to delay any longer, but to arouse themselves
to hearken better unto God" (Calvin). The Lord had not yet given
the people an understanding heart, because the people had not yet
asked for it, simply because the need of it was not felt (cf. chap. v.
26). — Vers. 5 sqq. With the appeal to the gracious guidance of
Israel by God through the desert, the address of Moses passes im-
perceptibly into an address from the Lord, just as in chap. xi. 14.
(On vers. 5, 6, vid. chap. viii. 3, 4 ; on ver. 7, vid. chap. ii. 26 sqq.,
and chap. iii. 1 sqq. and 12 sqq.). — Ver. 9. These benefits from the
Lord demanded obedience and fidelity. " Keep the words of this
covenant," etc. (cf. chap. viii. 18). 7 , ?&'}, to act wisely (as in chap,
xxxii. 29), bearing in mind, however, that Jehovah Himself is the
wisdom of Israel (chap. iv. 6), and the search for this wisdom
brings prosperity and salvation (cf. Josh. i. 7, 8).
Vers. 10-15. Summons to enter into the covenant of the Lord,
Digitized by
Google
448 / THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
namely, to enter inwardly, to make the covenant an affair of the
heart and life. — Vers. 10 sqq. " To-day" when the covenant-law
and covenant-right were laid before them, the whole nation stood
before the Lord without a single exception — the heads and the
tribes, the elders and the officers, all the men of Israel. The two
members are parallel. The heads of the people are the elders and
officers, and the tribes consist of all the men. The rendering given
by the LXX. and Syriac (also in the English version : TV.),
" heads (captains) of your tribes" is at variance with the language.
— Ver. 11. The covenant of the Lord embraced, however, not
only the men of Israel, but also the wives and children, and the
stranger who had attached himself to Israel, such as the Egyptians
who came out with Israel (Ex. xii. 38 ; Num. xi. 4), and the
Midianites who joined the Israelites with Hobab (Num. x. 29),
down to the very lowest servant, " from thy hewer of wood to tky
drawer of water" (cf. Josh. ix. 21, 27).— Ver. 12. " Tltat thou
shouldest enter into the covenant of the Lord thy God, and the engage-
ment on oath, which the Lord thy God concludeth with thee to-day."
13P with 3, as in Job xxxiii. 28, " to enter into," expresses entire
entrance, which goes completely through the territory entered, and
is more emphatic than J"P"iM Nia (2 Chron. xv. 12). " Into the
oath :" the covenant confirmed with an oath, covenants being al-
ways accompanied with oaths (vid. Gen. xxvi. 28). — Ver. 13. " That
He may set thee up (exalt thee) to-day into a people for Himself,
and that He may be (become) unto thee a God" (vid. chap, xxviii. 9,
xxvii. 9 ; Ex. xix. 5, 6). — Vers. 14, 15. This covenant Moses made
not only with those who are present, but with all whether present
or not; for it was to embrace not only those who were living
then, but their descendants also, to become a covenant of blessing
for all nations (cf . Acts ii. 39, and the intercession of Christ in
John xvii. 20).
Vers. 16-29. The summons to enter into the covenant of the
Lord is explained by Moses first of all by an exposition of the evil
results which would follow from apostasy from the Lord, or the
breach of His covenant. This exposition he introduces with an
allusion to the experience of the people with reference to the worth-
lessness of idols, both in Egypt itself, and upon their march through
the nations, whose territory they passed through (vers. 16, 17).
The words, " for ye have learned how we dwelt in Egypt, and passed
through the nations .... and have seen their abominations and their
idols " (gillulim : lit. clods, see Lev. xxvi. 30), have this significa-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXIX. 16-29. 449
tion : In our abode in Egypt, and upon our march through different
lands, ye have become acquainted with the idols of these nations,
that they are not gods, but only wood and stone (see at chap. iv.
28), silver and gold. "itsfcTiN, a3 j n chap. ix. 7, literally " ye know
that which we dwelt," i.e. know what our dwelling there showed,
what experience we gained there of the nature of heathen idols.
— Ver. 18. " That there may not be among you" etc. : this sentence
may be easily explained by introducing a thought which may be
easily supplied, such as " consider this," or " do not forget what ye
have seen, that no one, either man or woman, family or tribe, may
turn away from Jehovah our God." — " That there may not be a root
among you which bears poison and wormwood as fruit." A striking
image of the destructive fruit borne by idolatry (cf. Heb. xii. 15).
JRosh stands for a plant of a very bitter taste, as we may see from
the frequency with which it is combined with njg?, wormwood : it is
not, strictly speaking, a poisonous plant, although the word is used
in Job xx. 16 to denote the poison of serpents, because, in the esti-
mation of a Hebrew, bitterness and poison were kindred terms.
There is no other passage in which it can be shown to have the
meaning " poison." The sense of the figure is given in plain
terms in ver. 19, " that no one when he hears the words of this oath
may bless himself in his heart, saying, It will prosper with me, for I
walk in the firmness of my heart" To bless himself in his heart is
to congratulate himself. nW"U5>, firmness, a vox media ; in Syriac,
firmness, in a good sense, equivalent to truth ; in Hebrew, gene-
rally in a bad sense, denoting hardness of heart ; and this is the
sense in which Moses uses it here. — " To sweep away that which is
saturated with the thirsty : " a proverbial expression, of which very
different interpretations have been given (see BosenmUller ad h. I.),
taken no doubt from the land and transferred to persons or souls ;
so that we might supply Nephesh in this sense, " to destroy all, both
those who have drunk its poison, and those also who are still thirst-
ing for it " (Knobel). But even if we were to supply H$ (the land),
we should not have to think of the land itself, but simply of its in-
habitants, so that the thought would still remain the same. — Vers.
20, 21. "For the Lord will not forgive him (who thinks or speaks in
this way) ; but then will His anger smoke (break forth in fire ; vid.
Ps. lxxiv. 1), and His jealousy against that man, and the whole curse
of the law will lie upon him, that his name may be blotted out under
heaven (yid. chap. xxv. 19 ; Ex. xvii. 14). ' The Lord will separate
him, unto evil from all the tribes, — so that he will be shut out from
PENT. — VOL. III. 2 F
Digitized by
Google
450 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES. .
the covenant nation, and from its salvation, and be exposed to de-
struction, — according to all the curses of the covenant." Although
the pronominal suffix refers primarily to the man, it also applies,
according to ver. 18, to the woman, the family, and the tribe. u That
is written," etc., as in chap, xxviii. 58, 61. — Vers. 22-24. How
thoroughly Moses was filled with the thought, that not only indivi-
duals, but whole families, and in fact the greater portion of the
nation, would fall into idolatry, is evident from the further expan-
sion of the threat which follows, and in which he foresees in the
Spirit, and foretells, the extermination of whole families, and the
devastation of the land by distant nations ; as in Lev. xxvi. 31, 32.
Future generations of Israel, and the stranger from a distant land,
when they saw the strokes of the Lord which burst upon the land,
and the utter desolation of the land, would ask whence this devasta-
tion, and receive the reply, The Lord had smitten the land thus in
His anger, because its inhabitants (the Israelites) had forsaken His
covenant. "With regard to the construction, observe that ">»tfl, in
ver. 22, is resumed in ViptO, in ver. 24, the subject of ver. 22 being
expanded into the general notion, " all nations " (ver. 24). With
WVl, in ver. 226, a parenthetical clause is inserted, giving the reason
for the main thought, in the form of a circumstantial clause ; and to
this there is attached, by a loose apposition in ver. 23, a still further
picture of the divine strokes according to their effect upon the
land. The nouns in ver. 23, " brimstone and salt burning" are in
apposition to the strokes (plagues), and so far depend upon " they
see." The description is borrowed from the character of the Dead
Sea and its vicinity, to which there is an express allusion in the
words, " like the overthrow of Sodom," etc., i.e. of the towns of the
vale of Siddim (see at Gen. xiv. 2), which resembled paradise, the
garden of Jehovah, before their destruction (vid. Gen. xiii. 10 and
xix. 24 sqq.). — Ver. 24. " What is this great burning of wrath f " i.e.
what does it mean — whence does it come ? The reply to such a
question would be (vers. 25-29) : The inhabitants of the land have
forsaken the covenant of the Lord, the God of their fathers ; there-
fore has the wrath of the Lord burned over the land. — Ver. 26.
" Gods which God had not assigned them" (vid. chap. iv. 19). " All
the curses," etc., are the curses contained in chap, xxviii. 15-68,
Lev. xxvi. 14-38. — Those who give the answer close their address
in ver. 29 with an expression of pious submission and solemn
admonition. " That which is hidden belongs to the Lord our God
(is His affair), and that which is revealed belongs to us and our chiU
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXX. 1-10. 451
dren for ever, to do (that we may do) all the words of this law."
That which is revealed includes the law with its promises and threats ;
consequently that which is hidden can only refer to the mode in
which God will carry out in the future His counsel and will, which
He has revealed in the law, and complete His work of salvation
notwithstanding the apostasy of the people. 1
Chap. xxx. 1-10. Nevertheless the rejection of Israel and its
dispersion among the heathen were not to be the close. If the
people should return to the Lord their God in their exile, He would
turn His favour towards them again, and gather them again out of
their dispersion, as had already been proclaimed in chap. iv. 29 sqq.
and Lev. xxvi. 40 sqq., where it was also observed that the extre-
mity of their distress would bring the people to reflection and induce
them to return. — Vers. 1-3. " When all these words, the blessing and
the curse which I have set before thee, shall come." The allusion to
the blessing in this connection may be explained on the ground that
Moses was surveying the future generally, in which not only a curse
but a blessing also would come upon the nation, according to its
attitude towards the Lord as a whole and in its several members,
since even in times of the greatest apostasy on the part of the
nation there would always be a holy seed which could not die out ;
because otherwise the nation would necessarily have been utterly
and for ever rejected, whereby the promises of God would have
been brought to nought, — a result which was absolutely impossible.
" And thou takest to heart among all nations" etc., sc. what has be-
fallen thee, — not only the curse which presses upon thee, but also
the blessing which accompanies obedience to the commands of
God, — " and returnest to the Lord thy God, and hearhenest to His
voice with all ilie heart" etc. (cf . chap. iv. 29) ; " the Lord will turn
thy captivity, and liave compassion upon thee, and gather thee again"
TODBHIK "2W does not mean to bring back the prisoners, as the
more modern lexicographers erroneously suppose (the Kal 3«? never
has the force of the Hiphil), but to turn the imprisonment, and that
1 What the puncta extraordinaria above (*»)V WiJn vb mean, is uncertain.
"t: ▼
miter's conjecture is the most probable, " that they are intended to indicate a
various reading, formed by the omission of eleven consonants, and the transpo-
sition of the rest tiAV DITIMm (at magnolia sseculi sunt} ; " whereas there is no
foundation for Lightfoot's notion, that " they served as a warning, that we
should not wish to pry with curiosity into the secret things of God, but should
be content with His revealed will," — a notion which rests upon the supposition
that the points are inspired.
Digitizi
ed by Google
452 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
in a figurative sense, viz. to put an end to the distress (Job xlii. 10;
Jer. xxx. 8 ; Ezek. xvi. 53 ; Ps. xiv. 7 ; also Ps. Ixxxv. 2, cxxvi.
2, 4), except that in many passages the misery of exile in which the
people pined is represented as imprisonment. The passage before
us is fully decisive against the meaning to bring back the prisoners,
since the gathering out of the heathen is spoken of as being itself
the consequence of the " turning of the captivity ; " so also is Jer.
xxix. 14, where the bringing back (^TH) is expressly distinguished
from it. But especially is this the case with Jer. xxx. 18, where
" turning the captivity of Jacob's tents" is synonymous with having
mercy on his dwelling-places, and building up the city again, so
that the city lying in ruins is represented as not?, an imprisonment. 1
— Vers. 4, 5. The gathering of Israel out of all the countries of
the earth would then follow. Even though the rejected people
should be at the end of heaven, the Lord would fetch them thence,
and bring them back into the land of their fathers, and do good to
the nation, and multiply them above their fathers. These last
words show that the promise neither points directly to the gathering
of Israel from dispersion on its ultimate conversion to Christ, nor
furnishes any proof that the Jews will then be brought back to
Palestine. It is true that even these words have some reference to
the final redemption of Israel. This is evident from the curse of
dispersion, which cannot be restricted to the Assyrian and Babylo-
nian captivities, but includes the Roman dispersion also, in which
the nation continues still ; and it is still more apparent from the
renewal of this promise in Jer. xxxii. 37 and other prophetic pas-
sages. But this application is to be- found in the spirit, and not in
the letter. For if there is to be an increase in the number of the
Jews, when gathered out of their dispersion into all the world,
above the number of their fathers, and therefore above the number
of the Israelites in the time of Solomon and the first monarchs of
the two kingdoms, Palestine will never furnish room enough for a
nation multiplied like this. The multiplication promised here, so
far as it falls within the Messianic age, will consist in the realiza-
1 Hupfeld (on Ps. xiv. 7) has endeavoured to sustain the assertion that rnzv
is a later form for the older and simpler forms, *2E>, !V3E>i by citing one single
passage of the Old Testament. The abstract form of 'otb is JV3K>, imprisonment
(Num. xxi. 29), then prisoners. This form has been substituted by Jeremiah
for ro? in one passage, viz. chap, xxxii. 44 ; and the Masoretic punctuators
were the first to overlook the difference in the two words, and point them pro-
miscuously.
Digitized by
Google
chap. xxx. l-io. 453
tion of the promise given to Abraham, that his seed should grow
into nations (Gen. xvii. 6 and 16), i.e. in the innumerable multipli-
cation, not of the "Israel according to the flesh," but of the "Israel
according to the spirit," whose land is not restricted to the boun-
daries of the earthly Canaan or Palestine (see vol. i. p. 226). The
possession of the earthly Canaan for all time is nowhere promised
to the Israelitish nation in the law (see at chap. xi. 21). — Ver. 6.
The Lord will then circumcise their heart, and the heart of their
children (see chap. x. 16), so that they will love Him with all their
heart. When Israel should turn with true humility to the Lord,
He would be found of them, — would lead them to true repentance,
and sanctify them through the power of His grace, — would take
away the stony heart out of their flesh, and give them a heart of
flesh, a new heart and a new spirit, — so that they should truly know
Him and keep His commandments (yid. Ezek. xi. 19, xxxvi. 26 ;
Jer. xxxi. 33 sqq. and xxxii. 39 sqq.). " Because of thy life" i.e.
that thou mayest live, sc. attain to true life. The fulfilment of this
promise does not take place all at once. It commenced with small
beginnings at the deliverance from the Babylonian exile, and in a
still higher degree at the appearance of Christ in the case of all
the Israelites who received Him as their Saviour. Since then it
has been carried on through all ages in the conversion of individual
children of Abraham to Christ; and it will be realized in the future
in a still more glorious manner in the nation at large (Bom. xi. 25
sqq.). The words of Moses do not relate to any particular age, but
comprehend all times. For Israel has never been hardened and
rejected in all its members, although the mass of the nation lives
under the curse even to the present day. — Ver. 7. But after its
conversion, the curses, which had hitherto rested upon it, would fall
upon its enemies and haters, according to the promise in Gen. xii.
3. — Vers. 8 sqq. Israel would then hearken again to the voice of
the Lord and keep His commandments, and would rejoice in con-
sequence in the richest blessing of its God. In the expression,
nyot* 3^n nm ("thou shalt return and hearken"), 31^ ("thou
shalt return ") has an adverbial signification. This is evident from
the corresponding expression in ver. 96, " for Jehovah will again
rejoice over thee" (lit. "will return and rejoice"), in which the
adverbial signification is placed beyond all doubt. — Vers. 8-10 con-
tain the general thought, that Israel would then come again into its
normal relation to its God, would enter into true and perfect cove-
nant fellowship with the Lord, and enjoy all the blessings of the
Digitized by
Google
454 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
covenant. — Ver. 9a is a repetition of chap, xxviii. 11. The Lord
will rejoice again over Israel, to do them good (vid. chap, xxviii. 63),
as He had rejoiced over their fathers. The fathers are not the
patriarchs alone, hut all the pious ancestors of the people. — Ver. 10.
A renewed enforcement of the indispensable condition of salvation.
Vers. 11-20. The fulfilment of this condition is not impossible,
nor really very difficult. This natural thought leads to the motive,
which Moses impresses upon the hearts of the people in vers. 11-14,
viz. that He might turn the blessing to them. God had done every-
thing to render the observance of His commandments possible to
Israel. " This commandment " (used as in chap. vi. 1 to denote the
whole law) is " not too wonderful for thee" i.e. is not too hard to
grasp, or unintelligible (yid. chap. xvii. 8), nor is it too far off : it is
neither in lwaven, i.e. at an inaccessible height ; nor beyond the sea,
i.e. at an unattainable distance, at the end of the world, so that any
one could say, Who is able to fetch it thence 1 but it is very near
thee, in thy mouth and in thy heart to do it. It not only lay before
the people in writing, but it was also preached to them by word of
mouth, and thus brought to their knowledge, so that it had become
a subject of conversation as well as of reflection and careful exami-
nation. But however near the law had thus been brought to man,
sin had so estranged the human heart from the word of God, that
doing and keeping the law had become invariably difficult, and in
fact impossible ; so that the declaration, " the word is in thy heart,"
only attains its full realization through the preaching of the gospel
of the grace of God, and the righteousness that is by faith ; and
to this the Apostle Paul applies the passage in Rom. x. 25 sqq.
— Vers. 15—20. In conclusion, Moses sums up the contents of the
whole of this preaching of the law in the words, " life and good,
and death and evil," as he had already done at chap. xi. 26, 27, in
the first part of this address, to lay the people by a solemn adjura-
tion under the obligation to be faithful to the Lord, and through
this obligation to conclude the covenant afresh. He had set before
them this day life and good ("good" = prosperity and salvation), as
well as death and evil (JTJ, adversity and destruction), by command-
ing them to love the Lord and walk in His ways. Love is placed
first, as in chap. vi. 5, as being the essential principle of the fulfil-
ment of the commandments. Expounding the law was setting
before them life and death, salvation and destruction, because the
law, as the word of God, was living and powerful, and proved itself
in every man a power of life or of death, according to the attitude
Digitized by
Google
chap. xxxi. 455
which he assumed towards it (vid. chap, xxxii. 47). rPti, to permit
oneself to be torn away to idolatry (as- in chap. iv. 19). — Ver. 18,
as chap. iv. 26, viii. 19. He calls npon heaven and earth as wit-
nesses (ver. 19, as in chap. iv. 26), namely, that he had set before
them life and death. W"in3S, in ver. 19, is the apodosis : " therefore
choose life." — Ver. 20. T*n wn N 3, for that (namely, to love the
Lord) is thy life, that is, the condition of life, and of long life, in
the promised land (vid. chap. iv. 40).
IV.— MOSES' FAREWELL AND DEATH.
Chap. xxxl-xxxxv.
With the renewal of the covenant, by the choice set before the
people between blessing and corse, life and death, Moses had
finished the interpretation and enforcement of the law (chap. i. 5),
and brought the work of legislation to a close. But in order that
the work to which the Lord had called him might be thoroughly
completed, it still remained for him, before his approaching death,
to hand over the task of leading the people into Canaan to Joshua,
who had been appointed as his successor, to finish writing out the
laws, and to hand over the book of the law to the priests. The
Lord also directed him to write an ode, as a witness against the
people, on account of their obstinacy, and teach it to the Israelites.
To these last arrangements and acts of Moses, which are narrated
in chap. xxxi. and xxxii., there are added in chap, xxxiii. the blessing
with which this man of God bade farewell to the tribes of Israel, and
in chap, xxxiv. the account of his death, with which the Pentateuch
closes.
MOSES' FINAL ARRANGEMENTS. COMPLETION AND HANDING OVER
OF THE BOOK OF THE LAW. — CHAP. XXXI.
The final arrangements which Moses made before his departure,
partly of his own accord, and partly by the command of God, relate
to the introduction of the Israelites into the promised land, and the
confirmation of their fidelity towards the Lord their God. — Vers.
1-13 describe how Moses promised the help of the Lord in the con-
quest of the land, both to the people generally, and also to Joshua,
Digltizi
ed by Google
456 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
their leader into Canaan (vers. 2-8), and commanded the priests to
keep the book of the law, and read it publicly every seventh year
(vers. 9-13) ; and vers. 14—23, how the Lord appeared to Moses
before the tabernacle, and directed him to compose an ode as a
testimony against the apostasy of the people, and promised Joshua
His assistance. And lastly, vers. 24—27 relate how the book of the
law, when brought to completion, was handed over to the Levites ;
and vers. 28-30 describe the reading of the ode to the people.
Vers. 1—8. In ver. 1 Moses' final arrangements are announced.
1?5 does not mean " he went away" (into his tent), which does not
tally with what follows (" and spake") ; nor is it merely equivalent
to porro, amplius. It serves, as in Ex. ii. 1 and Gen. xxxv. 22, as
a pictorial description of what he was about to do, in the sense of
" he prepared himself," or rose up. After closing the exposition of
the law, Moses had either withdrawn, or at any rate made a pause,
before he proceeded to make his final arrangements for laying down
his office, and taking leave of the people. — Ver. 2. These last
arrangements he commences with the declaration, that he must now
bid them farewell, as he is 120 years old (which agrees with Ex. vii.
7), and can no more go out and in, i.e. no longer work in the nation
and for it (see at Num. xxvii. 17) ; and the Lord has forbidden him
to cross over the Jordan and enter Canaan (see Num. xx. 24). The
first of these reasons is not at variance with the statement in chap.
xxxiv. 7, that up to the time of his death his eyes were not dim, nor
his strength abated. For this is merely an affirmation, that he
retained the ability to see and to work to the last moment of his
life, which by no means precludes his noticing the decline of his
strength, and feeling the approach of his death. — Vers. 3-5. But
although Moses could not, and was not to lead his people into
Canaan, the Lord would fulfil His promise, to go before Israel and
destroy the Canaanites, like the two kings of the Amorites ; only
they (the Israelites) were to do to them as the Lord had commanded
them, i.e. to root out the Canaanites (yid. chap. vii. 2 sqq. ; Num.
xxxiii. 51 sqq. ; Ex. xxxiv. 11 sqq.). — Ver. 6. Israel was therefore to
be of good courage, and not to be afraid of them (yid. chap. i. 21,
xx. 3). — Vers. 7, 8. Moses then encourages Joshua in the same way
in the presence of all the people, on the strength of the promise of
God in chap. i. 38 and Num. xxvii. 18 sqq. WrrrtK Stan, " thou wilt
come with this people into the land." These words are quite appro-
priate ; and the alteration of K^an into N , 3R, according to ver. 23
(Samar., Syr., Vulg.), is a perfectly unnecessary conjecture; for
Digitized by
Google
chap. xxxr. 9-13. 457
Joshua was not appointed leader of the people here, but simply
promised an entrance with all the people into Canaan.
Vers. 9-13. Moses then handed over the law which he had
written to the Levitical priests who carried the ark of the covenant,
and to all the elders of Israel, with instructions to read it to the
people at the end of every seven years, during the festal season of
the year of release (" at the end," as in chap. xv. 1), viz. at the feast
of Tabernacles (see Lev. xxiii. 34), when they appeared before the
Lord. It is evident from the context and contents of these verses,
apart from ver. 24, that the ninth verse is to be understood in the
way described, i.e. that the two clauses, which are connected to-
gether by vav. relat. (" and Moses wrote this law," " and delivered
it"), are not logically co-ordinate, but that the handing over of the
written law was the main thing to be recorded here. With regard
to the handing over of the law, the fact that Moses not only gave
the written law to the priests, that they might place it by the ark of
the covenant, but also " to all the elders of Israel," proves clearly
enough that Moses did not intend at this time to give the law-book
entirely out of his own hands, but that this handing over was
merely an assignment of the law to the persons who were to take
care, that in the future the written law should be kept before the
people, as the rule of their life and conduct, and publicly read to
them. The explanation which J. H. Mich, gives is perfectly correct,
" He gave it for them to teach and keep." The law-book would
only have been given to the priests, if the object had been simply
that it should be placed by the ark of the covenant, or at the most,
in the presence of the elders, but certainly not to all the elders, since
they were not allowed to touch the ark. The correctness of this
view is placed beyond all doubt by the contents of vers. 10 sqq.
The main point in hand was not the writing out of the law, or the
transfer of it to the priests and elders of the nation, but the com-
mand to read the law in the presence of the people at the feast of
Tabernacles of the year of release. The writing out and handing
over simply formed the substratum for this command, so that we
cannot infer from them, that by this act Moses formally gave the
law out of his own hands. He entrusted the reading to the priest-
hood and the college of elders, as the spiritual and secular rulers of
the congregation ; and hence the singular, " Thou shalt read this
law to all Israel." The regulations as to the persons who were to
undertake the reading, and also as to the particular time during the
seven days' feast, and the portions that were to be read, he left to
Digitized by
Google
458 THE FIFTH BOOK OF HOSES.
the rulers of the congregation. We learn from Neh. viii. 18, that
in Ezra's time they read in the book of the law every day from the
first to the last day of the feast, from which we may see on the one
hand, that the whole of the Tkorah (or Pentateuch), from beginning
to end, was not read ; and on the other hand, by comparing the
expression in ver. 18, " the book of the law of God," with " the
law," in ver. 14, that the reading was not restricted to Deuteronomy:
for, according to ver. 14, they had already been reading in Leviticus
(chap, xxiii.) before the feast was held, — an evident proof that Ezra
the scribe did not regard the book of Deuteronomy like the critics of
our day, as the true national law-book, an acquaintance with which
was all that the people required. Moses did not fix upon the feast
of Tabernacles of the sabbatical year as the time for reading the
law, because it fell at the beginning of the year, 1 as Sckultz wrongly
supposes, that the people might thereby be incited to occupy this
year of entire rest in holy employment with the word and works of
God. And the reading itself was neither intended to promote a
more general acquaintance with the law on the part of the people, —
an object which could not possibly have been secured by reading it
once in seven years ; nor was it merely to be a solemn promulgation
and restoration of the law as the rule for the national life, for the
purpose of removing any irregularities that might have found their
way in the course of time into either the religious or the political
life of the nation (B&hr, Symbol, ii. p. 603). To answer this end,
it should have been connected with the Passover, the festival of
Israel's birth. The reading stood rather in close connection with
the idea of the festival itself ; it was intended to quicken the soul
with the law of the Lord, to refresh the heart, to enlighten the
eyes, — in short, to offer the congregation the blessing of the law,
which David celebrated from his own experience in Ps. xix. 8-15,
1 It by no means follows, that because the sabbatical year commenced with
the omission of the usual sowing, i.e. began in the autumn with the civil year,
it therefore commenced with the feast of Tabernacles, and the order of the
feasts was reversed in the sabbatical year. According to Ex. xxiii. 16, the feast
of Tabernacles did not fall at the beginning, but at the end of the civil year.
The commencement of the year with the first of Tisri was an arrangement
introduced after the captivity, which the Jews had probably adopted from the
Syrians (see my bibl. Archteol. i. § 74, note 15). Nor does it follow, that be-
cause the year of jubilee was to be proclaimed on the day of atonement in the
sabbatical year with a blast of trumpets (Lev. xxv. 9), therefore the year of
jubilee must have begun with the feast of Tabernacles. The proclamation of
festivals is generally made some time before they commence.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXI. 14-23. 459
to make the law beloved and prized by the whole nation, as a pre-
cious gift of the grace of God. Consequently (vers. 12, 13), not
only the men, but the women and children also, were to be gathered
together for this purpose, that they might hear the word of God,
and learn to fear the Lord their God, as long as they should live in
the land which He gave them for a possession. On ver. 11, see Ex.
xxiii. 17, and xxxiv. 23, 24, where we also find nte"}? for "iton?
(ver. 24).
Vers. 14-23. After handing over the office to Joshua, and the
law to the priests and elders, Moses was called by the Lord to
come to the tabernacle with Joshua, to command him ( n }¥), i.e.
to appoint him, confirm him in his office. To this end the Lord
appeared in the tabernacle (ver. 15), in a pillar of cloud, which
remained standing before it, as in Num. xii. 5 (see the exposition
of Num. xi. 25). But before appointing Joshua, He announced
to Moses that after his death the nation would go a whoring after
other gods, and would break the covenant, for which it would be
visited with severe afflictions, and directed him to write an ode and
teach it to the children of Israel, that when the apostasy should
take place, and punishment from God be felt in consequence, it
might speak as a witness against the people, as it would not vanish
from their memory. The Lord communicated this commission to
Moses in the presence of Joshua, that he also might hear from the
mouth of God that the Lord foreknew the future apostasy of the
people, and yet nevertheless would bring them into the promised
land. In this there was also implied an admonition to Joshua, not
only to take care that the Israelites learned the ode and kept it in
their memories, but also to strive with all his might to prevent the
apostasy, so long as he was leader of Israel ; which Joshua did most
faithfully to the very end of his life (vid. Josh, xxiii. and xxiv.). —
The announcement of the falling away of the Israelites from the
Lord into idolatry, and the burning of the wrath of God in con-
sequence (vers. 16-18), serves as a basis for the command in vers.
19 sqq. In this announcement the different points are simply
linked together with "and," whereas in their actual signification
they are subordinate to one another : When thou shalt lie with thy
fathers, and the people shall rise up, and go a whoring after other
gods : My anger will burn against them, etc. Dip, to rise up, to
prepare, serves to bring out distinctly the course which the thing
would take. The expression, "foreign gods of the land" indicates
that in the land which Jehovah gave His people, He (Jehovah)
Digitized by
Google
460 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
alone was God and Lord, and that He alone was to be worshipped
there. ^3"ip3 is in apposition to n B^, " whither thou comest, in the
midst of it." The punishment announced in ver. 17 corresponds
most closely to the sin of the nation. For going a whoring after
strange gods, the anger of the Lord would burn against them ; for
forsaking Him, He would forsake them; and for breaking His
covenant, He would hide His face from them, i.e. withdraw His
favour from them, so that they would be destroyed. ?bt6 njn, it
(the nation) will be for devouring, i.e. will be devoured or destroyed
(see Ewald, § 237, c. ; and on ??« in this sense, see chap. vii. 16,
and Num. xiv. 9). "And many evils and troubles mil befall it;
and it will say in that day, Do not these evils befall me, became my
God is not in the midst of me?" When the evils and troubles
broke in upon the nation, the people would inquire the cause, and
would find it in the fact that they were forsaken by their God ;
but the Lord ("but I" in ver. 18 forms the antithesis to "they"
in ver. 17) would still hide His face, namely, because simply miss-
ing God is not true repentance. — Ver. 19. " And now" sc. because
what was announced in vers. 16-18 would take place, "write you
this song." "This" refers to the song which follows in chap, xxxii.
Moses and Joshua were to write the song, because they were both
of them to strive to prevent the apostasy of the people ; and Moses,
as the author, was to teach it to the children of Israel, to make
them learn it, that it might be a witness for the Lord (for Me)
against the children of Israel. " This " is defined still further in
vers. 20, 21: if Israel, through growing satisfied and fat in its land,
which was so rich in costly good, should turn to other gods, and
the Lord should visit it in consequence with grievous evils and
troubles, the song was to answer before Israel as a witness ; i.e. not
only serve the Lord as a witness to the people that He had foretold
all the evil consequences of apostasy, and had given Israel proper
warning (Knobet), but to serve, as we may see from vers. 20, 21,
and from the contents of the song, as a witness, on the one hand,
that the Lord had conferred upon the people so many benefits and
bestowed upon them such abundant blessings of His grace, that
apostasy from Him was the basest ingratitude, for which they
would justly be punished ; and, on the other hand, that the Lord
had not rejected His people in spite of the punishments inflicted
upon them, but would once more have compassion upon them and
requite their foes, and thus would sanctify and glorify Himself as
the only true God by His judgments upon Israel and the nations.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXI. 24-27. 461
The law, with its commandments, promises, and threats, was already
a witness of this kind against Israel (cf. ver. 26) ; but just as in
every other instance the appearance of a plurality of unanimous
witnesses raises the matter into an indisputable truth, so the Lord
would set up another witness against the Israelites besides the law,
in the form of this song, which was adapted to give all the louder
warning, " because the song would not be forgotten out of the
mouths of their seed" (ver. 21). The song, when once it had
passed into the mouths of the people, would not very readily vanish
from their memory, but would be transmitted from generation to
generation, and be heard from the mouths of their descendants, as
a perpetual warning voice, as it would be used by Israel ; for God
knew the invention of the people, i.e. the thoughts and purposes of
their heart, which they cherished (nt?y used to denote the doing of
the heart, as in Isa. xxxii. 6) even then before He had brought
them into Canaan. (On ver. 20a, vid. chap. vii. 5, ix. 5, and Ex.
iii. 8.) — In ver. 22 the result is anticipated, and the command of
God is followed immediately by an account of its completion by
Moses (just as in Ex. xii. 50 ; Lev. xvi. 34, etc.). — After this com-
mand with reference to the song, the Lord appointed Joshua to the
office which he had been commanded to take, urging him at the
same time to be courageous, and promising him His help in the
conquest of Canaan. That the subject to W} is not Moses, but
Jehovah, is evident partly from the context, the retrospective glance
at ver. 14, and partly from the words themselves, " I will be with
thee" (vid: Ex. iii. 12). 1
Vers. 24-27. With the installation of Joshua on the part of
God, the official life of Moses was brought to a close. Having
returned from the tabernacle, he finished the writing out of the
laws, and then gave the book of the law to the Levites, with a com-
mand to put it by the side of the ark of the covenant, that it might
be there for a witness against the people, as He knew its rebellion
and stiffneckedness (vers. 24-27). " 1 Bp*?y 3TD, to write upon a
book, equivalent to write down, commit to writing. Dtp 1?, till
their being finished, i.e. complete. By the "Levites who bare the ark
of the covenant" we are not to understand ordinary Levites, but the
1 KnobeVs assertion (on Num. xxvii. 23) that the appointment of Joshua on
the part of Moses by the imposition of hands, as described in that passage, is at
variance with this verse, scarcely needs any refutation. Or is it really the case,
that the installation of Joshua on the part of God is irreconcilable with his
ordination by Moses ?
Digitized by
Google
462 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Levitical priests, who were entrusted with the ark. "The Levites"
is simply a contraction for the full expression, " the priests the
sons of Levi " (ver. 9). It is true that, according to Num. iv. 4
sqq., the Kohathites were appointed to carry the holy vessels, which
included the ark of the covenant, on the journey through the desert;
but it was the priests, and not they, who were the true bearers and
guardians of the holy things, as we may see from the fact that the
priests had first of all to wrap up these holy things in a careful
manner, before they handed them over to the Kohathites, that they
might not touch the holy things and die (Num. iv. 15). Hence
we find that on solemn occasions, when the ark was to be brought
out in all its full significance and glory, — as, for example, in the
crossing of the Jordan (Josh. iii. 3 sqq., iv. 9, 10), when encom-
passing Jericho (Josh. vi. 6, 12), at the . setting up of the law on
Ebal and Gerizim (Josh. viii. 33), and at the consecration of
Solomon's temple (1 Kings viii. 3), — it was not by the Levites, but
by the priests, that the ark of the covenant was borne. In fact
the Levites were, strictly speaking, only their (the priests') servants,
who relieved them of this and the other labour, so that what they
did was done in a certain sense through them. If the (non-
priestly) Levites were not to touch the ark of the covenant, and
not even to put in the poles (Num. iv. 6), Moses would not have
handed over the law-book, to be kept by the ark of the covenant,
to them, but to the priests. tf"it* TOD, at the side of the ark, or,
according to the paraphrase of Jonathan, " in a case on the right
side of the ark of the covenant," which may be correct, although
we must not think of this case, as many of the early theologians
do, as a secondary ark attached to the ark of the covenant (see
Lundius, Jud. Heiligth. pp. 73, 74). The tables of the law were
deposited in the ark (Ex. xxv. 16, xl. 20),- and the book of the law
was to be kept by its side. As it formed, from its very nature,
simply an elaborate commentary upon the decalogue, it was also to
have its place outwardly as an accompaniment to the tables of the
law, for a witness against the people, in the same manner as the
song in the mouth of the people (ver. 21). For, as Moses adds in
ver. 27, in explanation of his instructions, u I know thy rebellioumu,
and thy stiff neck : behold, while I am yet alive with you this day, Jj(
have been rebellious against the Lord (vid. chap. ix. 7) ; and ltw
much more after my death."
With these words Moses handed over the complete book of the
law to the Levitical priests. For although the handing over is not
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXI. 28-30. 463
expressly mentioned, it is unquestionably implied in the words,
" Take this book, and put it by the side of the ark of the covenant,"
as the finishing of the writing of the laws is mentioned immediately
before. But if Moses finished the writing of the law after he had
received instructions from the Lord to compose the ode, what he
wrote will reach to ver. 23 ; and what follows from ver. 24 onwards
will form the appendix to his work by a different hand. 1 The sup-
position that Moses himself inserted his instructions concerning the
preservation of the book of the law, and the ode which follows, is
certainly possible, but not probable. The decision as to the place
where it should be kept was not of such importance as to need
insertion in the book of the law, since sufficient provision for its
safe keeping had been made by the directions in vers. 9 sqq. ; and
although God had commanded him to write the ode, it was not for
the purpose of inserting it in the Thorah as an essential portion of it,
but to let the people learn it, to put it in the mouth of the people.
The allusion to this ode in vers. 19 sqq. furnishes no conclusive evi-
dence, either that Moses himself included it in the law-book which
he had written with the account of his oration in vers. 28-30 and
chap, xxxii. 1-43, or that the appendix which Moses did not write
commences at ver. 14 of this chapter. For all that follows with
certainty from the expression " this song" (vers. 19 and 22), which
certainly points to the song in chap, xxxii., is that Moses himself
handed over the ode to the priests with the complete book of the
law, as a supplement to the law, and that this ode was then inserted
by the writer of the appendix in the appendix itself.
Vers. 28-30. Directly after handing over the book of the law,
Moses directed the elders of all the tribes, together with the official
persons, to gather round him, that he might rehearse to them the
ode which he had written for the people. The summons, " gather
unto me," was addressed to the persons to whom he had given the
book of the law. The elders and officers, as the civil authorities of the
congregation, were collected together by him to hear the ode, because
they were to put it in the mouth of the people, i.e. to take care that
1 The objection brought against this view by Riehm, namely, that "it
founders on the fact that the style and language in chap. xxxi. 24-30 and
xxxii. 44-47 are just the same as in the earlier portion of the book," simply
shows that he has not taken into consideration that, with the simple style
adopted in Hebrew narrative, we could hardly expect in eleven verses, which
contain for the most part simply words and sayings of Moses, to find any very
striking difference of language or of style. This objection, therefore, merely
proves that no valid arguments can be adduced against the view in question.
Digitized by
Google
464 THE FIFTH BOOK OF HOSES.
all the nation should learn it. The words, " / will call heaven and
earth as witnesses against you," refer to the substance of the ode
about to be rehearsed, which begins with an appeal to the heaven
and the earth (chap, xxxii. 1). The reason assigned for this in
vor. 29 is a brief summary of what the Lord had said to Moses in
vers. 16—21, and Moses thought it necessary to communicate to the
representatives of the nation. " Tlie work of your hands" refers to
the idols (vid. chap. iv. 28). — Ver. 30 forms the introduction to the
rehearsal of the ode.
SONG OF MOSES, AND ANNOUNCEMENT OF HIS DEATH. —
CHAP. XXXII.
Vers. 1-43. The Song of Moses. — In accordance with the
object announced in chap. xxxi. 19, this song contrasts the un-
changeable fidelity of the Lord with the perversity of His faithless
people. After a solemn introduction pointing out the importance of
the instruction about to be given (vers. 1-3), this thought is placed
in the foreground as the theme of the whole : the Lord is blameless
and righteous in His doings, but Israel acts corruptly and per-
versely ; and this is carried out in the first place by showing the
folly of the Israelites in rebelling against the Lord (vers. 6-18) ;
secondly, by unfolding the purpose of God to reject and punish the
rebellious generation (vers. 19-23) ; and lastly, by announcing and
depicting the fulfilment of this purpose, and the judgment in which
the Lord would have mercy upon His servants and annihilate His
foes (vers. 34-43).
The song embraces the whole of the future history of Israel,
and bears all the marks of a prophetic testimony from the mouth
of Moses, in the perfectly ideal picture which it draws, on the one
hand, of the benefits and blessings conferred by the Lord upon His
people ; and on the other hand, of the ingratitude with which Israel
repaid its God for them all. " This song, soaring as it does to the
loftiest heights, moving amidst the richest abundance of pictures of
both present and future, with its concise, compressed, and pictorial
style, rough, penetrating, and sharp, but full of the holiest solem-
nity, a witness against the disobedient nation, a celebration of the
covenant God, sets before us in miniature a picture of the whole
life and conduct of the great man of God, whose office it pre-emi-
nently was to preach condemnation" (0. v. Gerlach). — It is true
that the persons addressed in this ode are not the contemporaries of
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXII. 1-43. 465
Moses, but the Israelites in Canaan, when they had grown haughty
in the midst of the rich abundance of its blessings, and had fallen
away from the Lord, so that the times when God led the people
through the wilderness to Canaan are represented as days long past
away. But this, the stand-point of the ode, is not to be identified
with the poet's own time. It is rather a prophetic anticipation of
the future, which has an analogon in a poet's absorption in an ideal
future, and differs from this merely in the certainty and distinct-
ness with which the future is foreseen and proclaimed. The asser-
tion that the entire ode moves within the epoch of the kings who
lived many centuries after the time of Moses, rests upon a total
misapprehension of the nature of prophecy, and a mistaken attempt
to turn figurative language into prosaic history. In the whole of
the song there is not a single word to indicate that the persons ad-
dressed were " already sighing under the oppression of a wild and
hostile people, the barbarous hordes of Assyrians or Chaldeans"
(Ewald, Kamphausen, etc.). 1 The Lord had indeed determined to
reject the idolatrous nation, and excite it to jealousy through those
that were " no people," and to heap up all evils upon it, famine,
pestilence, and sword ; but the execution of this purpose had not
yet taken place, and, although absolutely certain, was in the future
still. Moreover, the benefits which God had conferred upon His
people, were not of such a character as to render it impossible that
they should have been alluded to by Moses. All that the Lord had
done for Israel, by delivering it from bondage and guiding it miracu-
lously through the wilderness, had been already witnessed by Moses
himself ; and the description in vers. 13 and 14, which goes beyond
that time, is in reality nothing more than a pictorial expansion of
the thought that Israel was most bountifully provided with the
1 How little firm ground there is for this assertion in the contents of the
ode, is indirectly admitted even by Kamphausen himself in the following re-
marks: " The words of the ode leave us quite in the dark as to the author;"
and " if it were really certain that Deuteronomy was composed by Moses him-
self, the question as to the authenticity of the ode would naturally be decided in
the traditional way." Consequently, the solution of the whole is to be found
in the dictum, that " the circumstances which are assumed in any prophecy as
already existing, and to which the prophetic utterances are appended as to
something well known (?), really determine the time of the prophet himself ; "
and, according to this canon, which is held up as " certain and infallible," but
which is really thoroughly uncritical, and founded upon the purely dogmatic
assumption that any actual foreknowledge of the future is impossible, the ode
before us is to, be assigned to a date somewhere about 700 years before Christ.
PENT. — V?>L. III. 2 G
Digitized by
Google
466 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
richest productions of the land of Canaan, which flowed with milk
and honey. It is true, the satisfaction of Israel with these blessings
had not actually taken place in the time of Moses, but was still only
an object of hope ; but it was hope of such a kind, that Moses conld
not cherish a moment's doubt concerning it. Throughout the whole
we find no allusions to peculiar circumstances or historical events
belonging to a later age. — On the other hand, the whole circle of
ideas, figures, and words in the ode points decidedly to Moses as the
author. Even if we leave out of sight the number of peculiarities
of style (air. Xeyofieva), which is by no means inconsiderable, and
such bold original composite words as ?X~ii? (not- God, ver. 21;
cf. ver. 17) and DJTW (not-people, ver. 21), which point to a very
remote antiquity, and furnish evidence of the vigour of the earliest
poetry, — the figure of the eagle in ver. 11 points back to Ex. xix. 4;
the description of God as a rock in vers. 4, 15, 18, 30, 31, 37, recalls
Gen. xlix. 24 ; the fire of the wrath of God, burning even to the
world beneath (ver. 22), points to the representation of God in chap,
iv. 24 as a consuming fire ; the expression " to move to jealousy"
in vers. 16 and 21, recalls the "jealous God" in chap. iv. 24, vi.
15, Ex. xx. 5, xxxiv. 14 ; the description of Israel as children (sons)
in ver. 5, and "children without faithfulness" in ver. 20, suggests
chap. xiv. 1 ; and the words, " O that they were wise," in ver. 29>
recall chap. iv. 6, " a wise people." Again, it is only in the Penta-
teuch that the word <H3 (greatness, ver. 3) is used to denote the
greatness of God (yid. Deut. iii. 24, v. 21, ix. 26, xi. 2 ; Num. xiv.
19) ; the name of honour given to Israel in ver. 15, viz. Jeshurun,
only occurs again in chap, xxxiii. 5 and 26, with the exception of
Isa. xliv. 2, where it is borrowed from these passages ; and the
plural form nto|, in ver. 7, is only met with again in the prayer of
Moses, viz. Ps. xc. 15.
Vers. 1—5. Introduction and Theme. — In the introduction (vers.
1—3), — " Give ear, ye heavens, I will speak; and let the earth hear the
words of my mouth. Let my doctrine drop as the rain, let my speech
fall as the dew ; as showers upon green, and rain-drops upon herb :
for 1 will publish the name of the Lord ; give ye greatness to our
God," — Moses summons heaven and earth to hearken to his words,
because the instruction which he was about to proclaim concerned
both heaven and earth, i.e. the whole universe. It did so, however,
not merely as treating of the honour of its Creator, which was dis-
regarded by the murmuring people (Kampliausen), or to justify God,
as the witness of the righteousness of His doings, in opposition to
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXII. 1-48. 467
the faithless nation, when He punished it for its apostasy (just as in
chap. iv. 26, xxx. 19, xxxi. 28, 29, heaven and earth are appealed to
as witnesses against rebellious Israel), but also inasmuch as heaven
and earth would be affected by the judgment which God poured
out upon faithless Israel and the nations, to avenge the blood of
His servants (ver. 43) ; since the faithfulness and righteousness of
God would thus become manifest in heaven and on earth, and the
universe be sanctified and glorified thereby. The vav consec. before
rriaiK expresses the desired or intended sequel : so that I may then
speak, or " so will I then speak" (vid. Kohler on Hogg. p. 44, note).
— Ver. 2. But because what was about to be announced was of such
importance throughout, he desired that the words should trickle
down like rain and dew upon grass and herb. The point of com-
parison lies in the refreshing, fertilizing, and enlivening power of
the dew and rain. Might the song exert the same upon the hearts
of the hearers. HJ57, accepting, then, in a passive sense, that which
is accepted, instruction (doctrine, Prov. xvi. 21, 23 ; Isa. xxix. 24).
To "publish the name of the Lord ;" lit. call, i.e. proclaim (not " call
upon"), or praise. It was not by himself alone that Moses desired
to praise the name of the Lord ; the hearers of his song were also
to join in this praise. The second clause requires this : " give ye
{i.e. ascribe by word and conduct) greatness to our God." Til, ap-
plied here to God (as in chap. iii. 24, v. 21, ix. 26, xi. 2), which is
only repeated again in Ps. cl. 2, is the greatness manifested by God
in His acts of omnipotence ; it is similar in meaning to the term
" glory" in Ps. xxix. 1, 2, xcvi. 7, 8.
Vers. 4, 5. " The Rock — blameless is His work; for all His
ways are right : a God of faithfulness, and without injustice ; just
and righteous is He. Corruptly acts towards Him, not His children ;
their spot, a perverse and crooked generation." ">wn is placed first
absolutely, to give it the greater prominence. God is called " the
rock," as the unchangeable refuge, who grants a firm defence and
secure resort to His people, by virtue of His unchangeableness or
impregnable firmness (see the synonym, " the Stone of Israel," in
Gen. xlix. 24). This epithet points to the Mosaic age ; and this is
clearly shown by the use made of this title of God (Zur) in the
construction of surnames in the Mosaic era ; such, for example, as
Pedahzur (Num. i. 10), which is equivalent to Pedahel (" God-
redeemed," Num. xxxiv. 28), Elizur (Num. i. 5), Zuriel (Num. iii.
35), and Zurishaddai (Num. i. 6, ii. 12). David, who had so often
experienced the rock-like protection of his God, adopted it in his
Digitized by
Google
468 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Psalms (2 Sam. xxii. 3, 32 = Ps. xviii. 3, 32 ; also Ps. xix. 15, xxxi.
3, 4, lxxi. 3). Perfect (i.e. blameless, without fault or blemish) is His
work ; for His ways, which He adopts in His government of the
world, are right. As the rock, He is " a God of faithfulness,"
upon which men may rely and build in all the storms of life, and
" without iniquity," i.e. anything crooked or false in His nature.—
Ver. 5. His people Israel, on the contrary, had acted corruptly
towards Him. The subject of " acted corruptly" is the rebellious
generation of the people ; but before this subject there is introduced
parenthetically, and'in apposition, " not his children, but their spot."
Spot (mum) is used here in a moral sense, as in Prov. ix. 7, Job xi.
15, xxxi. 7, equivalent to stain. The rebellious and ungodly were
not children of the Lord, but a stain upon them. If these words
had stood after the actual subject, instead of before them, they
would have presented no difficulty. This verse is the original of the
expression, " children that are corrupters," in Isa. i. 4.
Vers. 6-18. Expansion of the theme according to the thought
expressed in ver. 5. The perversity of the rebellious generation
manifested itself in the fact, that it repaid the Lord, to whom it
owed existence and well-being, for all His benefits, with a foolish
apostasy from its Creator and Father. This thought is expressed
in ver. 6, in a reproachful question addressed to the people, and then
supported in vers. 7-14 by an enumeration of the benefits conferred
by God, and in vers. 15-18 by a description of the ingratitude of
the people. — Ver. 6. " Will ye thus repay the Lord ? thou fooltih
people and unwise ! Is He. not thy Father, who hath founded thee,
who hath made thee and prepared thee f" ?B3, the primary idea of
which is doubtful, signifies properly to show, or do, for the most part
good, but sometimes evil (vid. Ps. vii. 5). For the purpose of paint-
ing the folly of their apostasy distinctly before the eyes of the
people, Moses crowds words together to describe what God was to
the nation, — " thy Father," to whose lqve Israel was indebted for its
elevation into an independent people : comp. Isa. lxiii. 16, where
Father and Redeemer are synonymous terms, with Isa. briv. 7, God
the Father, Israel the clay which He had formed, and Mai. ii. 10,
where God as Father is said to have created Israel ; see also the
remarks at chap. xiv. 1 on the notion of Israel's sonship. — ^ij, He
has acquired thee ; TOJ5, ktooOoi, to get, acquire (Gen. iv. 1), then so
as to involve the idea of kti&iv (Gen. xiv. 9), though without being
identical with *03. It denotes here the founding of Israel as a nation,
by its deliverance out of the power of Pharaoh. The verbs which
Digitizi
ed by Google
CHAP. XXXIL 1-43. 469
follow {made and established) refer to the elevation and prepara-
tion of the redeemed nation, as the nation of the Lord, by the con-
clusion of a covenant, the giving of the law, and their guidance
through the desert. — Ver. 7. " Remember the days of old, consider
the years of the past generations : ask thy father, that he may make
known to thee ; thine old men, that they may tell it to thee!" With
these words Moses summons the people to reflect upon what the
Lord had done to them. The days of old (Pty), and years of gene-
ration and generation, i.e. years through which one generation after
another had lived, are the times of the deliverance of Israel out
of Egypt, including the pre-Mosaic times, and also the immediate
post-Mosaic, when Israel had entered into the possession of Canaan.
These times are described by Moses as a far distant past, because
he transported himself in spirit to the " latter days" (chap. xxxi.
29), when the nation would have fallen away from its God, and
would have been forsaken and punished by God in consequence.
" Day 8 of eternity" are times which lie an eternity behind the
speaker, not necessarily, however, before all time, but simply at a
period very far removed from the present, and of which even the
fathers and old men could only relate what had been handed down
by tradition to them.
Vers. 8 and 9. " When the Most High portioned out inheritance
to the nations, when He divided the children of men; He fixed the
boundaries of the nations according to the number of the sons of
Israel : for the Lord's portion is His people ; Jacob the cord of His
inheritance." Moses commences his enumeration of the manifesta-
tions of divine mercy with the thought, that from the very com-
mencement of the forming of nations God had cared for His people
Israel. The meaning of ver. 8 is given in general correctly by
Calvin: "In the whole arrangement of the world God had kept
this before Him as the end : to consult the interests of His chosen
people." The words, " when the Most High portioned out inherit-
ance to the nations," etc., are not to be restricted to the one fact of
the confusion of tongues and division of the nations as described in
Gen. xi., but embrace the whole period of the development of the
one human family in separate tribes and nations, together with their
settlement in different lands ; for it is no doctrine of the Israelitish
legend, as Kamphausen supposes, that the division of the nations was
completed once for all. The book of Genesis simply teaches, that
after the confusion of tongues at the building of the tower of Babel,
God scattered men over the entire surface of the earth (chap. xi.
Digitized by
Google
470 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
9), and that the nations were divided, i.e. separate nations were
formed from the families of the sons of Noah (Gen. x. 32) ; that is
to say, the nations were formed in the divinely-appointed way of
generation and multiplication, and so spread over the earth. And
the Scriptures say nothing about a division of the countries among
the different nations at one particular time ; they simply show, that,
like the formation of the nations from families and tribes, the posses-
sion of the lands by the nations so formed was to be traced to God,
— was the work of divine providence and government, — whereby
God so determined the boundaries of the nations ("the nations"
are neither the tribes of Israel, nor simply the nations round about
Canaan, but the nations generally), that Israel might receive as its
inheritance a land proportioned to its numbers. 1 — Ver. 9. God did
this, because He had chosen Israel as His own nation, even before
it came into existence. As the Lord's people of possession (cf.
chap. vii. 6, x. 15, and Ex. xix. 5), Israel was Jehovah's portion,
and the inheritance assigned to Him. »n 3 a cord, or measure,
then a piece of land measured off ; here it is figuratively applied to
the nation. — Vers. 10 sqq. He had manifested His fatherly care
and love to Israel as His own property.
Ver. 10. " He found him in the land of the desert, and in tin
wilderness, the howling of the steppe ; He surrounded him, took care
of him, protected him as the apple of His eye." These words do
not " relate more especially to the conclusion of the covenant at
Sinai " (Luther), nor merely to all the proofs- of the paternal care
with which God visited His people in the desert, to lead them to
Sinai, there to adopt them as His covenant nation, and then to
guide them to Canaan, to the exclusion of their deliverance from
the bondage of Egypt. The reason why Moses does not mention
this fact, or the passage through the Red Sea, is not to be sought
for, either solely or even in part, in the fact that " the song does
not rest upon the stand-point of the Mosaic times ;" for we may see
clearly that distance of time would furnish no adequate ground for
"singling out and elaborating certain points only from the re-
nowned stories of old," say from the 105th Psalm, which no one
would think of pronouncing an earlier production than this song.
1 The Septuagint rendering, " according to the number of the angels of
God," is of no critical value, — in fact, is nothing more than an arbitrary inter-
pretation founded upon the later Jewish notion of guardian angels of the dif-
ferent nations (Sir. xvii. 14), which probably originated in a misunderstanding
of chap. iv. 19, as compared with' Dan. x. 13, 20, 21, and xii. 1.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXII. 1-43. 471
Nor is it because the gracious help of God, which the people expe-
rienced up to the time of the exodus from Egypt, was inferior in
importance to the divine care exercised over it during the march
through the desert (a fact which would need to he proved), or be-
cause the solemn conclusion of the covenant, whereby Israel first
became the people of God, took place during the sojourn at Sinai,
that Moses speaks of God as finding the people in the desert and
adopting them there ; but simply because it was not his intention
to give a historical account of the acts performed by God upon and
towards Israel, but to describe how Israel was in the most helpless con-
dition when the Lord had compassion upon it, to take it out of that
most miserable state in which it must have perished, and bring it into
the possession of the richly-blessed land of Canaan. The whole de-
scription of what the Lord did for Israel (vers. 10-14) is figurative.
Israel is represented as a man in the. horrible desert, and in danger of
perishing in the desolate waste, where not only bread and water had
failed, but where ravenous beasts lay howling in wait for human life,
when the Lord took him up and delivered him out of all distress.
The expression "found him" is also to be explained from this figure.
Finding presupposes seeking, and in the seeking the love which goes
in search of the loved one is manifested. Also the expression "land
of the desert " — a land which is a desert, without the article defin-
ing the desert more precisely — shows that the reference is not to
the finding of Israel in the desert of Arabia, and that these words
are not to be understood as relating to the fact, that when His
people entered the desert the Lord appeared to them in the pillar
of cloud and fire (Ex. xiii. 20, Schultz). For although the figure
of the desert is chosen, because in reality the Lord had led Israel
through the Arabian desert to Canaan, we must not so overlook the .
figurative character of the whole description as to refer the expres-
sion " in a desert land " directly and exclusively to the desert of
Arabia. The measures adopted by the Pharaohs, the object of
which was the extermination or complete suppression of Israel,
made even Egypt a land of desert to the Israelites, where they
would inevitably have perished if the Lord had not sought, found,
and surrounded them there. To depict still further the helpless
and irremediable situation of Israel, the idea of the desert is
heightened still further by the addition of 'tfl V\ta\ " and in fact (1
is explanatory) in a waste," or wilderness (tohu recalls Gen. i. 2).
" Howling of the desert " is in apposition to tohu (waste), and not a
genitive dependent upon it, viz. "waste of the howling of the desert,
Digltizi
ed by Google
472 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
or of the desert in which wild beasts howl" (Ewald), as if JJ1
stood after Pty. "Howling of the desert" does not mean the
desert in which wild beasts howl, but the howling which is heard
in the desert of wild beasts. The meaning of the passage, there-
fore, is "in the midst of the howling of the wild beasts of the
desert." This clause serves to strengthen the idea of tohu (waste),
and describes the waste as a place of the most horrible howling of
wild beasts. It was in this situation that the Lord surrounded His
people. 33te, to surround with love and care, not merely to protect
(vid. Ps. xxvi. 6 ; Jer. xxxi. 22). 1^3, from T? or ?2n, to pay atten-
tion, in the sense of " not to lose sight of them." " To keep as the
apple of the eye" is a figurative description of the tenderest care.
The apple of the eye is most carefully preserved (vid. Ps. xvii. 8 ;
Prov. vii. 2).
Ver. 11. "As an eagle, which stirreth up its nest and soars over
its young, He spread out His wings, took him up, carried him upon
His wings." Under the figure of an eagle, which teaches its young
to fly, and in doing so protects them from injury with watchful
affection, Moses describes the care with which the Lord came to
the relief of His people in their helplessness, and assisted them to
develop their strength. This figure no doubt refers more especially
to the protection and assistance of God experienced by Israel in its
journey through the Arabian desert ; but it must not be restricted
to this. It embraces' both the deliverance of Israel out of Egypt
by the outstretched arm of the Lord, as we may see from a com-
parison with Ex. xix. 4, where the Lord is said to have brought His
people out of Egypt upon eagles' wings, and also the introduction
into Canaan, when the Lord drove the Canaanites out from before
them and destroyed them. This verse contains an independent
thought ; the first half is the protasis, the second the apodosis. The
nominative to " spreadeth abroad" is Jehovah ; and the suffixes in
vinj£ and viNt5» (" taketh" and " beareth") refer to Israel or Jacob
(ver. 9), like the suffixes in ver. 10. As 3 cannot open a sentence
like lefcs, we must supply the relative "!$} after 1B> b. tip TPn, to
waken up, rouse up its nest, i.e. to encourage the young ones to
fly. It is rendered correctly by the Vulgate, provocans ad volan-
dum pullos suos ; and freely by Luther, " bringeth out its young."
" Soareth over its young :" namely, in order that, when they were
attempting to fly, if any were in danger of falling through ex-
haustion, it might take them at once upon its powerful wings, and
preserve them from harm. Examples of this, according to the
Digitizi
ed by Google
I
j CHAP. XXXII. 1-43. 473
popular belief, are given by Bockart (Hieroz. ii. p. 762). *|rn, from
«irn to be loose or slack (Jer. xxiii. 9) : in the Piel it is applied to
a bird in the sense of loosening its wings, as distinguished from
binding its wings to its body; hence (1) to sit upon eggs with
loosened wings, and (2) to fly with loosened wings. Here it is used
in the latter sense, because the young are referred to. The point
of comparison between the conduct of God towards Jacob and the
acts of an eagle towards its young, is the loving care with which He
trained Israel to independence. The carrying of Israel upon the
eagle's wings of divine love and omnipotence was manifested in the
most glorious way in the guidance of it by the pillar of cloud and
fire, though it was not so exclusively in this visible vehicle of the
gracious presence of God as that the comparison can be restricted
to this phenomenon alone. Luther s interpretation is more correct
than this,—" Moses points out in these words, how He fostered them
in the desert, bore with their manners, tried them and blessed them
that they might learn to fly, i.e. to trust in Him," — except that the
explanation of the expression " to fly " is narrowed too much.
Vers. 12—14. " The Lord alone did lead him, and with Him was
no strange god. He made him drive over the high places of the earth,
and eat the productions of the field ; and made him suck honey out of
the rock, and oil out of the flint-stone. Cream of cattle, and milk of
the flock, with the fat of lambs, and rams of Bashan's kind, and
bucks, with the kidney-fat of wheat : and grape-blood thou drunkest
as fiery wine." Moses gives prominence to the fact that Jehovah
alone conducted Israel, to deprive the people of every excuse for
their apostasy from the Lord, and put their ingratitude in all the
stronger light. If no other god stood by the Lord to help Him, He
had thereby laid Israel under the obligation to serve Him alone as
its God. " With Him" refers to Jehovah, and not to Israel. — Vers.
13, 14. The Lord caused the Israelites to take possession of Canaan
with victorious power, and enter upon the enjoyment of its abundant
blessings. The phrase, " to cause to drive over the high places of
the earth," is a figurative expression for the victorious subjugation
of a land ; it is not taken from Ps. xviii. 34, as Ewald assumes, but
is original both here and in chap, xxxiii. 29. "Drive" (ride) is
only a more majestic expression for " advance." The reference to
this passage in Isa. lviii. 14 is unmistakeable. Whoever has obtained
possession of the high places of a country is lord of the land. The
" high places of the earth " do not mean the high places of Canaan
only, although the expression in, this instance relates to the posses-
DigitiZ'
ed by Google
474 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
sion of Canaan. u And he (Jacob) ate :" for, so, that he could now
eat, the productions of the field, and in fact ajll the riches of the
fruitful land, which are then described in superabundant terms.
Honey out of the rock and oil out of the flint-stone, i.e. the most
valuable productions out of the most unproductive places, since God
so blessed the land that even the rocks and stones were productive.
The figure is derived from the fact that Canaan abounds in wild
bees, which make their hives in clefts of the rock, and in olive-trees
which grow in a rocky soil. " Rock-flints," i.e. rocky flints. The
nouns in ver. 14 are dependent upon " to suck " in ver. 13, as the
expression is not used literally. "Things which are sweet and
pleasant to eat, people are in the habit of sucking" (Ges. Hies.
p. 601). fwpn and 3?n (though 3?n seems to require a form 3?n ;
vid. Ewald, § 213, b.) denote the two forms in which the milk
yielded by the cattle was used ; the latter, milk in general, and the
former thick curdled milk, cream, and possibly also butter. The
two are divided poetically here, the cream being assigned to the
cattle, and the milk to the sheep and goats. " The fat of lambs"
i.e. " lambs of the best description laden with fat" ( Vitringa). Fat
is a figurative expression for the best (vid. Num. xviii. 12). " And
rams :" grammatically, no doubt, this might also be connected with
" the fat," but it is improbable from a poetical point of view, since
the enumeration would thereby drag prosaically ; and it is also
hardly reconcilable with the apposition JBO '33, i.e. reared in Bashan
(vid. Ezek. xxxix. 18), which implies that Bashan was celebrated
for its rams, and not merely for its oxen. This epithet, which
Kamphausen renders " of Bashan's kind," is unquestionably used
for the best description of rams. The list becomes poetical, if we
take " rams" as an accusative governed by the verb " to suck" (ver.
13). " Kidney-fat (i.e. the best fat) of wheat," the finest and most
nutritious wheat. Wine is mentioned last, and in this case the list
passes with poetic freedom into the form of an address. " Grape-
blood" for red wine (as in Gen. xlix. 11). ion, from ion to fer-
ment, froth, foam, lit. the foaming, i.e. fiery wine, serves as a
more precise definition of the " blood of the grape."
Vers. 15-18. Israel had repaid its God for all these benefits by
a base apostasy. — Ver. 15. "But Righteous-nation became fat, and
struck out — thou becamest fat, thick, gross — and let go God mho
made him, and despised the rock of his salvation." So much is
certain concerning Jeshurun, that it was an honourable surname
given to Israel ; that it is derived from 1^, and describes Israel as
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXII. 1-48. 475
a nation of just or right men (a similar description to that given by
Balaam in Num. xxiii. 10), because Jehovah, who is just and right
(ver. 4), had called it to uprightness, to walk in His righteousness,
and chosen it as His servant (Isa. xliv. 2). The prevalent opinion,
that Jeshurun is a diminutive, and signifies rectalus, or "little
pious" (Ges. and others), has no more foundation than the deriva-
tion from Israel, and the explanation, " little Israel," since there is
no philological proof that the termination un ever had a diminu-
tive signification in Hebrew (see Hengstenberg, Balaam, p. 415) ;
and an appellatio blanda et charitativa is by no means suitable to
this passage, much less to chap, xxxiii. 5. The epithet Righteous-
nation, as we may render Jeshurun, was intended to remind Israel
of its calling, and involved the severest reproof of its apostasy.
" By placing the name of righteous before Israel, he censured
ironically those who had fallen away from righteousness ; and by
thus reminding them with what dignity they had been endowed, he
upbraided them with the more severity for their guilt of perfidy.
For in other places (sc. chap, xxxiii. 5, 26) Israel is honoured with
an eulogium of the same kind, without any such sinister meaning,
hut with simple regard to its calling; whilst here Moses shows
reproachfully how far they had departed from that pursuit of piety,
to the cultivation of which they had been called" (Calvin). The
words, " became fat, and struck out," are founded upon the figure
of an ox that had become fat, and intractable in consequence (vid.
Isa. x. 27, Hos. iv. 16 ; and for the fact itself, Deut. vi. 11, viii. 10,
xxxi. 20). To sharpen this reproof, Moses repeats the thought in
the form of a direct address to the people : " Thou hast become fat,
stout, gross." Becoming fat led to forsaking God, the Creator and
ground of its salvation. " A full stomach does not promote piety,
for it stands secure, and neglects God " (Luther). ?33 is no doubt
a denom. verb from »J, lit. to treat as a fool, i.e. to despise (vid.
Micah vii. 6).
Vers. 16-18. " They excited His jealousy through strange
(gods), they provoked Him by abominations. They sacrificed to
devils, which (were) not-God; to gods whom they knew not, to new
(ones) that had lately come up, whom your fathers feared not. The
rock which begat thee thou forsookest, and hast forgotten the God
that bare thee." These three verses are only a further expansion of
ver. 156. Forsaking the rock of its salvation, Israel gave itself
up to the service of worthless idols. The expression "excite to
jealousy" is founded upon the figure of a marriage covenant,
Digitized by
Google
476 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
under which the relation of the Lord to Israel is represented (vid.
chap. xxxi. 16, and the com. on Ex. xxxiv. 15). "This jealousy
rests upon the sacred and spiritual marriage tie, by which God had
bound the people to Himself" (Calvin). "Strange gods," with
which Israel committed adultery, as in Jer. ii. 25, iii. 13. The
idols are called " abominations " because Jehovah abhorred them
(chap. vii. 25, xxvii. 15; cf. 2 Kings xxiii. 13). D*Tt? signifies
demons in Syriac, as it has been rendered by the LXX. and Vul-
gate here ; lit. lords, like Baalim. It is also used in Ps. cvi. 37.—
" Not- God," a composite noun, in apposition to Shedim (devils),
like the other expressions which follow : " gods whom they knew
not," i.e. who had not made themselves known to them as gods by
any benefit or blessing (vid. chap. xi. 28) ; " new (ones), who had
come from near," i.e. had but lately risen up and been adopted by
the Israelites. " Near," not in a local but in a temporal sense, in
contrast to Jehovah, who had manifested and attested Himself as
God from of old (ver. 7). "Wfo, to shudder, construed here with
an accusative, to experience a holy shuddering before a person, to
revere with holy awe. — In ver. 18 Moses returns to the thought of
ver. 15, for the purpose of expressing it emphatically once more,
and paving the way for a transition to the description of the acts
-of the Lord towards His rebellious nation. To bring out still mote
prominently the base ingratitude of the people, he represents the
creation of Israel by Jehovah, the rock of its salvation, under the
figure of generation and birth, in which the paternal and maternal
love of the Lord to His people had manifested itself. «W1, to twist
round, then applied to the pains of childbirth. The air. Xey. W is
to be traced to n»E>, and is a pausal form like W in chap. iv. 33.
rw = n >iW, to forget, to neglect.
Vers. 19-33. For this foolish apostasy the Lord would severely
visit His people. This visitation is represented indeed in ver. 19,
as the consequence of apostasy that had taken place, — not, however
as a punishment already inflicted, but simply as a resolution which
God had formed and would carry out, — an evident proof that we
have no song hepBfeelonging to the time when God visited with
severe punishments Hie Israelites who had fallen into idolatry. I"
ver. 19 the determination to reject the degenerate children is an-
nounced, and in vers. 20-22 this is still further defined and ex-
plained. — Ver. 19. "And the Lord saw it, and rejected— flu*
indignation at His sons and daughters." The object to "saw" n» T
easily be supplied from the context : He saw the idolatry of tin
v.
Digltizi
ed by Google
CHAP. XXXII. 1-48. 477
people, and rejected those who followed idols, and that because of
indignation that His sons and daughters practised . such abomina-
tions. The expression "he saw" simply serves to bring out the
causal link between the apostasy and the punishment. J**U^ has
been very well rendered by Kamphausen, "He resolved upon
rejection," since vers. 20 sqq. clearly show that the rejection had
only been resolved upon by God, and was not yet carried out. In
what follows, Moses puts this resolution into the mouth of the
Lord Himself. — Vers. 20—22. " And He said, I will hide My face
from them, I will see what their end will be : for they are a genera-
tion full of perversities, children in whom is no faithfulness. They
excited My jealousy by a no-god, provoked Me by their vanities ; and
I also will excite their jealousy by a no-people, provoke them by a
foolish nation. For a fire blazes up in My nose, and burns to the
lowest hell, and consumes the earth with its increase, and sets on fire
the foundations of the mountains? The divine purpose contains two
things -.—first of all (ver. 20) the negative side, to hide the face,
t'.«. to withdraw His favour and see what their end would be, i.e.
that their apostasy would bring nothing but evil and destruction ;
for they were " a nation of perversities " (tahpuchoth is moral
perversity, Prov. ii. 14, vi. 14), t'.e. " a thoroughly perverse and
faithless generation " (KnobeT) ; — and then, secondly (ver. 21), the
positive side, viz. chastisement according to the right of complete
retaliation. The Israelites had excited the jealousy and vexation of
God by a no-god and vanities ; therefore God would excite their
jealousy and vexation by a no-people and a foolish nation. How
this retaliation would manifest itself is not fully defined however
here, but is to be gathered from the conduct of Israel towards the
Lord. Israel had excited the jealousy of God by preferring a no-
god, or Dy? 1 !!, nothingnesses, i.e. gods that were vanities or nothings
(Elilim, Lev. xix. 4), to the true and living God, its Father and
Creator. God would therefore excite them to jealousy and ill-will
by a no-people, a foolish nation, i.e. by preferring a no-people to
the Israelites, transferring His favour to them, and giving the
blessing which Israel had despised to a foolish nation. It is only
with this explanation of the words that full justice is done to the
idea of retribution ; and it was in this sense that Paul understood
this passage as referring to the adoption of the Gentiles as the
people of God (Eom. x. 19), and that not merely by adaptation,
or by connecting another meaning with the words, as Umbreit
supposes, but by interpreting it in exact accordance with the
Digitized by
Google
478 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
true sense of the words. 1 The adoption of the Gentile world
into covenant with the Lord involved the rejection of the disobe-
dient Israel ; and this rejection would be consummated in severe
judgments, in which the ungodly would perish. In this way the
retribution inflicted by the Lord upon the faithless and perverse
generation of His sons and daughters becomes a judgment upon
the whole world. The jealousy of the Lord blazes up into a fire
of wrath, which burns down to sheol. This aspect of the divine
retribution comes into the foreground in what follows, from ver. 23
onwards; whilst the adoption of the Gentile world, which the
Apostle Paul singles out as the leading thought of this verse, in
accordance with the special purpose of the song, falls back behind
the thought, that the Lord would not utterly destroy Israel, but
when all its strength had disappeared would have compassion upon
His servants, and avenge their blood upon His foes. The idea
of a no-people is to be gathered from the antithesis no-god. As
1 But when Kamphausen, on the other hand, maintains that this thought,
which the apostle finds in the passage before us, would be " quite erroneous if
taken as an exposition of the words," the assertion is supported by utterly
worthless arguments : for example, (1) that throughout this song the exalted
heathen are never spoken of as the bride of God, but simply as a rod of disci-
pline used against Israel ; (2) that this verse refers to the whole nation of
Israel, and there is no trace of any distinction between the righteous and the
wicked ; and (3) that the idea that God would choose another people as the
covenant nation would hare been the very opposite of that Messianic hope with
which the author of this song was inspired. To begin with the last, the Mes-
sianic hope of the song consisted unquestionably in the thought that the Lord
would do justice to His people, His servants, and would avenge their blood,
even when the strength of the nation should have disappeared (vers. 36 and
43). But this thought, that the Lord would have compassion upon Israel at
last, by no means excludes the reception of the heathen into the kingdom of
God, as is sufficiently apparent from Rom. ix.-xi. The assertion that this verse
refers to the whole nation is quite incorrect. The plural suffixes used through-
out in vers. 20 and 21 show clearly that both verses simply refer to those who
had fallen away from the Lord ; and nowhere throughout the whole song is it
assumed, that the whole nation would fall away to the very last man, so that
there would be no further remnant of faithful servants of the Lord, to whom
the Lord would manifest His favour again. And lastly, it is nowhere affirmed
that God would simply use the heathen as a rod against Israel. The reference
is solely to enemies and oppressors of Israel ; and the chastisement of Israel by
foes holds the second, and therefore a subordinate, place among the evils with
which God would punish the rebellious. It is true that the heathen are not
described as the bride of God in this song, but that is for no other reason than
because the idea of moving them to jealousy with a not -people is not more
fully expanded. .
Digitizi
ed by Google
- CHAP. XXXII. 1-43. 479
Sehultz justly observes, " the expression no-people can no more
denote a people of monsters, than the no-god was a monster, by
which Israel had excited the Lord to jealousy." This remark is
quite sufficient to show that the opinion of Ewald and others is
untenable and false, namely, that "the expression no-people sig-
nifies a truly inhuman people, terrible and repulsive." No-god
is a god to whom the predicate of godhead cannot properly be
applied ; and so also no-people is a people that does not deserve the
name of a people or nation at all. The further definition of no-
god is to be found in the word " vanities? No-god are the idols,
who are called vanities or nothingnesses, because they deceive the
confidence of men in their divinity; because, as Jeremiah says
(Jer. xiv. 22), they can give no showers of rain or drops of water
from heaven. No-people is explained by a " foolish nation." A
"foolish nation" is the opposite of a wise and understanding
people, as Israel is called in chap. iv. 6, because it possessed
righteous statutes and rights in the law of the Lord. The foolish
nation therefore is not " an ungodly nation, which despises all laws
both human' and divine " (Ros., Maur.), but a people whose laws
and rights are not founded upon divine revelation. Consequently
the no-people is not " a barbarous and inhuman people " (Eos.), or
"a horde of men that does not deserve to be called a people"
(Maurer), but a people to which the name of a people or nation is
to be refused, because its political and judicial constitution is the
work of man, and because it has not the true God for its head and
king ; or, as Vitringa explains, " a people not chosen by the true
God, passed by when a people was chosen, shut out from the
fellowship and grace of God, alienated from the commonwealth
of Israel, and a stranger from the covenant of promise (Eph. ii.
12)." In this respect every heathen nation was a "no-people,"
even though it might not be behind the Israelites so far as its out-
ward organization was concerned. This explanation cannot be set
aside, either by the objection that at that time f Israel had brought
itself down to the level of the heathen, by its apostasy from the
Eternal, — for the notion of people and no-people is not taken from
the outward appearance of Israel at any particular time, but is
derived from its divine idea and calling, — or by an appeal to the
singular, " a foolish nation," whereas we should expect " foolish
nations " to correspond to the " vanities," if we were to understand
by the no-people not one particular heathen nation, but the heathen
nations generally. The singular, " a foolish nation," was required
Digitized by
Google
480 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
by the antithesis, upon which it is founded, the "wise nation,"
from which the expression no-people first receives its precise defini-
tion, which would be altogether obliterated by the plural. More-
over, Moses did not intend to give expression to the thought that
God would excite Israel to jealousy by either few, or many, or all
the Gentile nations.
In ver. 22, the determination of the Lord with regard to the
faithless generation is explained by the threat, that the wrath of
the Lord which was kindled against this faithlessness would set the
whole world in flames down to the lowest hell. We may see how
far the contents of this verse are from favouring the conclusion that
" no-people" means a barbarous and inhuman horde, from the diffi-
culty which the supporters of this view have found in dealing with
the word '3. Ewald renders it dock (yet), in total disregard of the
usages of the language ; and Venema, certe, profecto (surely) ; whilst
Kampkausen supposes it to be used in a somewhat careless manner.
The contents of ver. 22, which are introduced with *?, by no means
harmonize with the thought, " I will send a barbarous and inhuman
horde ;" whilst the announcement of a judgment setting the whole
World in flames may form a very suitable explanation of the thought,
that the Lord would excite faithless Israel to jealousy by a " no-
people." This judgment, for example, would make the worthless-
ness of idols and the omnipotence of the God of Israel manifest in
all the earth, and would lead the nations to seek refuge and salva-
tion with the living God ; and, as we learn from the history of the
kingdom of God, and the allusions of the Apostle Paul to this mys-
tery of the divine counsels, the heathen themselves would be the
first to do so when they saw all their power and glory falling into
ruins, and then the Israelites, when they saw that God had taken
the kingdom from them and raised up the heathen who were con-
verted to Him to be His people. The fire in the nose of the Lord
is a figurative description of burning wrath and jealousy (vid. chap,
xxix. 19). The fire signifies really nothing else than His jealousy,
His vital energy, and in a certain sense His breath ; it therefore
naturally burns in the nose (vid. Ps. xviii. 9). In this sense the
Lord as "a jealous God" is a consuming fire (vid. chap. iv. 24, and
the exposition of Ex. iii. 2). This fire burns down even to the lower
hell. The lower hell, i.e. the lowest region of sheol, or the lower
regions, forms the strongest contrast to heaven ; though we cannot
deduce any definite doctrinal conclusions from the expression as to
the existence of more hells than one. This, fire "consumes the
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXII. 1-48. 481
earth with Its increase," i.e. all its vegetable productions, and sets
on fire the foundations of the mountains. This description is not a
hyperbolical picture of the judgment which was to fall upon the
children of Israel alone (Kamphausen,- Aben-Ezra, etc.) ; for it is a
mistake to suppose that the judgment foretold affected the Israelitish
nation only. The thought is weakened by the assumption that the
language is hyperbolical. The words are not intended to foretell
one particular penal judgment, but refer to judgment in its totality
and universality, as realized in the course of centuries in different
judgments upon the nations, and only to be completely fulfilled at
the end of the world. Calvin is right therefore when he says, "As
the indignation and anger of God follow His enemies to hell, to
eternal flames and infernal tortures, so they devour their land with
its produce, and burn the foundations of the mountains ; . . . there
is no necessity therefore to imagine that there is any hyperbole in
the words, ' to the lower hell.' " This judgment is then depicted in
vers, 23-33 as it would discharge itself upon rebellious Israel.
Ver. 23. " / will heap up. evils upon them, use up My arrows
against them." The evils threatened against the despisers of the
Lord and His commandments would be poured out in great abun-
dance by the Lord upon the foolish generation. HBD, to add one
upon the other (vid. Num. xxxii. 14) ; hence in Hiphil to heap up,
sweep together. These evils are represented in the second clause
of the verse as arrows, which the Lord as a warrior would shoot
away at His foes (as in ver. 42 ; cf. Ps. xxxviii. 3, xci. 5 ; Job vi.
4). n??, to bring to an end, to use up to the very last. — Ver. 24.
" Have they wasted away with hunger, are they consumed with pesti-
lential heat and bitter plague: I will let loose the tooth of beasts upon
them, with the poison of things that crawl in the dust." — Ver. 25.
" If the sword without shall sweep them away, and in the chambers of
terrors, the young man as the maiden, the suckling with the grey-
haired man." The evils mentioned are hunger, pestilence, plague,
wild beasts, poisonous serpents, and war. The first hemistich in
ver. 24 contains simply nouns construed absolutely, which may be
regarded as a kind of circumstantial clause. The literal meaning
is, " With regard to those who are starved with hunger, etc., I
will send against them ;" i.e. when hunger, pestilence, plague, have
brought them to the verge of destruction, I will send, etc. 'JO,
construct state of nJD, air. "Key., with which Cocceius compares HXD
and )*SD, to suck out, and for which Schultens has cited analogies
from the Arabic. " Sucked out by hunger," i.e. wasted away.
PENT. — VOL. III. 2 H
Digltizi
ed by Google
482 THE FIFTH BOOK OF HOSES.
" Tooth of beasts and poison of serpents :" poetical for beasts of
prey and poisonous animals. See Lev. xxvi. 22, where wild beasts
are mentioned as a plague along with pestilence, famine, and sword.
— Ver. 25. These are accompanied by the evils of war, which
sweeps away the men outside in the slaughter itself by the sword,
and the defenceless — viz. youths and maidens, sucklings and old
men — in the chambers by alarm, no" 1 ^ is a sudden mortal terror,
and Knobel is wrong in applying it to hunger and plague. The
use of the verb ?3W, to make childless, is to be explained on the
supposition that the nation or land is personified as a mother, whose
children are the members of the nation, old and young together.
Ezekiel has taken the four grievous judgments out of these two
verses : sword, famine, wild beasts, and pestilence (Ezek. xiv. 21 :
see also v. 17, and Jer. xv. 2, 3).
Vers. 26 and 27. U I should say, I will blow them away, I mil
blot out the remembrance of them among men ; if I did not fear wrai/i
upon the enemy, that their enemies might mistake it, that tJiey might
say, Our hand was high, and Jehovah has not done all this." The
meaning is, that the people would have deserved to be utterly de-
stroyed, and it was only for His own name's sake that God abstained
from utter destruction. W}DK to be construed conditionally requires
w : if I did not fear (as actually was the case) I should resolve to
destroy them, without leaving a trace behind. " I should say," used
to denote the purpose of God, like " he said" in ver. 20. The air.
Xery. DrPNDK, which has been rendered in veiy different ways, cannot
be regarded, as it is by the Rabbins, as a denom. verb from HKS, a
corner ; and Calvin's rendering, " to scatter through corners," does
not suit the context ; whilst the meaning, " to cast or scare out of
all corners," cannot be deduced from this derivation. The context
requires the signification to annihilate, as the remembrance of them
was to vanish from the earth. We get this meaning if we trace it
to riKS, to blow, — related to nj>B (Isa. xlii. 14) and fins, from which
comes ns, — in the Hiphil " to blow away," not to blow asunder.
IVaEfy not " to cause to rest," but to cause to cease, delere (as in
Amos viii. 4). " Wrath upon the enemy" i.e. "displeasure on the
part of God at the arrogant boasting of the enemy, which was
opposed to the glory of God" (Vitringa). }B, lest, after i\i, to fear.
On this reason for sparing Israel, see chap. ix. 28 ; Ex. xxxii. 12 ;
Num. xiv. 13 sqq. ; Isa. x. 5 sqq. Enemy is a generic term, hence
it is followed by the plural. "OJ, Piel, to find strange, sc. the de-
struction of Israel, i.e. to mistake the reason for it, or, as is shown
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXII. 1-48. 483
by what follows, to ascribe the destruction of Israel to themselves
and their own power, whereas it had been the work of God. " Our
hand was high" i.e. has lifted itself up or shown itself mighty, an
intentional play upon the " high hand" of the Lord (Ex. xiv. 8 ;
cf. Isa. xxvi. 11). — The reason why Israel did not deserve to be
spared is given in ver. 58 : " For a people forsaken of counsel are
they, and there is not widerstanding in tfiem." " Forsaken of coun-
sel," i.e. utterly destitute of counsel.
This want of understanding on the part of Israel is still further
expounded in vers. 29-32, where the words of God pass imper-
ceptibly into the words of Moses, who feels impelled once more to
impress the word which the Lord had spoken upon the hearts of
the people. — Vers. 29-31. "If they were wise, they would understand
this, would consider their end. Ah, how could one pursue a thousand,
and two put ten thousand to flight, were it not that their Rock had
sold them, and Jehovah had given them up I For their rock is not
as our rock; of that our enemies are judges." V? presupposes a case,
which is either known not to exist, or of which this is assumed ;
" if they were wise," which they are not. " This" refers to the
leading thought of the whole, viz. that apostasy from God the
Lord is sure to be followed by the severest judgment. u Their
end," as in ver. 20, the end towards which the people were going
through obstinate perseverance in their sin, i.e. utter destruction, if
the Lord did not avert it for His name's sake. — Ver. 30. If Israel
were wise, it could easily conquer all its foes in the power of its
God (yid. Lev. xxvi. 8) ; but as it had forsaken the Lord its rock,
He, their (Israel's) rock, had given them up into the power of the
foe. ''Si to DK is more emphatic or distinct than *ft> DK only, and
introduces an exception which does not permit the desired event to
take place. Israel could have put all its enemies to night were it
not that its God had given it entirely up to them (sold them as
slaves). The supposition that this had already occurred by no
means proves, as Kamphausen believes, " that the poet was speaking
of the existing state of the nation," but merely that Moses thinks
of the circumstances as certain to occur when the people should
have forsaken their God. The past implied in the verbs "sold"
and " given up " is a prophetically ideal past or present, but not a
real and historical one. The assertion of Hupfeld and Kamphausen,
that 130, as used with special reference to the giving up of a nation
into the power of the heathen, " belongs to a somewhat later usage
of the language," is equally groundless. — Ver. 31. The giving up
Digltizi
ed by Google
484 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
of Israel into the power of the heathen arose, not from the superior
power of the heathen and their gods, but solely from the apostasy
of Israel from its own God. " Our rock," as Moses calls the Lord,
identifying himself with the nation, is not as their rock, i.e. the gods
in whom the heathen trust. That the pronoun in "their rock"
refers to the heathen, is so perfectly obvious from the antithesis
" our rock," that there cannot possibly be any doubt about it. The
second hemistich in ver. 30 contains a circumstantial clause, intro-
duced to strengthen the thought which precedes it. The heathen
themselves could be arbitrators (vid. Ex. xxi. 22), and decide
whether the gods of the heathen were not powerless before the
God of Israel. " Having experienced so often the formidable
might of God, they knew for a certainty that the God of Israel
was very different from their own idols" {Calvin). The objection
offered by Schultz, namely, that " the heathen would not admit
that their idols were inferior to Jehovah, and actually denied this
at the time when they had the upper hand (Isa. x. 10, 11)," has
been quite anticipated by Calvin, when he observes that Moses
"leaves the decision to the unbelievers, not as if they would speak
the truth, but because he knew that they must be convinced by
experience." As a confirmation of this, Luther and others refer
not only to the testimony of Balaam (Num. xxiii. and xxiv.), but
also to the Egyptians (Ex. xiv. 25) and Philistines (1 Sam. v. 7
sqq.), to which we may add Josh. ii. 9, 10.
Vers. 32 and 33. " For their vine is of the vine of Sodom, and
of the fields of Gomorrah : their grapes are poisonous grapes, bitter
clusters have they. Dragon-poison is their wine, and dreadful venom
of asps." The connection is pointed out by Calovius thus : " Moses
returns to the Jews, showing why, although the rock of the Jews
was very different from the gods of the Gentiles, even according to
the testimony of the heathen themselves, who were their foes, they
were nevertheless to be put to flight by their enemies and sold ; and
why Jehovah sold them, namely, because their vine was of the vine
of Sodom, i.e. of the very worst kind, resembling the inhabitants of
Sodom and Gomorrah, as if they were descended from them, and
not from their holy patriarchs." The "for" in ver. 32 is neither
co-ordinate nor subordinate to that in ver. 31. To render if as
subordinate would give no intelligible meaning ; and the supposi-
tion that it is co-ordinate is precluded by the fact, that in that case
vers. 32 and 33 would contain a description of the corruptions of
the heathen. The objections to this view have been thus expressed
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXII. 1-48. 485
by Schultz with perfect justice : " It is a priori inconceivable, that
in so short an ode there should be so elaborate a digression on the
subject of the heathen, seeing that their folly is altogether foreign
to the theme of the whole." To this we may add, that throughout
the Old Testament it is the moral corruption and ungodliness of
the Israelites, and never the vices of the heathen, that are compared
to the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah. The Israelites who were for-
saken by the Lord, were designated by Isaiah (i. 10) as a people
of Gomorrah, and their rulers as rulers of Sodom (cf. Isa. iii. 9) ;
the inhabitants of Jerusalem were all of them like Sodom and
Gomorrah (Jer. xxiii. 14) ; and the sin of Jerusalem was greater
than that of Sodom (Ezek. xvi. 46 sqq.). The only sense in which
the " for" in ver. 32 can be regarded as co-ordinate to that in
ver. 31, is on the supposition that the former gives the reason for
the thought in ver. 30J, whilst the latter serves to support the idea
in ver. 30a. The order of thought is the following: Israel would
have been able to smite its foes with very little difficulty, because,
the gods of the heathen are not a rock like Jehovah ; but Jehovah
had given up His people to the heathen, because it had brought
forth fruits like Sodom, i.e. had resembled Sodom in its wickedness.
The vine and its fruits are figurative terms, applied to the nation
and its productions. " The nation was not only a degenerate, but
also a poisonous vine, producing nothing but what was deadly"
{Calvin). This figure is expanded still further by Isa. v. 2 sqq.
Israel was a vineyard planted by Jehovah, that it might bring
forth good fruits, instead of which it brought forth wild grapes
(vid. Jer. ii. 21 ; Ps. lxxx. 9 sqq. ; Hos. x. 1). " Their vine" is
the Israelites themselves, their nature being compared to a vine
which had degenerated as much as if it had been an offshoot of a
Sodomitish vine. nb'iE', the construct state of nb'lB', floors, fields.
The grapes of this vine are worse than wild grapes, they are bitter,
poisonous grapes. — Ver. 33. The wine of these grapes is snake-
poison. Tannin: see Ex. vii. 9, 10. Pethen: the asp or adder, one
of the' most poisonous kinds of snake, whose bite was immediately
fatal (vid. RosenmUllerf bibl. Alihk. iv. 2, pp. 364 sqq.). These
figures express the thought, that " nothing could be imagined worse,
or more to be abhorred, than that nation" (Calvin). Now although
this comparison simply refers to the badness of Israel, the thought
of the penal judgment that fell upon Sodom lies behind. " They
imitate the Sodomites, they bring forth the worst fruits of all im-
piety, they deserve to perish like Sodom " (J. H. Michaelis).
Digitized by
Google
486 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
The description of this judgment commences in ver. 34. Israel
had deserved for its corruption to be destroyed from the earth (ver.
26); yet for His name's sake the Lord would have compassion
upon it, when it was so humiliated with its heavy punishments that
its strength was coming to an end. — Ver. 34. " Is not this hidden
with Me, sealed up in My treasuries ?" The allusion in this verse
has been disputed ; many refer it to what goes before, others to
what follows after. There is some truth in both. The verse forms
the transition, closing what precedes, and introducing what follows.
The assertion that the figure of preserving in the treasuries pre-
cludes the supposition that " this " refers to what follows, cannot
be sustained. For although in Hos. xiii. 12, and Job xiv. 17, the
binding and sealing of sins in a bundle are spoken of, yet it is very
evident from Ps. cxxxix. 16, Mai. iii. 16, and Dan. vii. 10, that not
only the evil doings of men, but their days generally, i.e. not only
their deeds, but the things which happen to them, are written in a
book before God. 0. v. Gerlach has explained it correctly: "All
these things have been decreed long ago ; their coming is infallibly
certain." " This " includes not only the sins of the nation, but also
the judgments of God. The apostasy of Israel, as well as the
consequent punishment, is laid up with God — sealed up in His
treasuries — and therefore they have not yet actually occurred : an
evident proof that we have prophecy before us, and not the de-
scription of an apostasy that had already taken place, and of the
punishment inflicted in consequence. The air. \ey. DD3 in this
connection signifies to lay up, preserve, conceal, although the ety-
mology is disputed. The figure in the second hemistich is not
taken from secret archives, but from treasuries or stores, in which
whatever was to be preserved was to be laid up, to be taken ont
in due time.
Vers. 35 and 36. " Vengeance is Mine, and retribution for tk
time when their foot shall shake : for the day of their destruction w
near, and that which is determined for them cometh hastily. Fortk
Lord will judge His people, and have compassion upon His servants,
when He seeth that every hold has disappeared, and the fettered and
the free are gone." — The Lord will punish the sins of His people
in due time. " Vengeance is Mine :" it belongs to Me, it is My
part to inflict. dW is a noun here for the usual B&&, retribntion
(vid. Ewald, § 156, b.). The shaking of the foot is a figure repre-
senting the commencement of a fall, or of stumbling (vid. Ps-
xxxviii. 17, xciv. 18). The thought in this clause is not, u At or
Digitizi
ed by Google
CHAP. XXXII. 1-43. 487
towards the time when their misfortune begins, I will plunge them
into the greatest calamity," as Kamphausen infers from the fact
that the shaking denotes the beginning of the calamity ; and yet
the vengeance can only be completed by plunging them into
calamity, — a thought which he justly regards as unsuitable, though
he resorts to emendations of the text in consequence. But the
supposed unsuitability vanishes, if we simply regard the words,
" Vengeance is Mine, and retribution," not as the mere announce-
ment of a quality founded in the nature of God, and residing in
God Himself, but as an expression of the divine energy, with this
signification, I will manifest Myself as an avenger and recompenser,
when their foot shall shake. Then what had hitherto been hidden
with God, lay sealed up as it were in His treasuries, should come
to light, and be made manifest to the sinful nation. God would
not delay in this ; for the day of their destruction was near. "PR
signifies misfortune, and sometimes utter destruction. The primary
meaning of the word cannot be determined with certainty. That
it does not mean utter destruction, we may see from the parallel
clause. " The things that shall come upon them," await them, or
are prepared for them, are, according to the context, both in ver.
26 and also in vers. 36 sqq., not destruction, but sjmply a calamity
or penal judgment that would bring them near to utter destruction.
Again, these words do not relate to the punishment of " the wicked
deeds of the inhuman horde," or the vengeance of God upon the
enemies of Israel (Ewald, Kamphausen), but to the vengeance or
retribution which God would inflict upon Israel. This is evident,
apart from what has been said above against the application of vers.
38, 34, to the heathen, simply from ver. 366, which unquestionably
refers to Israel, and has been so interpreted by every commentator.
— The first clause is quoted in Bom. xii. 19 and Heb. x. 30, in
the former to warn against self-revenge, in the latter to show the
energy with which God will punish those who fall away from the
faith, in connection with ver. 36a, u the Lord will judge His
people." — In ver. 36 the reason is given for the thought in ver. 35.
P"! is mostly taken here in the sense of " procure right," help to
right, which it certainly often has (e.g. Ps. liv. 3), and which is not
to be excluded here ; but this by no means exhausts the idea of the
word. The parallel nnjJV does not compel us to drop the idea of
punishment, which is involved in the judging ; for it is a question
whether the two clauses are perfectly synonymous. " Judging His
people " did not consist merely in the fact that Jehovah punished
Digitizi
ed by Google
488 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
the heathen who oppressed Israel, hut also in the fact that He
punished the wicked in Israel who oppressed the righteous. " His
people" is no doubt Israel as a whole (as, for example, in Isa. i. 3) ,
but this whole was composed of righteous and wicked, and -God
could only help the righteous to justice by punishing and destroy-
ing the wicked. In this way the judging of His people became
compassion towards His servants. " His servants" are the right-
eous, or, speaking more correctly, all who in the time of judgment
are found to be the servants of God, and are saved. Because Israel
was His nation, the Lord judged it in such a manner as not to
destroy it, but simply to punish it for its sins, and to have compas-
sion upon His servants, when He saw that the strength of the
nation was gone. -1J, the hand, with which one grasps and works,
is a figure employed to denote power and might (vid. Isa. xxviii. 2).
?|K, to run out, or come to an end (1 Sam. ix. 7 ; Job xiv. 11).
The meaning is, " when every support is gone," when all the rotten
props of its might, upon which it has rested, are broken (EwaM).
The noun DBN, cessation, disappearance, takes the place of a verb.
The words 3*1V) "WX1? are a proverbial phrase used to denote all men,
as we may clearly see from 1 Kings xiv. 10, xxi. 21 ; 2 Kings iv.
8, xiv. 6. The literal meaning of this form, however, cannot be
decided with certainty. The explanation given by L. de Dim is
the most plausible one, viz. the man who is fettered, restrained,
i.e. married, and the single or free. For 2VV the meaning caelebs
is established by the Arabic, though the Arabic can hardly be ap-
pealed to as proving that "NVJ7 means paterfamilias, as this meaning,
which Roediger assigns to the Arabic word, is founded upon a
mistaken interpretation of a passage in Ramus.
Vers. 37-39. The Lord would then convince His people of the
worthlessness of idols and the folly of idolatry, and bring it to
admit the fact that He was God alone. " Then will He say, Where
are their gods, the rock in whom they trusted ; who consumed the fat of
their burnt-offerings, the wine of their libations ? Let them rise up
and help you, that there may be a shelter over you ! See now that I,
I am it, and there is no God beside Me : I kill, and make alive ; I
smite in pieces, and I heal; and there is no one who delivers out o/Afy
Iiand." TDffl might be taken impersonally, as it has been by Luther
and others, " men will say ;" but as it is certainly Jehovah who is
speaking in ver. 39, and what Jehovah says there is simply a
deduction from what is addressed to the people in vers. 37 and 38,
there can hardly be any doubt that Jehovah is speaking in vers.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXII. 1-43. 489
37, 38, as well as in vers. 34, 35, and therefore that Moses simply
distinguishes himself from Jehovah in ver. 36, when explaining the
reason for the judgment foretold by the Lord. The expression,
" their gods," relates, not to the heathen, but to the Israelites, upon
whom the judgment had fallen. The worthlessness of their gods
had become manifest, namely, of the strange gods or idols, which
the Israelites had preferred to the living God (yid. vers. 16, 17),
and to which they had brought their sacrifices and drink-offerings.
In ver. 38, "iffc is the subject, — the gods, who consumed the fat
of the sacrifices offered to them by their worshippers (the foolish
Israelites), — and is not to be taken as the relative with ^nat, as the
LXX., Vulg., and Luther have rendered it, viz. " whose sacrifices
they (the Israelites) ate," which neither suits the context nor the
word 3?0 (fat), which denotes the fat portions of the sacrificial
animals that were burned upon the altar, and therefore presented
to God. The wine of the drink-offerings was also poured out upon
the altar, and thus given up to the deity worshipped. The handing
over of the sacrificial portions to the deity is described here with
holy irony, as though the gods themselves consumed the fat of the
slain offerings, and drank the wine poured out for them, for the
purpose of expressing this thought : " The gods, whom ye entertained
so well, and provided so abundantly with sacrifices, let them now
arise and help you, and thus make themselves clearly known to
you." The address here takes the form of a direct appeal to the
idolaters themselves ; and in the last clause the imperative is intro-
duced instead of the optative, to express the thought as sharply as
possible, that men need the protection of God, and are warranted
in expecting it from the gods they worship : " let there be a shelter
over you." Sithrah for aether, a shelter or defence. — Ver. 39. The
appeal to their own experience of the worthlessness of idols is
followed by a demand that they should acknowledge Jehovah as
the only true God. The repetition of " I" is emphatic : " I, I only ■
it" as an expression of being; I am it, ir/a> el/ii, John viii. 24,
xviii. 5. The predicate Elohim (vid. 2 Sam. vii. 28 ; Isa. xxxvii.
16) is omitted, because it is contained in the thought itself, and
moreover is clearly expressed in the parallel clause which follows,
*' there is not a God beside Me." Jehovah manifests Himself in
His doings, which Israel had experienced already, and still continued
to experience. He kills and makes alive, etc., i.e. He has the power
of life and death. These words do not refer to the immortality of
the soul, but to the restoration to life of the people of Israel, which
Digltizi
ed by Google
490 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
God had delivered tip to death (so 1 Sam. ii. 6 ; 2 Kings v. 7 ; cf.
Isa. xxvi. 19 ; Hos. xiii. 10 ; Wisd. xvi. 13 ; Tohit xiii. 2). This
thought, and the following one, which is equally consolatory, that
God smites and heals again, are frequently repeated by the prophets
(vid. Hos. vi. 1 ; Isa. xxx. 26, lvii. 17, 18 ; Jer. xvii. 14). None
can deliver out of His hand (vid. Isa. xliii. 13 ; Hos. v. 14, ii. 12).
Vers. 40-43. The Lord will show Himself as the only true God,
who slays and makes alive, etc. He will take vengeance upon His
enemies, avenge the blood of His servants, and expiate His land,
His people. With this promise, which is full of comfort for all the
servants of the Lord, the ode concludes. " For I lift up My hand
to heaven, and say, As truly as I live for ever, if I have sharpened
My flashing sword, and My hand grasps for judgment, I will repay
vengeance to My adversaries, and requite My haters. I will make My
arrows drunk with blood, and My sword will eat flesh ; with the blood
of the slain and prisoners, with the hairy head of the foe." Lifting
up the hand to heaven was a gesture by which a person taking an
oath invoked God, who is enthroned in heaven, as a witness of the
truth and an avenger of falsehood (Gen. xiv. 22). Here, as in
Ex. vi. 8 and Num. xiv. 30, it is used anthropomorphically of God,
who is in heaven, and can swear by no greater than Himself (vid.
Isa. xiv. 23 ; Jer. xxii. 5 ; Heb. vi. 17). The oath follows in vers.
41 and 42. DK, however, is not the particle employed in swearing,
which has a negative meaning (vid. Gen. xiv. 23), but is conditional,
and introduces the protasis. As the avenger of His people upon
their foes, the Lord is represented as a warlike hero, who whets His
sword, and has a quiver filled with arrows (as in Ps^ vii. 13). "As
long as the Church has to make war upon the world, the flesh, and
the devil, it needs a warlike head " (Schultz). 3in pna, the flash of
the sword, i.e. the flashing sword (vid. Gen. iii. 24 ; Nahum iii. 3 ;
Hab. iii. 11). In the next clause, " and My hand grasps Judgment,"
mishpat (judgment) does not mean punishment or destruction hurled
by God upon His foes, nor the weapons employed in the execution
of judgment, but judgment is introduced poetically as the thing
which God takes in hand for the purpose of carrying it out
Dj?3 y&[}, to lead back vengeance, i.e. to repay it. Punishment is
retribution for evil done. By the enemies and haters of Jehovah
we need not understand simply the heathen enemies of the Israelites,
for the ungodly in Israel were enemies of God quite as much as
the ungodly heathen. If it is evident from vers. 25-27, where God
is spoken of as punishing Israel to the utmost when it had fallen
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXII. 1-48. 491
into idolatry, but not utterly destroying it, that the punishment
which God would inflict would also fall upon the heathen, who
would have made an end of Israel ; it is no less apparent from vers.
37 and 38, especially from the appeal in ver. 38, Let your idols arise
and help you (ver. 38), which is addressed, as all admit, to the
idolatrous Israelites, and not to the heathen, that those Israelites
who had made worthless idols their rock would be exposed to the
vengeance and retribution of the Lord. In ver. 42 the figure of
the warrior is revived, and the judgment of God is carried out still
further under this figure. Of the four different clauses in this
verse, the third is related to the first, and the fourth to the second.
God would make His arrows drunk with the blood not only of the
slain, but also of the captives, whose lives are generally spared, but
were not to be spared in this judgment. This sword would eat flesh
of the hairy head of the foe. The edge of the sword is represented
poetically as the mouth with which it eats (2 Sam. ii. 26, xviii. 8,
etc.) ; " the sword is said to devour bodies when it slays them by
piercing" (Ges. thes. p. 1088). nijrjB, from V}B, a luxuriant, uncut
growth of hair (Num. vi. 5 ; see at Lev. x. 6). The hairy .head is
not a figure used to denote the " wild and cruel foe " (Knobel), but
a luxuriant abundance of strength, and the indomitable pride of the
foe, who had grown fat and forgotten his Creator (ver. 15). This
explanation is confirmed by Ps. lxviii. 22 ; whereas the rendering
apxpvre';, princes, leaders, which is given in the Septuagint, has no
foundation in the language itself, and no tenable support in Judg.
v. 2. — Ver. 43. For this retribution which God accomplishes upon
His enemies, the nations were to praise the people of the Lord. As
this song commenced with an appeal to heaven and earth to give
glory to the Lord (vers. 1-3), so it very suitably closes with an
appeal to the heathen to rejoice with His people on account of the acts
of the Lord. " Rejoice, nations, over His people ; for He avenges
the blood of His servants, and repays vengeance to His adversaries,
and so expiates His land, His people." " His people " is an accu-
sative, and not in apposition to nations in the sense of " nations
which are His people." For, apart from the fact that such a
combination would be unnatural, the thought that the heathen had
become the people of God is nowhere distinctly expressed in the
song (not even in ver. 21) ; nor is the way even so prepared for it
as that we could expect it here, although the appeal to the nations
to rejoice with His people on account of what God had done involves
the Messianic idea, that all nations will come to the knowledge of
Digitized by
Google
492 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
the Lord (vid. Ps. xlvii. 2, lxvi. 8, lxvii. 4). — The reason for this
rejoicing is the judgment through which the Lord avenges the
blood of His servants and repays His foes. As the enemies of God
are not the heathen as such (see at ver. 41), so the servants of
Jehovah are not the nation of Israel as a whole, but the faithful
servants whom the Lord had at all times among His people, and
who were persecuted, oppressed, and put to death by the ungodly.
By this the land was defiled, covered with blood-guiltiness, so that
the Lord was obliged to interpose as a judge, to put an end to the
ways of the wicked, and to expiate His land, His people, i.e. to
wipe out the guilt which rested upon the land and people, by the
punishment of the wicked, and the extermination of idolatry and
ungodliness, and to sanctify and glorify the land, and nation (vid.
Isa. i. 27, iv. 4, 5).
In vers. 44-47 it is stated that Moses, with Joshua, spake the
song to the people ; and on finishing this rehearsal, once more
impressed upon the hearts of the people the importance of observing
all the commandments of God. This account proceeds from the
author -of the supplement to the Thorah of Moses, who inserted
the song in the book of the law. This explains the name Hoshea,
instead of Jehoshuah (Joshua), which Moses had given to his servant
(Num. xiii. 8, 16), and invariably uses (compare chap. xxxi. 3, 7,
14, 23, with chap. i. 38, iii. 21, 28, and the exposition of Num. xiii.
16). — On ver. 46, vid. chap. vi. 7 and xi. 19 ; and on ver. 47, vid.
chap. xxx. 20.
Vers. 48-52. " That self-same day," viz. the day upon which
Moses had rehearsed the song to the children of Israel, the Lord
renewed the announcement of his death, by repeating the command
already given to him (Num. xxvii. 12-14) to ascend Mount Nebo,
there to survey the land of Canaan, and then to be gathered unto
his people. In form, this repetition differs from the previous
announcement, partly in the fact that the situation of Mount Nebo
is more fully described (in the land of Moab, etc., as in chap. i. 5,
xxviii. 69), and partly in the continual use of the imperative, and a
few other trifling points. These differences may all be explained from
the fact that the account here was not written by Moses himself.
MOSES BLESSING. — CHAP. XXXIII.
Before ascending Mount Nebo to depart this life, Moses took
leave of his people, the tribes of Israel, in the blessing which is
Digitized by
Google
chap. xxxm. 493
very fittingly inserted in the book of the law between the divine
announcement of his approaching death and the account of the
death itself, as being the last words of the departing man of God.
The blessing opens with an allusion to the solemn conclusion of the
covenant and giving of the law at Sinai, by which the Lord became
King of Israel, to indicate at the outset the source from which all
blessings must flow to Israel (vers. 2-5). Then follow the separate
blessings upon the different tribes (vers. 6—25). And the whole
concludes with an utterance of praise to the Lord, as the mighty
support and refuge of His people in their conflicts with all their
foes (vers. 26-29). This blessing was not written down by Moses
himself, like the song in chap, xxxii., but simply pronounced in the
presence of the assembled tribes. This is evident, not only from
the fact that there is nothing said about its being committed to
writing, but also from the heading in ver. 1, where the editor
clearly distinguishes himself from Moses, by speaking of Moses as
"the man of God," like Caleb in Josh. xiv. 6, and the author of the
heading to the prayer of Moses in Ps. xc. 1. In later times, ''man
of God" was the title usually given to a prophet (yid. 1 Sam. ix. 6;
1 Kings xii. 22, xiii. 14, etc.), as a man who enjoyed direct inter-
course with God, and received supernatural revelations from Him.
Nevertheless, we have Moses' own words, not only in the blessings
upon the several tribes (vers. 6-25), but also in the introduction
and conclusion of the blessing (vers. 2-5 and 26-29). The intro-
ductory words before the blessings, such as " and this for Judah "
in ver. 7, " and to Levi he said " (ver. 8), and the similar formulas
in vers. 12, 13, 18, 20, 22, 23, and 24, are the only additions made
by the editor who inserted the blessing in the Pentateuch. The
arrangement of the blessings in their present order is probably also
his work. It neither accords with the respective order of the sons
of Jacob, nor with the distribution of the tribes in the camp, nor
with the situation of their possessions in the land of Canaan. It is
true that Eeuben stands first as the eldest son of Jacob; but Simeon-
is then passed over, and Judah, to whom the dying patriarch be-
queathed the birthright which he withdrew from Reuben, stands
next; and then Levi, the priestly tribe. Then follow Benjamin
and Joseph, the sons of Eachel ; Zebulun and Issachar, the last
sons of Leah (in both cases the younger before the elder); and
lastly, the tribes descended from the sons of the maids : Gad, the
son of Zilpah ; Dan and Naphtali, the sons of Bilhah ; and finally,
Asher, the second son of Zilpah. To discover the guiding prih-
Digitized by
Google
494 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
ciple in this arrangement, we must look to the blessings themselves,
which indicate partly the position already obtained by each tribe, as
a member of the whole nation, in the earthly kingdom of God, and
partly the place which it was to reach and occupy in the further
development of Israel in the future, not only in relation to the
Lord, but also in relation to the other nations. The only exception
to this is the position assigned to Reuben, who occupies the fore-
most place as the first-born, notwithstanding his loss of the birth-
right. In accordance with this principle, the first place properly
belonged to the tribe of Judah, who was raised into the position of
lord over his brethren, and the second to the tribe of Levi, which
had been set apart to take charge of the sacred things ; whilst Ben-
jamin is associated with Levi as the u beloved of the Lord." Then
follow Joseph, as the representative of the might which Israel would
manifest in conflict with the nations ; Zebulun and Issachar, as the
tribes which would become the channels of blessings to the nations
through their wealth in earthly good ; and lastly, the tribes de-
scended from the sons of the maids, Asher being separated from
his brother Gad, and placed at the end, in all probability simply
because it was in the blessing promised to him that the earthly
blessedness of the people of God was to receive its fullest manifes-
tation.
On comparing the blessing of Moses with that of Jacob, we
should expect at the very outset, that if the blessings of these two
men of God have really been preserved to us, and they are not later
inventions, their contents would be essentially the same, so that the
blessing of Moses would contain simply a confirmation of that of the
dying patriarch, and would be founded upon it in various ways. This
is most conspicuous in the blessing upon Joseph ; but there are also
several other blessings in which it is unmistakeable, although Moses'
blessing is not surpassed in independence and originality by that of
Jacob, either in its figures, its similes, or its thoughts. But' the
resemblance goes much deeper. It is manifest, for example, in the
fact, that in the case of several .of the tribes, Moses, like Jacob,
does nothing more than expound their names, and on the ground of
the peculiar characters expressed in the names, foretell to the tribes
themselves their peculiar calling and future development within
the covenant nation. Consequently we have nowhere any special
predictions, but simply prophetic glances at the future, depicted in
a purely ideal manner, whilst in the case of most of the tribes the
utter want of precise information concerning their future history
Digitized by
Google
chap, xxxiii. 495
prevents us from showing in what way they were fulfilled. The
difference in the times at which the two hlessings were uttered is
also very apparent. The existing circumstances from which Moses
surveyed the future history of the tribes of Israel in the light of
divine revelation, were greatly altered from the time when Jacob
blessed the heads of the twelve tribes before his death, in the per-
sons of his twelve sons. These tribes had now grown into a nume-
rous people, with which the Lord had established the covenant that
Jle had made with the patriarchs. The curse of dispersion in Israel,
which the patriarch had pronounced upon Simeon and Levi (Gen.
xlix. 5-7), had been changed into a blessing so far as Levi was con-
cerned. The tribe of Levi had been entrusted with the " light and
right " of the Lord, had been called to be the teacher of the rights
and law of God in Israel, because it had preserved the covenant of
the Lord, after the conclusion of the covenant at Sinai, even though
it involved the denial of flesh and blood. Reuben, Gad, and half
Manasseh had already received their inheritance, and the other
tribes were to take possession of Canaan immediately. These cir-
cumstances formed the starting-point for the blessings of Moses,
not only in the case of Levi and Gad, where they are expressly
mentioned, but in that of the other tribes also, where they do not
stand prominently forward, because for the most part Moses simply
repeats the leading features of their future development in their
promised inheritance, as already indicated in the blessing of Jacob,
and " thus bore his testimony to the patriarch who anticipated him,
that the spirit of his prophecy was truth " (Ziegler, p. 159).
In this peculiar characteristic of the blessing of Moses, we have
the strongest proof of its authenticity, particularly in the fact that
there is not the slightest trace of the historical circumstances of
the nation at large and the separate tribes which were peculiar to
the post-Mosaic times. The little ground that there is for the
assertion which Knobel repeats, that the blessing betrays a closer
acquaintance with the post-Mosaic times, such as Moses himself
could not possibly have possessed, is sufficiently evident from the
totally different expositions which have been given by the different
commentators of the saying concerning Judah in ver. 7, which is
adduced in proof of this. Whilst Knobel finds the desire expressed
in this verse on behalf of Judah, that David, who had fled from
Saul, might return, obtain possession of the government, and raise
his tribe into the royal tribe, Graf imagines that it expresses the
longing of the kingdom of Judah for reunion with that of Israel ;
Digltizi
ed by Google
496 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
and Hofmann and Maurer even trace an allusion to the inhabitants
of Judea who were led into captivity along with Jehoiachin : one
assumption being just as arbitrary and as much opposed to the text
as the other. — All the objections brought against the genuineness
of this blessing are founded upon an oversight or denial of its pro-
phetic character, and upon untenable interpretations of particular
expressions abstracted from it. Not only is there no such thing in
the whole blessing as a distinct reference to the peculiar historical
circumstances of Israel which arose after Moses' death, but there
are some points in the picture which Moses has drawn of the tribes
that it is impossible to recognise in these circumstances. Even
Knobel from his naturalistic stand-point is obliged to admit, that no
traces can be found in the song of any allusion to the calamities
which fell upon the nation in the Syrian, Assyrian, and Chaldsean
periods. And hitherto it has proved equally impossible to point out
any distinct allusion to the circumstances of the nation in the period
of the judges. On the contrary, as Schukz observes, the speaker
rises throughout to a height of ideality which it would have been no
longer possible for any sacred author to reach, when the confusions
and divisions of a later age had actually taken place. He sees
nothing of the calamities from without, which fell upon the nation
again and again with destructive fury, nothing of the Canaanites
who still remained in the midst of the Israelites, and nothing of the
hostility of the different tribes towards one another ; he simply sees
how they work together in the most perfect harmony, each contri-
buting his part to realize the lofty ideal of Israel. And again he
grasps this ideal and the realization of it in so elementary a way,
and so thoroughly from the outer side, without regard to any
inward transformation and glorification, that he must have lived in
a time preceding the prophetic age, and before the moral conflicts
had taken place.
Vers. 2-5. In the introduction Moses depicts the elevation of
Israel into the nation of God, in its origin (ver. 2), its nature
(ver. 3), its intention and its goal (vers. 4, 5). — Ver. 2. " Jehovah
came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them ; He shone from
the mountains of Paran, and came out of holy myriads, at His right
rays of fire to them" To set forth the glory of the covenant
which God made with Israel, Moses depicts the majesty and glory
in which the Lord appeared to the Israelites at Sinai, to give them
the law, and become their king. The three clauses, " Jehovah
came from Sinai . . . from Seir . . . from the mountains of Paran," do
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXIII. 2-5. 497
not refer to different manifestations of God (Knobel), but to the one
appearance of God at Sinai. Like the sun when it rises, and fills
the whole of the broad horizon with its beams, the glory of the
Lord, when He appeared, was not confined to one single point, but
shone upon the people of Israel from Sinai, and Seir, and the
mountains of Paran, as they came from the west to Sinai. The
Lord appeared to the people from the summit of Sinai, as they lay
encamped at the foot of the mountain. This appearance rose like a
streaming light from Seir, and shone at the same time from the
mountains of Paran. Seir is the mountain land of the Edomites to
the east of Sinai ; and the mountains of Paran are in all probability
not the mountains of et-Tih, which form the southern boundary of
the desert of Paran, but rather the mountains of the Azazimeh,
which ascend to a great height above Kadesh, and form the boundary
wall of Canaan towards the south. The glory .of the Lord, who
appeared upon Sinai, sent its beams even to the eastern and northern
extremities of the desert. This manifestation of God formed the
basis for all subsequent manifestations of the omnipotence and grace
of the Lord for the salvation of His people. This explains the
allusions to the description before us in the song of Deborah (Judg.
v. 4) and in Hab. iii. 3. — The Lord came not only from Sinai, but
from heaven, " out of holy myriads," i.e. out of the midst of the
thousands of holy angels who surround His throne (1 Kings xxii.
19 ; Job i. 6 ; Dan. vii. 10), and who are introduced in Gen. xxviii.
12 as His holy servants, and in Gen. xxxii. 2, 3, as the hosts of God,
and form the assembly of holy ones around His throne (Ps. Ixxxix.
6, 8 ; cf. Ps. lxviii. 18 ; Zech. xiv. 5 ; Matt. xxvi. 53 ; Heb. xii. 22 ;
Rev. v. 11, vii. 11). — The last clause is a difficult one. The writing
rn E>K in two words, " fire of the law," not only fails to give a suit-
able sense, but has against it the fact that JB, law, edictum, is not
even a Semitic word, but was adopted from the Persian into the
Chaldee, and that it is only by Gentiles that it is ever applied- to the
law of God (Ezra vii. 12, 21, 25, 26 ; Dan. vi. 6). It must be read
as one word, mefe, as it is in many MSS. and editions, — not, how-
ever, as connected with "rate, nftE'K, the pouring out of the brooks,
slopes of the mountains (Num. xxi. 15), but in the form I'lB'N, com-
posed, according to the probable conjecture of Bottcher, of B>K, fire,
and n"TB> (in the Chaldee and Syriac), to throw, to shoot arrows, in
the sense of " fire of throwing," shooting fire, a figurative descrip-
tion of the flashes of lightning. Gesenius adopts this explanation,
except that he derives m from AT, to throw. It is favoured by the
PENT. — VOL. III. ' 2 I
Digitizi
ed by Google
498 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
fact that, according to Ex. xix. 16, the appearance of God upon
Sinai was accompanied by thnnder and lightning ; and flashes of
lightning are often called the arrows of God, whilst iTU?, in Hebrew,
is established by the name "Wl^ (Num. i. 5, ii. 10). To this we
may add the parallel passage, Hab. iii. 4, " rays oat of His hand,"
which renders this explanation a very probable one. By u them,"
in the second and fifth clauses, the Israelites are intended, to
whom this fearful theophany referred. On the signification of the
manifestation of God in fire, see chap. iv. 11, and the exposition of
Ex. iii. 2.
Ver. 3. " Yea, nations He loves ; all His holy ones are in Thy
Ivand : and they lie down at Thy feet ; they rise up at Thy word$."
D'By 33h is the subject placed first absolutely : " nations loving,"
sc. is he ; or " as loving nations — all Thy holy ones are in Thy
hand." The nations or peoples are not the tribes of Israel here,
any more than in chap, xxxii. 8, or Gen. xxviii. 3, xxxv. 11, and
xlviii. 4 ; whilst Judg. v. 14 and Hos. x. 14 cannot come into
consideration at all, for there the word is defined by a suffix. The
meaning of the words depends upon whether " all His holy ones"
are the godly in Israel, or the Israelites generally, or the angels.
There is nothing to favour the first explanation, as the distinction
between the godly and the wicked would be out of place in the
introduction to a blessing upon all the tribes. The second has only
a seeming support in Dan. vii. 21 sqq. and Ex. xix. 6. It does not
follow at once from the calling of Israel to be the holy nation of
Jehovah, that all the Israelites were or could be called " holy ones
of the Lord," Least of all should Num. xvi. 3 be adduced in
support of this. Even in Dan. vii. the holy ones of the Most High
are not the Jews generally, but simply the godly, or believers, in the
nation of God. The third view, on the other hand, is a perfectly
natural one, on account of the previous reference to the holy myriads.
The meaning, therefore, would be this : The Lord embraces all
nations with His love, He who, so to speak, has all His holy angels
in His hand, i.e. His power, so that they serve Him as their Lord.
They lie down at His feet. The air. Xey. «n is explained by
Kimchi and Saad. as signifying adjuncU sequuntur vestigia sua ; and
by the Syriac, They f ollow thy foot, from conjecture rather than any
certain etymology. The derivation proposed by modern linguists,
from the verb nan^ according to an Arabic word signifying recvbwt,
innixus est, has apparently more to support it. K^, it rises up : in-
transitive, as in Hab. i. 3, Nah. i. 5, Hos. xiii. 1, and Ps. Ixxxix. 10.
Digitized by
Google
CHAP XXXIII. 2-5. 499
^•rfiaro is not a Hithpael participle (that which is spoken) ; for l? 5 !*?
has not a passive, bat an active signification, to converse (Num. vii.
89 ; Ezek. ii. 2, etc.). It is rather a noun, n*i3"l, from <^[, words,
utterances. The singular, Nfe^, is distributive : every one (of them)
rises on account of thine utterances, i.e. at thy words. The suflBxes
relate to God, and the discourse passes from the third to the second
person. • In our own language, such a change in a sentence like
this, " all His (God's) holy ones are in Thy (God's) hand," would
be intolerably harsh, but in Hebrew poetry it is by no means rare
(see, for example, Ps. xlix. 19).
Vers. 4, 5. " Moses appointed us a law, a possession of the congre-
gation of Jacob. And He became King in righteous-nation (Jeshurun) ;
there the heads of the people assembled, in crowds the tribes of Israel."
The God who met Israel at Sinai in terrible majesty, out of the
myriads of holy angels, who embraces all nations in love, and has
all the holy angels in His power, so that they lie at His feet and
rise up at His word, gave the law through Moses to the congrega-
tion of Jacob as a precious possession, and became King in Israel.
This was the object of the glorious manifestation of His holy
majesty upon Sinai. Instead of saying, " He gave the law to
the tribes of Israel through my mediation," Moses personates the
listening nation, and not only speaks of .himself in the third per-
son, but does so by identifying his own person with the nation,
because he wished the people to repeat his words from thorough
conviction, and because the law which he gave in the name of the
Lord was given to himself as well, and was as binding upon him
as upon every other member of the congregation. In a similar
manner the prophet Habakkuk identifies himself with the nation in
chap, hi., and says in ver. 19, out of the heart of the nation, " The
Lord is my strength, . . . who maketh me to walk upon mine high
places," — an expression which did not' apply to himself, but to the
nation as a whole. So again in the 20th and 21st Psalms, which
David composed as the prayers of the nation for its king, he not
only speaks of himself as the anointed of the Lord, but addresses
such prayers to the Lord for himself as could only be offered by
the nation for its king. " A possession for the congregation of
Jacob." " Israel was distinguished above all other nations by the
possession of the divinely revealed law (chap. iv. 5—8) ; that was its
most glorious possession, and therefore is called its true tceinrjkiov"
(Knobel). The subject in ver. 5 is not Moses but Jehovah, who
became King in Jeshurun (see at chap, xxxii. 15 and Ex. xv. 18).
Digitized by
Google
500 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
« "W ere gathered together ;" this refers to the assembling of the
nation around Sinai (chap. iv. 10 sqq. ; cf. Ex. xix. 17 sqq.), to the
day of assembly (chap. ix. 10, x. 4, xviii. 16).
Ver. 6. The blessings upon the tribes commence with this
verse. "Let Reuben live and not die, and there be a (small)
number of his men." The rights of the first-born had been with-
held from Reuben in the blessing of Jacob (Gen. xlix. 3) ; .Moses,
however, promises this tribe continuance and prosperity. The
words, " and let his men become a number," have been explained
in very different ways. 1B?P in this connection cannot mean a
large number (iroXixs iv apt,0fi$, LXX.), but; like ">BDD 'JlD (chap,
iv. 27 ; Gen. xxxiv. 30 ; Jer. xliv. 28), simply a small number, that
could easily be counted (cf. chap, xxviii. 62). The negation must
be carried on to the last clause. This the language will allow, as
the rule that a negation can only be carried forward when it stands
with emphatic force at the very beginning (Ewald, § 351) is not
without exceptions ; see for example Prov. xxx. 2, 3, where three
negative clauses follow a positive one, and in the last the vb is
omitted, without the particle of negation having been placed in
any significant manner at the beginning. — Simeon was the next in
age to Reuben ; but he is passed over entirely, because according
to Jacob's blessing (Gen. xlix. 7) he was to be scattered abroad in
Israel, and lost his individuality as a tribe in consequence of this
dispersion, in accordance with which the Simeonites simply received
a number of towns within the territory of Judah (Josh. xix. 2-9),
and, " having no peculiar object of its own, took part, as far as
possible, in the fate and objects of the other tribes, more especially
of Judah " (Schultz). Although, therefore, it is by no means to
be regarded as left without a blessing, but rather as included in
the general blessings in vers. 1 and 29, and still more in the
blessing upon Judah, yet it could not receive a special blessing
like the tribe of Reuben, because, as Ephraem Syrus observes, the
Simeonites had not endeavoured to wipe out the stain of the crime
which Jacob cursed, but had added to it by fresh crimes (more
especially the audacious prostitution of Zimri, Num. xxv.). Even
the Simeonites did not become extinct, but continued to live in the
midst of the tribe of Judah, so that as late as the eighth century, in
the reign of Hezekiah, thirteen princes are enumerated with their
families, whose fathers' houses had increased greatly (1 Chron. iv.
34 sqq.) ; and these families effected conquests in the south, even
penetrating into the mountains of Seir, for the purpose of seeking
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXIII. 7-11. • 501
fresh pasture (1 Chron. iv. 39-43). Hence the assertion that the
omission of Simeon is only conceivable from the circumstances of
a later age, is as mistaken as the attempt made in some of the
MSS. of the Septnagint to interpolate the name of Simeon in the
second clause of ver. 6.
Ver. 7. The blessing upon Judah is introduced with the
formula, " And this for Judah, and he said :" " Hear, Jehovah, the
voice of Judah, and bring him to his people ; with his hands he fights
for him; and help against his adversaries wilt Thou be." Judah,
from whom the sceptre was not to depart (Gen. xlix. 10), is men-
tioned before Levi as the royal tribe. The prayer, May Jehovah
bring Judah to his people, can hardly be understood in any other
way than it is by Onkelos and Hengstenberg (Christol. i. 80),
viz. as founded upon the blessing of Jacob, and expressing the
desire, that as Judah was to lead the way as the champion of his
brethren in the wars of Israel against the nations, he might have a
prosperous return to his people ; for the thought, " introduce him
to the kingdom of Israel and Judah" (Luther), or "give up to him
the people which belongs to him according to Thine appointment "
(Schultz), is hardly implied in the words, "bring to his people."
Other explanations are not worth mentioning. What follows points
to strife and war : " With his hands (VT accusative of the instru-
ment, vid. Ges. § 138, 1, note 3 ; Ewald, § 283, a.) is he fighting
(3"i participle of 3n) for it (the nation) ; Thou wilt grant him help,
deliverance before his foes."
Vers. 8-11. Levi. — Vers. 8, 9. " Thy right and Thy light is to
Thy godly man, whom Thou didst prove in Massah, and didst strive
with him at the water of strife; who says to his father and his mother,
I see him not ; and does not regard his brethren, and does not know
his sons; for they observed Thy word, and kept Thy covenant." This
blessing is also addressed to God as a prayer. The Urim and
Thummim — that pledge, which the high priest wore upon his breast-
plate, that the Lord would always give His people light to preserve
His endangered right (vid. Ex. xxviii. 29, 30) — are here regarded
as a prerogative of the whole of the tribe of Levi. Thummim is
placed before Urim, to indicate at the outset that Levi had de-
fended the right of the Lord, and that for that very reason the
right of the Urim and Thummim had been given to him by the
Lord. " Thy holy one " is not Aaron, but Levi the tribe-father,
who represents the whole tribe to which the blessing applies; hence
in vers. 9J and 10 the verb passes into the plural. To define more
Digitized by
Google
502 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
precisely the expression "Thy holy one," reference is made to the
trials at Massah and at the water of strife, on the principle that the
Lord humbles His servants before He exalts them, and confirms
those that are His by trying and proving them. The proving
at Massah refers to the murmuring of the people on account of
the want of water at Rephidim (Ex. xvii. 1-7, as in chap. vi. 16
and ix. 22), from which the place received the name of Massah
and Meribah ; the striving at the water of strife, to the rebellion of
the people against Moses and Aaron on account of the want of
water at Kadesh (Num. xx. 1-13). At both places it was primarily
the people who strove with Moses and Aaron, and thereby tempted
God. For it is evident that even at Massah the people murmured
not only against Moses, but against their leaders generally, from
the use of the plural verb, " Give ye us water to drink " (Ex. xvii.
2). This proving of the people, however, was at the same time a
proof, to which the Lord subjected the heads and leaders of the
nation, for the purpose of trying their faith. And thus also, in
chap. viii. 2 sqq., the whole of the guidance of Israel through the
desert is described as a trial and humiliation of the people by the
Lord. But in Moses and Aaron, the heads of the tribe of Levi,
the whole of the tribe of Levi was proved. The two provings by
means of water are selected, as Sckultz observes, " because in their
correlation they were the best adapted to represent the beginning
and end, and therefore the whole of the temptations." — Ver. 9. In
these temptations Levi had proved itself " a holy one," although in
the latter Moses and Aaron stumbled, since the Levites had risen
up in defence of the honour of the Lord and had kept His cove-
nant, even with the denial of father, mother, brethren, and children
(Matt. x. 37, xix. 29). The words, "who says to his father," etc.,
relate to the event narrated in Ex. xxxii. 26-29, where the Levites
draw their swords against the Israelites their brethren, at the com-
mand of Moses, after the worship of the golden calf, and execute
judgment upon the nation without respect of person. To this we
may add Num. xxv. 8, where Phinehas interposes with his sword in
defence of the honour of the Lord against the shameless prostitu-
tion with the daughters of Moab. On these occasions the Levites
manifested the spirit which Moses predicates here of all the tribe.
By the interposition at Sinai especially, they devoted themselves
with such self-denial to the service of the Lord, that the dignity of
the priesthood was conferred upon their tribe in consequence. — In
vers. 10 and 11, Moses celebrates this vocation : " They will teach
Digitized by
Google
chap, xxxra. 12. 503
Jacob Thy rights, and Israel Thy law; bring incense to Thy nose, and
whole-offering upon Thine altar. Bless, Lord, his strength, and let
the work of his hands be well-pleasing to Thee : smite his adversaries
and his haters upon the hips, that they may not rise !" The tribe of
Levi had received the high and glorious calling to instruct Israel
in the rights and commandments of God (Lev. x. 11), and to pre-
sent the sacrifices of the people to the Lord, viz. incense in the
holy place, whole-offering in the court. " Whole-offering," a term
applied to the burnt-offering (see vol. ii. p. 291), which is men-
tioned instar omnium, as being the leading sacrifice. The priests
alone were actually entrusted with the instruction of the people in
the law and the sacrificial worship ; but as the rest of the Levites
were given them as assistants in their service, this service might
very properly be ascribed to the whole tribe ; and no greater bless-
ing could be desired for it than that the Lord should give them
power to discharge the duties of their office, should accept their
service with favour, and make their opponents powerless. The
enemies and haters of Levi were not only envious persons, like
Korah and his company (Num. xvi. 1), but ail opponents of the
priests and Levites. The loins are the seat of strength (Ps. lxix.
24; Job xl. 16 ; Prov. xxxi. 17). This is the only place in which
|» is used before a finite verb, whereas it often stands before the
infinitive (e.g. Gen. xxvii. 1, xxxi. 29).
Ver. 12. Benjamin. — " The beloved of the Lord will dwell
safely with Him ; He shelters him at all times, and he dwells between
His shoulders" Benjamin, the son of prosperity, and beloved of
his father (Gen. xxxv. 18, xliv. 20), should bear his name with
right. He would be the beloved of the Lord, and as such would
dwell in safety with the Lord (Ivff, lit. founded upon Him). The
Lord would shelter him continually. The participle expresses the
permanence of the relation : is his shelterer. In the third clause
Benjamin is the subject once more ; he dwells between the shoulders
of Jehovah. " Between the shoulders" is equivalent to u upon the
back" (vid. 1. Sam. xvii. 6). The expression is founded upon the
figure of a father carrying his son (chap. i. 29). This figure is by
no means so bold as that of the eagle's wings, upon which the Lord
had carried His people, and brought them to Himself (Ex. xix. 4 ;
vid. Deut. xxxii. 11). There is nothing strange in the change of
subject in all three clauses, since it is met with repeatedly even in
plain prose (e.g. 2 Sam. xi. 13) ; and here it follows simply enough
from the thoughts contained in the different clauses, whilst the
Digitized by
Google
504 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES. '
suffix in all three clauses refers to the same noun, i.e. to Jehovah. 1
There are some who regard Jehovah as the suhject in the third
clause, and explain the unheard-of figure which they thus obtain,
viz. that of Jehovah dwelling between the shoulders of Benjamin,
as referring to the historical fact that God dwelt in the temple at
Jerusalem, which was situated upon the border of the tribes of
Benjamin and Judah. To this application of the words Knobel
has properly objected, that God did not dwell between ridges
(= shoulders) of mountains there, but upon the top of Moriah;
but, on the other hand, he has set up the much more untenable
hypothesis, that the expression refers to Gibeon, where the taber-
nacle stood after the destruction of Nob by Saul. — Moreover, the
whole nation participated in the blessing which Moses desired for
Benjamin ; and this applies to the blessings of the other tribes also.
All Israel was, like Benjamin, the beloved of the Lord (yid. Jer.
xi. 15 ; Ps. lx. 7), and dwelt with Him in safety (vid. ver. 28).
Vers. 13-17. Joseph. — Ver. 13. "Blessed of the Lord be his
land, of (in) the most precious things of heaven, the dew, and of
the flood which lies beneath, (ver. 14) and of the most precious of
the produce of the *«n, and of the most precious of the growth of the
moons, (ver. 15) and of the head of the mountains of olden time, and
of the most precious thing of the everlasting hills, (ver. 16) and of
the most precious thing of the earth, and of its fulness, and the good-
will of Him that dwelt in the bush : let it come upon the head of
Joseph, and upon the crown of him that is illustrious among his
brethren." What Jacob desired and solicited for his son Joseph,
Moses also desires for this tribe, namely, the greatest possible abun-
dance of earthly blessing, and a vigorous manifestation of power in
conflict with the nations. But however unmistakeable may be the
connection between these words and the blessing of Jacob (Gen.
xlix. 22 sqq.), not only in the things desired, but even in particular
expressions, there is an important difference which equally strikes
us, namely, that in the case of Jacob the main point of the blessing
is the growth of Joseph into a powerful tribe, whereas with Moses
it is the development of power on the part of this tribe in the land
of its inheritance, in perfect harmony with the different times at
which the blessings were pronounced. Jacob described the growth
of Joseph under the figure of the luxuriant branch of a fruit-tree
1 " To dwell upon God and between His shoulders is the same as to repose
upon Him : the simile being taken from fathers who carry their sons while deli-
cate and young" (Calvin).
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXIII. 13-17. 505
t
planted by the water ; whilst Moses fixes his eye primarily upon
the land of Joseph, and desires for him the richest productions.
" May his land be blessed by Jehovah from (ID of the cause of the
blessing, whose author was Jehovah ; vid. Ps. xxviii. 7, civ. 3) the
most precious thing of the heaven." "U», which only occurs again
in the Song of Sol. iv. 13, 16, and vii. 14, is applied to precious
fruits. The most precious fruit which the heaven yields to the
land is the dew. The " productions of the sun," and EH3, air. \ey.
fromtJns, " the produce of the moons," are the fruits of the earth,
which are matured by the influence of the sun and moon, by their
light, their warmth. At the same time, we can hardly so distin-
guish the one from the other as to understand by the former the
fruits which ripen only once a year, and by the latter those which
grow several times and in different months; and Ezek. xlvii. 12
and Rev. xxii. 2 cannot be adduced as proofs of this. The plural
" moons" in parallelism with the sun does not mean months, as in
Ex. ii. 2, but the different phases which the moon shows in its
revolution round the earth. K'tfiO (from the head), in ver. 15, is a
contracted expression signifying " from the most precious things of
the head." The most precious things of the head of the mountains
of old and the eternal hills, are the crops and forests with which the
tops of the mountains and hills are covered. Moses sums up the
whole in the words, " the earth, and the fulness thereof :" every-
thing in the form of costly good that the earth and its productions
can supply. — To the blessings of the heaven and earth there are to
be added the good-will of the Lord, who appeared to Moses in the
thorn-bush to redeem His people out of the bondage and oppression
of Egypt and bring it into the land of Canaan, the land flowing
with milk and honey (Ex. iii. 2 sqq.). The expression "that
dwells in the bush" is to be explained from the significance of
this manifestation of God as shown at Ex. iii., which shadowed
forth a permanent relation between the Lord and His people. The
spiritual blessing of the covenant grace is very suitably added to
the blessings of nature ; and there is something no less suitable
in the way in which the construction commencing with tfX"n is
dropped, so that an anakolouthon ensues. This word cannot be
taken as an accusative of more precise definition, as Schultz sup-
poses ; nor is \0 to be supplied before it, as Knobel suggests. Gram-
matically considered, it is a nominative to which the verb nnsian
properly belongs, although, as a matter of fact, not only the good-
will, but the natural blessings, of the Lord were also to come
Digitizi
ed by Google
506 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
upon the head of Joseph. Consequently we have not Kto* (masc),
which, fan would require, but the lengthened poetical feminine form
nnttian (vid. Ewald, § 191, c), used in a neuter sense. It, i.e.
everything mentioned before, shall come upon Joseph. On the
expression, " illustrious among his brethren," see at Gen. xlix. 26.
In the strength of this blessing, the tribe of Joseph would attain to
such a development of power, that it would be able to tread down
all nations. — Ver. 17. " The first-born of his ox, majesty is to him,
and buffalo-horns his horns : with them he thrusts down nations, all at
once the ends of the earth. These are the myriads of Ephraim, and
these the thousands of Manasseh." The "first-born of his (Joseph's)
oxen " (shor, a collective noun, as in chap. xv. 19) is not Joshua
(Rabb., Schultz) ; still less is it Joseph (Bleek, DiesteT), in which
case the pronoun his ox would be quite out of place ; nor is it King
Jeroboam II., as Graf supposes. It is rather Ephraim, whom the
patriarch Jacob raised into the position of the first-born of Joseph
(Gen. xlviii. 8 sqq.). All the sons of Joseph resembled oxen, but
Ephraim was the most powerful of them all. He was endowed
with majesty ; his horns, the strong weapon of oxen, in which all
their strength is concentrated, were not the horns of common oxen,
but horns of the wild buffalo (reem, Num. xxiii. 22), that strong
indomitable beast (cf . Job xxxix. 9 sqq. ; Ps. xxii. 22). With them
he would thrust down nations, the ends of the earth, i.e. the most
distant nations (vid. Ps. ii. 8, vii. 9, xxii. 28). " Together," i.e. all
at once, belongs rhythmically to " the ends of the earth." Such are
the myriads of Ephraim, i.e. in such might will the myriads of
Ephraim arise. To the tribe of Ephraim, as the more numerous,
the ten thousands are assigned ; to the tribe of Manasseh, the
thousands.
Vers. 18 and 19. Zebulun and Issachar. — " Rejoice, Zebulun,
at thy going out ; and, Issachar, at thy tents. Nations will they invite
to the mountain ; there offer the sacrifices of righteousness : for they
suck the affluence of the seas, and the hidden treasures of the sand."
The tribes of the last two sons of Leah Moses unites together, and,
like Jacob in Gen. xlix. 13, places Zebulun the younger first. He
first of all confirms the blessing which Jacob' pronounced through
simply interpreting their names as omina, by calling upon them to
rejoice in their undertakings abroad and at home. " At thy tents"
corresponds to " at thy going out" (tents being used poetically for
dwellings, as in chap. xvi. 7) ; like " sitting" to " going out and
coming in" in 2 Kings xix. 27, Isa. xxxvii. 28, Ps. cxxxix. 2 ; and
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXIII. 18, 19. 507
describes life in its two aspects of work and production, rest and
recreation. Although " going out" (enterprise and labour) is attri-
buted to Zebulun, and u remaining in tents" (the comfortable en-
joyment of life) to Issachar, in accordance with the delineation of
their respective characters in the blessing of Jacob, this is to be
attributed to the poetical parallelism of the clauses, and the whole
is to be understood as applying to both in the sense suggested by
Graf, "Kejoice, Zebulun and Issachar, in your labour and your
rest" This peculiarity, which is founded in the very nature of
poetical parallelism, which is to individualize the thought by dis-
tributing it into parallel members, has been entirely overlooked by
all the commentators who have given a historical interpretation to
each, referring the " going out" to the shipping trade and commer-
cial pursuits of the Zebulunites, and the expression " in thy tents "
either to the spending of a nomad life in tents, for the purpose of
performing a subordinate part in connection with trade (Schultz),
or to the quiet pursuits of agriculture and grazing (Knobel). They
were to rejoice in their undertakings at home and abroad ; for they
would be successful. The good things of life would flow to them
in rich abundance ; they would not make them into mammon, how-
ever, but would invite nations to the mountain, and there offer
sacrifices of righteousness. " The peoples" are nations generally,
not the tribes of Israel, still less the members of their own tribes.
By the " mountain" without any more precise definition, we are not
to understand Tabor or Carmel any more than the mountain land
of Canaan. It is rather " the mountain of the Lord's inheritance"
(Ex. xv. 17), upon which the Lord was about to plant His people,
the mountain which the Lord had chosen for His sanctuary, and in
which His people were to dwell with Him, and rejoice in sacrificial
meals of fellowship with Him (see vol. ii. p. 55). To this end
the Lord had sanctified Moriah through the sacrifice of Isaac which
He required of Abraham, though it had not been revealed to Moses
that it was there that the temple, in which the name of the Lord
in Israel would dwell, was afterwards to be built. There is no dis-
tinct or direct allusion to Moriah or Zion, as the temple-mountain,
involved in the words of Moses. It was only by later revelations
and appointments on the part of God that this was to be made
known. The words simply contain the Messianic thought that
Zebulun and Issachar would offer rich praise-offerings and thank-
offerings to the Lord, from the abundant supply of earthly good
that would flow to them, upon the mountain which He would make
Digitized by
Google
508 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
ready as the seat of His gracious presence, and would call, i.e. invite
the nations to the sacrificial meals connected with them, to delight
themselves .with them in the rich gifts of the Lord, and worship
the Lord who blessed His people thus. For the explanation of this
thought, see Ps. xxii. 28-31. Sacrifice is mentioned here as an
expression of divine worship, which culminated in sacrifice; and
slain-offerings are mentioned, not burnt-offerings, to set forth the
worship of God under the aspect of blessedness in fellowship with
the Lord. " Slain-offerings of righteousness" are not merely out-
wardly legal sacrifices, in conformity with the ritual of the law, but
such as were offered in a right spirit, which was well-pleasing to God
(as in Ps. iv. 6, li. 21). It follows as a matter of course, therefore,
that by the abundance of the seas we are not merely to under-
stand the profits of trade upon the Mediterranean Sea ; and that
we are still less to understand by the hidden treasures of the sand
" the fish, the purple snails, and sponges" (Knobel), or " tunny-fish,
purple shells, and glass" (Ps. Jon.) ; but that the words receive their
best exposition from Isa. lx. 5, 6, 16, and lxvi. 11, 12, i.e. that the
thought expressed is, that the riches and treasures of both sea and
land would flow to the tribes of Israel.
Vers. 20 and 21. Gad. — "Blessed be He that enlargeth Gad: like
a lioness he lieth down, and teareth the arm, yea, the crown of the head.
And he chose his first-fruit territory, for there was the leader's portion
kept ; and he came to the heads of the people, he executed the justice of
the Lord, and his rights with Israel." Just as in the blessing of Noah
(Gen. ix. 26) the God of Shem is praised, to point out the salvation
appointed by God for Shem, so here Moses praises the Lord, who
enlarged Gad, i.e. who not only gave him a broad territory in the
conquered kingdom of Sihon, but furnished generally an unlimited
space for his development (vid. Gen. xxvi. 22), so that he might
unfold his lion-like nature in conflict with his foes. On the figure
of a lioness, see Gen. xlix. 9 ; and on the warlike character of the
Gadites, the remarks on the blessing of Jacob upon Gad (Gen.
xlix. 19). The second part of the blessing treats of the inheritance
which Gad obtained from Moses at his own request beyond Jordan.
ntO, with an accusative and S>, signifies to look out something for
oneself (Gen. xxii. 8 ; 1 Sam. xvi. 17). The " first-fruit" refers
here to the first portion of the land which Israel received for a pos-
session ; this is evident from the reason assigned, r\\>?n DE> Va, whilst
the statement that Gad chose the hereditary possession is in har-
mony with Num. xxxii. 2, 6, 25 sqq., where the children of Gad are
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXIII. 20, 21. 509.
described as being at the head of the tribes, who came before Moses
to ask for the conquered land as their possession. The meaning of
the next clause, of which very different explanations have been
given, can only be, that Gad chose such a territory for its inherit-
ance as became a leader of the tribes, ppno, he who determines,
commands, organizes ; hence both a commander and also a leader in
war. It is in the latter sense that it occurs both here and in Judg.
v. 14. Pi?Hp npprjj the field, or territory of the leader, may either
be the territory appointed or assigned by the lawgiver, or the terri-
tory falling to the lot of the leader. According to the .former view,
Moses would be the tnechokek. But the thought, that Moses ap-
pointed or assigned him his inheritance, could be no reason why
Gad should choose it for himself. Consequently pphD nppn can only
mean the possession which the mechokek chose for himself, as befit-
ting him, or specially adapted for him. Consequently the mechokek
was not Moses, but the tribe of Gad, which was so called because
it unfolded such activity and bravery at the head of the tribes in
connection with the conquest of the land, that it could be regarded
as their leader. This peculiar prominence on the part of the Gadites
may be inferred from the fact, that they distinguished themselves
above the Reubenites in the fortification of the conquered land
(Num. xxxii. 34 sqq.). pBD, from |BD, to Cover, hide, preserve, is a
predicate, and construed as a noun, " a thing preserved." — On the
other hand, the opinion has been very widely spread, from the time
of Onkelos down to Baumgarten and Ewald, that this hemistich refers
to Moses : " there is the portion of the lawgiver hidden," or " the
field of the hidden leader," and that it contains an allusion to the
fact that the grave of Moses was hidden in the inheritance of Gad.
But this is not only at variance with the circumstance, that a pro-
phetic allusion to the grave of Moses such as Baumgarten assumes
is apparently inconceivable, from the simple fact that we cannot
imagine the Gadites to have foreseen the situation of Moses' grave
at the time when they selected their territory, but also with the fact
that, according to Josh. xiii. 20, the spot where this grave was situ-
ated (chap, xxxiv. 5) was not allotted to the tribe of Gad, but to
that of Reuben ; and lastly, with the use of the word chelkah, which
does not signify a burial-ground or grave. — But although Gad chose
out an inheritance for himself, he still went before his brethren, i.e.
along with the rest of the tribes, into Canaan, to perform, in con-
nection with them, what the Lord demanded of His people as a right.
This is the meaning of the second half of the verse. The clause,
Digitized by
Google
510 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
" he came to the heads of the people," does not refer to the fact
that the Gadites came to Moses and the heads of the congregation,
to ask for the conquered land as a possession (Num. xxxii. 2), but
expresses the thought that Gad joined the heads of the people to
go at the head of the tribes of Israel (comp. Josh. i. 14, iv. 12,
with Num. xxxii. 17, 21, 32), to conquer Canaan with the whole
nation, and root out the Oanaanites. The Gadites had promised
this to Moses and the heads of the people ; and this promise Moses
regarded as an accomplished act, and praised in these words with
prophetic foresight as having been already performed, and that not
merely as one single manifestation of their obedience towards the
word of the Lord, but rather as a pledge that Gad would always
manifest the same disposition. " To do the righteousness of Je-
hovah," i.e. to do what Jehovah requires of His people as righteous-
ness, — namely, to fulfil the commandments of God, in which the
righteousness of Israel was to consist (chap. vi. 25). WV, imperfect
Kal for nnt£ or nnto ; see Get. § 76, 2, c, and Ewald, § 142, c. " With
Israel :" in fellowship with (the rest of) Israel.
Ver. 22. Dan is " a young lion which springs out of Bashan."
Whilst Jacob compared him to a serpent by the way, which sud-
denly bites a horse's feet, so that its rider falls backward, Moses
gives greater prominence to the strength which Dan would display
in conflict with foes, by calling him a young lion which suddenly
springs out of its ambush. The reference to Bashan has nothing
to do with the expedition of the Danites against Laish, in the valley
of Rehoboth (Judg. xviii. 28), as this yalley did not belong to
Bashan. It is to be explained from the simple fact, that in the
regions of eastern Bashan, which abound with caves, and more
especially in the woody western slopes of Jebel Hauran, many lions
harboured, which rushed forth from th6 thicket, and were very
dangerous enemies to the herds of Bashan. Even if no other express
testimonies to this fact are to be found, it may be inferred from the
description given of the eastern spurs of Antilibanus in the Song of
Sol. (ivi 8), as the abodes of lions and leopards. The meaning leap
forth, spring out, is confirmed by both the context and dialects,
though the word only occurs here.
Ver. 23. Naphtalt. — " Naphtali, satisfied with favour, and
full of the blessing of Jehovah ; of sea and south shall he take pos-
session." If the gracefulness of Naphtali is set forth in the blessing
of Jacob, by comparing it to a gazelle, here Moses assures the same
tribe of satisfaction with the favour and blessing of God, and pro-
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXIII. 24, 26. 511
mises it the possession of the sea and of the south, i.e. an inherit-
ance which should combine the advantages of the sea — a healthy
sea-breeze — with the grateful warmth of the south. This blessing
is expressed in far too general terms for it to be possible to interpret
it historically, as relating to the natural characteristics of the in-
heritance of the Naphtalites in Canaan, or to regard it as based
upon them, apart altogether from the fact, that the territory of
Naphtali was situated in the north-east of Canaan, and reached as
far as the sea of Galilee, and that it was for the most part moun-
tainous, though it was a very fertile hill-country (Josh, xviii. 32-39).
neh' is a very unique form of the imperative, though this does not
warrant an alteration of the text.
Vers. 24 and 25. Asher. — " Blessed before the sons be Asher ;
let him be the favoured among his brethren, and dipping his foot in oil.
Iron and brass be thy castle ; and as the days of thy life let thy rest
continue." Asher, the prosperous (see at Gen. xxx. 15), was justly
to bear the name. ■ He was to be a child of prosperity ; blessed with
earthly good, he was to enjoy rest all his life long in strong for-
tresses. It is evident enough that this blessing is simply an expo-
sition of the name Asher, and that Moses here promises the tribe a •
verification of the omen contained in its name. 0^31? ^P* 1 ? does not
mean " blessed with children," or " praised because of his children,"
in which case we should have V33 ; but " blessed before the sons" •
(cf. Judg. v. 24), i.e. blessed before the sons of Jacob, who were
peculiarly blessed, equivalent to the most blessed of all the sons of
Israel. WIR Wi doe3 not mean the beloved among his brethren,
acceptable to his brethren, but the one who enjoyed the favour of
the Lord, i.e. the one peculiarly favoured by the Lord. Dipping
the foot in oil points to a land flowing with oil (Job xxix. 6), i.e. fat
or fertile throughout, which Jacob had already promised to Asher
(see Gen. xlix. 20). To complete the prosperity, however, security
and rest were required for the enjoyment of the blessings bestowed
by God ; and these are promised in ver. 25. ?WD (air. Xey.) does
not mean a shoe, but is derived from ?{0, to bolt (Judg. iii. 23), and
signifies either a bolt, or that which is shut fast ; a poetical expres-
sion for a castle or fortress. Asher's dwellings were to be castles,
fortresses of iron and brass ; i.e. as strong and impregnable as if
they were built of iron and brass. The pursuit of mining is not
to be thought of as referred to here, even though the territory of
Asher, which reached to Lebanon, may have contained brass and
iron (see at chap. viii. 9). Luther follows the LXX. and Vulgate,
Digitized by
Google
512 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
and renders this clause, " iron and brass be upon , his shoes ;" but
this is undoubtedly wrong, as the custom of fastening the shoes or
sandals with brass or iron was quite unknown to the Israelites; and
even Goliath, who was clothed in brass from head to foot, and wore
iron greaves, had no iron sandals, though the military shoes of the
ancient Romans had nails in the soles. Moreover, the context con-
tains no reference to war, so as to suggest the idea that the treading
down and crushing of the foe are intended. " As thy days," i.e. as
long as the days of thy life last, let thy rest be (continue). Luther's
rendering, " let thine old age be as thy youth," which follows the
Vulgate, cannot be sustained ; for although K3^, derived from 3^,
to vanish away, certainly might signify old age, the expression
" thy days" cannot possibly be understood as signifying youth.
Vers. 26-29. The conclusion of the blessing corresponds to the
introduction^ As M6ses s, S0 n 2 mence< i w ' tn *h e glorious fact of the
founding of the kingdom of Jen1§JS tt * n I srae l> as tne ^ rm founda-
tion of the salvation of His people^SL* 16 a ' so conc ' U( ^ es witn a
reference to the Lord their eternal refug^S^™* 11 a congratulation
of Israel which could find refuge in such i^fe*' - Vers * 26 > 27>
" Who is as God, a righteous nation, who ride7\ heavm % f y t
help, and in His exaltation upon the clouds. Abiding t e M ° S
olden time, and beneath are everlasting arms ■ and ! * drmt
nation has a God who rules in heaven with almighty pofc'
is a refuge and help to his people against every foe. -* 1 "™
enemy before thee, and says, Destroy." " The meanin'eTs^ 0ther
nafinn K«o n n«j — 1,_ i * * . . o " ^K.er.
DOflkr
is a vocative, and the alteration of f>N3 into ^"'""aT'the 0& ° f
Jeshurun," according to the ancient versions, is to be reiecte? °"
the simple ground that the expression "in thy help," which foil
immediately afterwards, is an address to Israel. Riding upon i
heaven and the clouds is a figure used to denote the unlimit
omnipotence with which God rules the world out of heaven, and ,
the helper of His people. « In thy help," i.e. as thy helper. Thi
God is a dwelling to His people. «!», like the masculine ft» "in
±-s. xc. 1, and xci. 9, signifies « dwelling,"- a genuine Mosaic
ngure, to which, m all probability, the houseless wandering of the
peop e in the desert, which made them feel the full worth of a
dwelling, first gave rise. The figure not only implies that God
grants protection and a refuge to His people in the storms of life
(Vs. xci. 1, 2, cf. Isa. iv. 6), but also that He supplies His people
with everything that can afford a safe abode. « The God of old,"
t.e. who has proved Himself to be God from the very beginning of
Digitized by
Google
CHAP. XXXIII. 26-29. 513
the world (yid. Ps. xc. 1 ; Hab. i. 12). The expression " under-
neath" is to be explained from the antithesis to the heaven where
God is enthroned above mankind. He who is enthroned in heaven
above is also the God who is with His people upon the earth below,
and holds and bears them in His arms. _ " Everlasting arms" are
arms whose strength is never exhausted. There is no need to
supply " thee" after " underneath ;" the expression should rather be
left in its general form, " upon the earth beneath." The reference
to Israel is obvious from the context. The driving of the enemy
before Israel is not to be restricted to the rooting out of the
Canaanites, but applies to every enemy of the congregation of the
Lord. — Ver. 28. " And Israel dwells safely, alone the fountain of
Jacob, in a land full of corn and wine ; his heavens also drop down
dew." Because the God of old was the dwelling and help of
Israel, it dwelt safely and separate from the other nations, in a
land abounding with corn and wine. " The fountain of Jacob" is
parallel to " Israel ;" " alone (separate) dwells the fountain of Jacob."
This title is given to Israel as having sprung from the patriarch
Jacob, in whom it had its source. A similar expression occurs in
Ps. Ixviii. 27. It completely destroys the symmetry of the clauses
of the verse to connect the words, as Luther does, with what follows,
in the sense of " the eye of Jacob is directed upon a land." The
construction of X3& with ?K, to dwell into a land, may be explained
on the ground that the dwelling involves the idea of spreading out
over the land. On the " land of corn," etc., see chap. viii. 7 and 8.
. *)X is emphatic : yea his heaven, i.e. the heaven of this land drops
down dew (yid. Gen. xxvii. 28). Israel was- to be congratulated
upon this. — Ver. 29. " Sail to thee, Israel ! who is like thee, a
people saved in the Lord, the shield of thy help, and who (is) the
sword of thine eminence. Thine enemies will deny themselves to thee,
and thou ridest upon their heights." " Saved ;" not merely delivered
from danger and distress, but in general endowed with salvation
(like Zech. ix. 9 ; see also Isa. xlv. 17). The salvation of Israel
rested in the Lord, as the ground out of which it grew, from which
it descended, because the Lord was its help and shield, as He had
already promised Abraham (Gen. xv. 1), and " the sword of his
eminence," i.e. the sword which had fought for the eminence of
Israel. But because the Lord was Israel's shield and sword, or, so
to speak, both an offensive and defensive weapon, his enemies denied
themselves to him, i.e. feigned friendship, did not venture to appear
openly as enemies (for the meaning " feign," act the hypocrite, see
PENT. — VOL. III. 2 K
Digitized by
Google
514 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
Ps. xviii. 45, lxxxi. 16). But Israel would ride upon their heights,
the high places of their land, i.e. would triumph over all its foes
(see at chap, xxxii. 13).
DEATH AND BURIAL OP MOSES. — CHAP. XXXIV.
Vers. 1-8. After blessing the people, Moses ascended Mount
Nebo, according to the command of God (chap, xxxii. 48-51), and
there the Lord showed him, in all its length and breadth, that pro-
mised land into which he was not to enter. From Nebo, a peak of
Pisgah, which affords a very extensive prospect on all sides (see p.
214), he saw the land of Gilead, the land to the east of the Jordan
as far as Dan, t.«. not Laish-Dan near the central source of the
Jordan (Judg. xviii. 27), which did not belong to Gilead, but a
Dan in northern Peraea, which has not yet been discovered (see at
Gen. xiv. 14) ; and the whole of the land on the west of the Jordan,
Canaan proper, in all its different districts, namely, " the whole of
Naphtali" i.e. the later Galilee on the north, " the land of Ephraim
and Manasseh" in the centre, and "the whole of the land ofJudah,"
the southern portion of Canaan, in all its breadth, " to the hinder
(Mediterranean) sea" (see chap. xi. 24) ; also " the south land"
(Negeb : see at Num. xiii. 17), the southern land of steppe towards
the Arabian desert, and " the valley of the Jordan" (see Gen. xiii.
10), i.e. the deep valley from Jericho the palm-city (so called from
the palms which grew there, in the valley of the Jordan : Judg. i.
16, iii. 43 ; 2 Chron. xxviii. 15) " to Zoar" at the southern ex-
tremity of the Dead Sea (see at Gen. xix. 22). This sight of every
part of the land on the east and west was not an ecstatic vision, but
a sight with the bodily eyes, whose natural power of vision was
• miraculously increased by God, to give Moses a glimpse at least of
the glorious land which he was not to tread, and delight his eye
with a view of the inheritance intended for his people. — Vers. 5, 6.
After this favour had been granted him, the aged servant of the
Lord was to taste death as the wages of sin. There, i.e. upon
Mount Nebo, he died, " at the mouth," i.e. according to the com-
mandment, " of the Lord" (not " by a kiss of the Lord," as the
Kabbins interpret it), in the land of Moab, not in Canaan (see at
Num. xxvii. 12-14). " And He buried him in the land of Moab,
over against Beth Peor." The subject in this sentence is Jehovah.
Though the third person singular would allow of the verb being
taken as impersonal (lldatyav axnov, LXX. : they buried him),
Digitized by
Google
chap, xxxnr. i-s. 515
such a rendering is precluded by the statement which follows, u no
man knoweih of his sepulchre unto this day" u The valley" where
the Lord buried Moses was certainly not the Jordan valley, as in
chap. iii. 29, but most probably " the valley in the field of Moab,
upon the top of Pisgah," mentioned in Num. xxi. 20, near to Nebo
(see p. 148) ; in any case, a valley on the mountain, not far from
the top of Nebo. — The Israelites inferred what is related in vers.
1-6 respecting the end of Moses' life, from the promise of God in
chap, xxxii. 49, and Num. xxvii. 12, 13, which was communicated
to them by Moses himself (chap. iii. 27), and from the fact that
Moses wept up Mount Nebo, from which he never returned. On
his ascending the mountain, the eyes of the people would certainly
follow him as far as they possibly could. It is also very possible
that there were many parts of the Israelitish camp from which the
top of Nebo was visible, so that the eyes of his people could not
only accompany him thither, but could also see. that when the Lord
had shown him the promised land, He went down with him into
the neighbouring valley, where Moses was taken for ever out of
their sight. There is not a word in the text about God having
brought the body of Moses down from the mountain and buried it
in the valley. This "romantic idea" is invented by Knobel, for
the purpose of throwing suspicion upon the historical truth of a fact
which is offensive to him. The fact itself that the Lord buried His
servant Moses, and no man knows of his sepulchre, is in perfect
keeping with the relation in which Moses stood to the Lord while
he was alive. Even if his sin at the water of strife rendered it
necessary that he should suffer the punishment of death, as a
memorable example of the terrible severity of the holy God against
sin, even in the case of His faithful servant ; yet after the justice
of God had been satisfied by this punishment, he was to be distin-
' guished in death before all the people, and glorified as the servant
who had been found faithful in all the house of God, whom the
Lord had known face to face (ver. 10), and to whom He had spoken
mouth to mouth (Num. xii. 7, 8). The burial of Moses by the
hand of Jehovah was not intended to conceal his grave, for the
purpose of guarding against a superstitious and idolatrous reverence
for his grave; for with the opinion held by the Israelites, that
corpses and graves defiled, there was but little fear of this ; but, as
we may infer from the account of the transfiguration of Jesus, the
intention was to place him in the same category with Enoch and
Elijah. As Kurtz. observes, " The purpose of God was to prepare
Digitized by
Google
516 THE FIFTH BOOK OF MOSES.
for him a condition, both of body and soul, resembling that of these
two men of God. Men bury a corpse that it may pass into corrup-
tion. If Jehovah, therefore, would not suffer the body of Moses to
be buried by men, it is but natural to seek for the reason in the fact
that He did not intend to leave him to corruption, but, when burying
it with His own hand, imparted a power to it which preserved it
from corruption, and prepared the way for it to pass into the same
form of existence to which Enoch and Elijah were taken, without
either death or burial." — There can be no doubt that this truth lies
at the foundation of the Jewish theologoumenon mentioned in the
Epistle of Jude, concerning the contest between Michael the arck-
angel and the devil for the body of Moses. — Vers. 7, 8. Though he
died at the age of one hundred and twenty (see at chap. xxxi. 2),
Moses' eyes had not become dim, and his freshness had not abated
(W air \ey., connected with n? in Gen. xxx. 37, signifies freshness).
Thus had the Lord -preserved the full vital energy of His servant,
even till the time of his death. The mourning of the people lasted
thirty days, as in the case of Aaron (Num. xx. 29).
Vers. 9-12. Joshua now took Moses' place as the leader of the
people, filled with the spirit of wisdom (practical wisdom, mani-
festing itself in action), because Moses' had ordained him to his
office by the laying on of hands (Num. xxvii. 18). And the people
obeyed him ; but he was not like Moses. " There arose no more a
prophet in Israel like unto Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face"
i.e. so far as the miracles and signs were concerned which Moses
did, by virtue of his divine mission, upon Pharaoh, his servants, and
his land, and the terrible acts which he performed before the eyes
of Israel (vers. 11 and 12 ; vid. chap. xxvi. 8, and iv. 34). " Whom
Jehovah knew :" not who knew Him, the Lord. "To know," like
yivtoaKeiv in 1 Cor. viii. 3, relates to the divine knowledge, which
not only involves a careful observance (chap. ii. 7), but is also a
manifestation of Himself to man, a penetration of man with the
spiritual power of God. Because he was thus known by the Lord,
Moses was able to perform signs and wonders, and mighty, terrible
acts, such as no other performed either before or after him. In
this respect Joshua stood far below Moses, and no prophet arose in
Israel like unto Moses. — This remark concerning Moses does not
presuppose that a long series of prophets had already risen up since
the time of Moses. When Joshua had defeated the Canaanites,
and conquered their land with the powerful help of the Lord,
which was still manifested in signs and wonders, and had divided
Digitized by
Google
CONCLUDING REMARKS. 517
it among the children of Israel , and when the tribes had settled
down in their inheritance, so that the different portions- of the land
began to be called by the names of Naphtali, Ephraim, Manasseh,
and Judah, as is the case in ver. 2 ; the conviction might already
have become established in Israel, that no other prophet would arise
like Moses, to whom the Lord had manifested Himself with such
signs and wonders before the Egyptians and the eyes of Israel.
The position occupied by Joshua in relation to this his predecessor,
as the continuer of his work, would necessarily awaken and confirm
this conviction, in connection with what the Lord had said as to
the superiority of Moses to all the prophets (Num. xii. 6 sqq.).
Moses was the founder and mediator of the old covenant. As long
as this covenant was to last, no prophet could arise in Israel like
unto Moses. There is but One who is worthy of greater honour
than- Moses, namely, the Apostle and High Priest of our profession,
who is placed as the Son over all the house of God, in which Moses
was found faithful as a servant (compare Heb. iii. 2-6 with Num.
xii. 7), Jesus Christ, the founder and mediator of the new and ever-
lasting covenant.
CONCLUDING REMARKS ON THE COMPOSITION OF THE
PENTATEUCH.
If we close our commentary with another survey of tne entire
work, viz. the five books of Moses, we may sum up the result of our
detailed exposition, so far as critical opinions respecting its origin
are concerned, in these words : We have found the decision which
we pronounced in our General Introduction, as to the internal
unity and system of the whole Thorah, as well as its Mosaic origin,
thoroughly confirmed. With the exception of the last chapters of
the fifth book, which are distinctly shown to be an appendix to the
Mosaic Thorah, added by a different hand, by the statement in Deut.
xxxi. 24 sqq., that when the book of the law was finished Moses
handed it over to the Levites to keep, there is nothing in the whole
of the five books which Moses might not have written. There are
no historical circumstances or events either mentioned or assumed,
which occurred for the first time after Moses was dead. Neither
the allusion to the place called Dan in Gen. xiv. 14 (cf. Deut.
xxxiv. 1) ; nor the remark in Gen. xxxvi. 1, that there were kings
Digltizi
ed by Google
518 CONCLUDING REMARKS ON THE
in the land of Edom before the children of Israel had a king over
them ; nor the statement that the monument which Jacob erected
over Rachel's grave remained "to this day" (Gen. xxxv. 20);
nor even the assertion in Deut. iii. 14, that Jair called Bashan
"Chawoth Jair" after his own name, furnishes any definite and
unmistakeable indication of a post-Mosaic time. 1 And the account
in Ex. xvi. 35, that the Israelites ate the manna forty years, till
they came to an inhabited land, " to the end," i.e. the extreme
boundary, of the land of Canaan, could only be adduced by Bleek
(Einl. p. 204) as an evident proof that " this could not have been
written before the arrival of the Israelites in the land of Canaan,"
through a irapepfMjveia, or misinterpretation of the words, " into the
land of their dwelling." For were not the Israelites on the border
of the land when they were encamped in the steppes of Moab by
the Jordan opposite to Jericho ? Or are we to suppose that the
kingdoms of Sihon and Og with their cities, which the Israelites
had already conquered under Moses, were an uninhabited land?
The passage mentioned last simply proves, that in the middle books
of the Pentateuch we have not simple diaries before us containing
the historical occurrences of the Mosaic times, but a work drawn
up according to a definite plan, and written in the last year of
•Moses' life. This is apparent from the remarks about the shining
face of Moses (Ex. xxxiv. 33—35), and the guidance of Israel in all
its journeys by the pillar of cloud (Ex. xl. 38, cf. Num. x. 34), as
well as from the systematic arrangement and distribution of the
materials according, to certain well-defined and obvious points of
view, as we have already endeavoured to show in the introductions
to the different books, and in the exposition itself.
If, however, the composition of the whole Thorah by Moses is
thus firmly established, in accordance with the statements in Deut
xxxi. 9 and 24, it by no means follows that Moses wrote the whole
1 But even if the remarks in Gen. xxxv. 20 and Deut. iii. 14 concerning the
preservation of the monument over Rachel's grave, and the retention of the
names which Jair gave to the towns of Bashan, should Really point to a post-
Mosaic time, no modest critic would ever think of adducing two such gloss-like
notices as a proof of the later origin of the whole Pentateuch, but would regard
these notices as nothing more than a gloss interpolated by a later hand. In
the case of the monument upon Rachel's grave, however, if it continued in
existence for centuries, it is not only conceivable, but by no means improbable,
that the spies sent into Canaan from Kadesh, who passed through the land
from Hebron to Hamath, saw it by the high road where the grave was situated,
and brought the intelligence of its preservation to Moses and the people.
Digitizi
ed by Google
COMPOSITION OF THE PENTATEUCH. 519
work from Gen. i. to Deut. xxxi. uno tenore, and in the closing
days of his life. Even in this case it may have been written step
by step ; and not only Genesis, but the three middle books., may
have been composed before the discourses in the fifth book, so that
the whole work was simply finished and closed after the renewal of
the covenant recorded in Deut. -xxix. and xxx. Again, such state-
ments as that Moses wrote this law, and made an end of writing
the words of this law in a book till they were finished (Deut. xxxi.
9 and 24), by no means require us to assume that Moses wrote it
all with his own hand. The epistles which the Apostle Paul sent
to the different churches were rarely written with his own hand,
but were dictated to one of his assistants ; yet their Pauline origin
is not called in question in consequence. And so Moses may have
employed some assistant, either a priest or scribe (skoter), in the
composition of the book of the law, without its therefore failing to
be his own work. Still less is the Mosaic authorship of the Penta-
teuch rendered doubtful by the fact that he availed himself of
written documents from earlier times in writing the primeval his-
tory, and incorporated them to some extent in the book of Genesis
without alteration ; and that in the history of his own time, and
when introducing the laws into his work, he inserted documents in
the middle books which had been prepared by the priests and sho-
tervm at his own command, — such, for example, as the lists of the
numbering of the people (Num. i.-iii. and xxvi.), the account of
the dedicatory offerings x>f the tribe-princes- (Num. vii.), and of the
committee of heads of tribes appointed for the purpose of dividing
the land of Canaan (Num. xxxiv. 16 sqq.), — in the exact form in
which they had been drawn up for public use. This conjecture is
rendered very natural by the contents and form of the Pentateuch.
The Pentateuch contains historical narrative and law, answer*
ing to the character of the divine revelation, which consisted in
historical facts, and received a development in accordance with
the times. And on closer inspection we find that several different
elements may be distinguished in each of these. The historical
contents are divisible into an annalistic or monumental portion, and
into prophetico-historical accounts. The former includes the simple
notices of the most important events from the creation of the world to
the death of Moses, with their exact chronological, ethnographical,
and geographical data ; also the numerous genealogical documents
introduced into the history. To the latter belong statements,
whether shorter or longer, respecting those revelations and promises
Digitized by
Google
520 CONCLUDING REMARKS ON THE
of God, by which the Creator of the heaven and the earth prepared
the way from the very earliest time for the redemption of the fallen
human race, and which, after laying the foundation for the Old
Testament kingdom of God by the guidance of the patriarchs and
the redemption of Israel out of the bondage of Egypt, He eventu-
ally carried out at Sinai by the conclusion of a covenant and the
giving of a law. In the same way, we may distinguish a twofold
element in the legal portion of the Pentateuch. The kernel of
the Sinaitic legislation is to be found in the decalogue, with the
moral and rightful conditions upon the basis of which the Lord
concluded the covenant with Israel. The religious and moral
truths and commandments, which, as being the absolute demands
of the holiness and justice, the love and mercy of God, constitute
the very essence of true religion, are surrounded in the covenant
economy of the Old Testament by certain religious statutes and
institutions, which were imposed upon the people of God simply
for the time of its infancy, and constituted that " shadow of things
to come" which was to pass away when the "body" appeared.
This " shadow " embraces all the special theocratic ordinances and
precepts of the so-called Levitical law (whether ecclesiastical, disci-
plinary, or magisterial), in which religious and ethical ideas were
symbolically incorporated ; so that they contained within them
eternal truths, whilst their earthly form was to pass away. These
covenant statutes are so intimately bound up with the general
religious doctrines and the purely moral commands, by virtue of
their symbolical significance, that in many respects they interlace
one another, the moral commands being enclosed and pervaded by
the covenant statutes, and the latter again being sanctified and
transformed by the former, so that the entire law assumes the form
of a complete organic whole. A similar organic connection is also
apparent between the historical and legal constituents of the Penta-
teuch. The historical narrative not only supplied the framework
or outward setting for the covenant legislation, but it also prepared
the way for that legislation, just as God Himself prepared the way
for concluding the covenant with Israel by His guidance of' the
human race and the patriarchs of Israel ; and it so pervades every
portion of it also, that, on the one hand, the historical circumstances
form the groundwork for the legal institutions, and on the other •
hand a light is thrown by the historical occurrences upon the cove-
nant ordinances and laws. Just as nature and spirit interpenetrate
each other in the world around us and in human life, and the
Digitized by
Google
COMPOSITION OF THE PENTATEUCH. 521
spirit not only comes to view in the life of nature, but transforms
it at the same time ; so has God planted His kingdom of grace in
the natural order of the world, that nature may be sanctified by
grace. But, notwithstanding this organic connection between the
various constituents of the Pentateuch, from the very nature of
the case not only are the historical and legal portions kept quite
distinct from one another in many passages, but the distinctions
between these two constituents are here and there brought very
clearly out to view.
The material differences necessarily determined in various ways
the form of the narrative, the phraseology, and even the words
employed. In the historical portions many words and expressions
occur which are never met with in the legal sections, and vice
versa. The same remark also applies to the different portions in
which we have either historical narrative, or the promulgation of
laws. In addition to this, we might reasonably expect to find whole
sections also, in which the ideas and verbal peculiarities of the
different constituents are combined. And this is really the case.
The differences stand out very sharply in the earliest chapters of
Genesis, where the account of paradise and the fall, together with
the promise of the victory of the seed of the woman over the ser-
pent, which contains the germ of all future revelations of God
(chap. ii. 4 sqq.), is appended immediately to the history of the
creation of the world (chap. i. 1 — ii. 3) ; whilst in the mode of
narration it differs considerably from the style of the first chapter.
Whereas in chap. i. the Creator of the heaven and the earth is
called Elohim simply ; in the history of paradise and the fall, not to
mention other differences, we meet with the composite name Jehovah
Elohim ; and, after this, the two names Elohim and Jehovah are
used interchangeably, so that in many chapters the former only
occurs, and in others again only the latter, until the statement in
Ex. vi., that God appeared to Moses and commissioned him to bring
the people of Israel out of Egypt, after which the name Jehovah
predominates, so that henceforth, with but few exceptions, Elohim
is only used in an appellative sense.
Upon this interchange in the names of God in the book of
Genesis, modern critics have built up their hypothesis as to the
composition of Genesis, and in fact of the entire Pentateuch, either
from different documents, or from repeated supplementary addi-
tions, in accordance with which they discover an outward cause for
the change of names, viz. the variety of editors, instead of deducing
Digitized by
Google
522 CONCLUDING BEMARKS ON THE
it from the different meanings of the names themselves ; whilst they
also adduce, in support of their view, the fact that certain ideas
and expressions change in connection with the name of God. The
fact is obvious enough. But the change in the use of the different
names of God is associated with the gradual development of the
saving purposes of God ; and as we have already shown in vol. i.
pp. 73 sqq., the names Elohim and Jehovah are expressive of differ-
ent relations on the part of God to the world. Now, as God did
not reveal Himself in the full significance of His name Jehovah till
the time of the exodus of Israel out of Egypt, and the conclusion
of the covenant at Sinai, we could expect nothing else than what we
actually. find in Genesis, namely, that this name is not used by the
author of the book of Genesis before the call of Abraham, except
in connection with such facts as were directly preparatory to the call
of Abraham to be the father of the covenant nation ; and that even
in the history of the patriarchs, in which it predominates from Gen.
xii.— xvi., it is used less frequently again after Jehovah revealed
Himself to Abraham as El Shaddai, and other titles of God sprang
out of the continued manifestations of God to the patriarchs, which
could take the place of that name. (For more detailed remarks, see
vol. i. pp. 330 sqq.). It would not have been by any means strange,
therefore, if the name Jehovah had not occurred at all in the account
of the creation of the world, in the genealogies of the patriarchs of
the primeval and preparatory age (Gen. v. and xi.), in the table of
nations (Gen. x.), in the account of the negotiations of Abraham
with the Hittites concerning the purchase of the cave of Machpelah
for a family sepulchre (Gen. xxiii.), in the notices respecting Esau
and the Edomitish tribe-princes and kings (Gen. xxxvi.), and other
narratives of similar import. Nevertheless we find it in the genea-
logy in Gen. v. 29, and in the table of nations in Gen. x. 9, where
the critics, in order to save their hypothesis, are obliged to hare
recourse to an assumption of glosses, or editorial revisions. They
have dealt still more violently with Gen. xvii. 1. There Jehovah
appears to Abram, and manifests Himself to him as El Shaddai,
from which it is very evident that the name El Shaddai simply
expresses one particular feature in the manifestation of Jehovah,
and describes a preliminary stage, anticipatory of the full develop-
ment of the nature of the absolute God, as expressed in the name
Jehovah. This is put beyond all doubt by the declaration of God
to Moses in Ex. vi. 3, " I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,
as El Shaddai, and by My name Jehovah was I not known to them."
Digitized by
Google
COMPOSITION OF THE PENTATEUCH. 523
Even Astruc observes, with reference to these words, u The passage
in Exodus, when properly understood, does not prove that the name
of Jehovah was a name of God unknown to the patriarchs, and
revealed for the first time to Moses ; it simply proves that God had
not shown the patriarchs the full extent of the meaning of this
n%me, as He had made it known to Moses." The modern critics,
on the other hand, have erased Jehovah from the text in Gen. xvii.
1, and substituted Elohim in its place, and then declare El Shaddai
synonymous with Elohim, whilst they have so perverted Ex. vi. 3
as to make the name Jehovah utterly unknown to the patriarchs.
By similar acts of violence they have mangled the text in very
many other passages, for the purpose of carrying out the distinc-
tion between the Elohim and Jehovah documents ; and yet for all
that they cannot escape the admission, that there are certain por-
tions or sections of the book of Genesis in which the separation is
impossible.
It is just the same with the supposed " favourite expressions"
of the Elohistic and Jehovistic sections, as with the names of God.
" There are certain favourite expressions, it is said, which are com-
mon to the Elohistic portions ; and the same things are frequently
called by different names in the Elohistic and Jehovistic sections.
Among the Elohistic expressions are : WIN (possession), OHMO JHN
(land of the stranger's sojourn), BSVfrH?, tanaS), mn Di>n D«>3 (the self-
same day), Padan-Aram (the Jehovistic for this is always (?) Aram-
Naharaim, or simply Aram), 1 ?13"N fHB, rna D'pn (the Jehovistic is
JVna rns) ; wherever the name Elohim occurs, these expressions
also appear as its inseparable satellites." This statement is in part
incorrect, and not in accordance with fact ; and even where there is
any foundation for it, it really proves nothing. In the first place,
it is not correct that WW* and Dnuo jnx are only to be met with in
Elohistic portions. In the very first passage in which we meet with
this word in the Pentateuch (Gen. xvii. 8), it is not Elohim, but
Jehovah, who appears as El Shaddai, and promises Abraham and
his seed the land of his pilgrimage, the land of Canaan, afiy rant*?.
1 The actual fact is, that Aram-Naharaim only occurs twice in the Penta-
teuch, viz. Gen. xxiv. 10 and Deut. xxiii. 5, for which Aram alone occurs in
Num. xxiii. 7, which is well known to apply not merely to Mesopotamia, but to
Syria as well, and is used here simply as a poetical term for Aram-Naharaim. '
Moreover, Padan-Aram and Aram-Naharaim are not identical ; but the former
merely denotes one particular district of " Aram of the two rivers," or Meso-
potamia.
Digitized by
Google
524 CONCLUDING REMARKS ON THE
This passage is clearly pointed to in Gen. xlviii. 4. In addition
to this, the word achuzzah occurs in Gen. xxiii. 4, 9, 20, xlix. 30,
1. 13, in connection with the family sepulchre which Abraham had
acquired as a possession by purchase ; also in the laws concerning
the sale and redemption of landed property (Lev. xxv. and xxvii.
very frequently), and in those concerning the division of the land
as a possession among the tribes and families of Israel (Num. xxvii.
7, xxxii. 5 sqq., xxxv. 2, 8) ; also in Lev. xxv. 34 and Gen. xxxvi.
43, — in both passages with reference to property or a fixed landed
possession, for which there was no other word in the Hebrew lan-
guage that could be used in these passages; not to mention the
fact, that St&helin, Knobel, and others, pronounce Num. xxxii. 32
a Jehovistic passage. So again the expressions JV13 D'jtfi (to set up
a covenant) and Drfi "l? (in their generations) occur in Gen. xvii. 7
in a Jehovistic framework ; for it was not Ehhim, but Jehovah,
who appeared to Abram (see ver. 1), to set up (not conclude) His
covenant with him and his posterity as an everlasting covenant,
according to their generations. To set up (i.e. realize, carry out)
a covenant, and to conclude a covenant, are certainly two distinct
ideas. — In Gen. xlvii. 27, again, and Lev. xxvi. 9, we meet with
T\yV[ rnB in two sections, which are pronounced Jehovistic. The
other three, no doubt, occur in Genesis in connection with Elohim;
but the expression, " in the self-same day," could not be expected
in Jehovistic sections, for the simple reason, that the time of the
revelations and promises of God is not generally reckoned by day
and hour. u After his kind" is only met with in four sections in
the whole of the Pentateuch, — in the accounts of the creation and
that of the flood (Gen. i. and vi. vii.), and in the laws concerning
clean and unclean beasts (Lev. xi. and Deut. xiv.), where it is
simply the species of animals that are referred to. Can this word
then be called a favourite Elohistic expression, which constantly
appears like an inseparable satellite, wherever the name Elohim
occurs! The same remarks apply to other words and phrases
described as Elohistic : e.g. tholedoth (which stands at the head of
a Jehovistic account, however, in Gen. ii. 4), "father's house" u in
their families" (mishpachoth), and many others. But just as such
expressions as these are not to be expected in the prophetico-his-
torical sections, for the simple reason that the ideas which they
express belong to a totally different sphere, so, on the other hand,
a considerable number of notions and words, which are associated
with the visible manifestations of God, the promises to the patriarchs,
Digitizi
ed by Google
COMPOSITION OF THE PENTATEUCH. 525
their worship, etc., are found in the book of Genesis always in con-
nection with the name Jehovah ; see, for example, TtfiT DBO fcOj?,
(rfbl) rtay ni>Jjn, nhan nn, and others of the same kind. ' And yet
the last two occur in the laws of the middle books, which the critics
attribute to the Elohist much more frequently than many of the
so-called Elohistic expressions and formulas of the book of Genesis.
This fact clearly shows, that there are no such things as favourite
expressions of the Elohist and Jehovist, but that the words are
always adapted to the subject. In the covenant statutes of the
middle books, we find Elohistic and Jehovistic expressions combined,
because the economy of the Sinaitic covenant was anticipated on
the one hand by the patriarchal revelations of Jehovah the cove-
nant God, and established on the other hand upon the natural
foundations of the Israelitish commonwealth. . The covenant which
Jehovah concluded with the people of Israel at Sinai (Ex. xxiv.)
was simply the setting up and full realization of the covenant which
He made with Abram (Gen. xv.), and had already begun to set up
with him by the promise of a son, and the institution of circum-
cision as the covenant sign (Gen. xvii.). The indispensable condi-
tion of membership in the covenant was circumcision, which Jehovah
commanded to Abraham when He made Himself known to him as
El Slwddai (Gen. xvii.), and in connection with which we meet
for the first time with the legal formulas, " a statute for ever," "in
your generations," and " that soul shall be cut off," which recur so
constantly in the covenant statutes of the middle books, but so
arranged, that the expression " a statute for ever" is never used
in connection with general religious precepts or purely moral com-
mandments, the eternal significance of which did not need to be
enjoined, since it naturally followed from the unchangeable holiness
and justice of the eternal God, whilst this could not be assumed
without further ground of the statutory laws and ordinances of the
covenant. But these covenant ordinances also had their roots in
the natural order of the world and of the national life. The nation
of Israel which sprang from the twelve sons of Israel by natural
generation, received its division into tribes, and the constitution
founded upon this, as a covenant nation and congregation of Je-
hovah. The numbering of the people was taken in tribes, accord-
ing to the families and fathers' houses of the different tribes ; and
the land of Canaan, which was promised them for an inheritance,
was to be divided among the tribes, with special reference to the
number and magnitude of their families. It is perfectly natural,
Digitized by
Google
526 CONCLUDING REMARKS ON THE
therefore, that in the laws and statements concerning these things,
words and formularies should be repeated which already occur in
the book of Genesis in connection with the genealogical notices.
Modern critics, as is well known, regard the whole of the Sinaitic
legislation, from Ex. xxv. to Num. x. 28, as an essential part of the
original work, with the exception of Ex. xx.— xxiii., Lev. xvii.-xx.
and xxvi., and a few verses in Lev. x., xxiii., xxiv., xxv., and Num.
iv. and viii. Now, as a great variety of things are noticed in this
law — such as the building and setting up of the tabernacle, the
description of the priests' clothes, the order of sacrifice — which are
not mentioned again in the other parts of the Pentateuch, it was
very easy for Knobel to fill several pages with expressions from
the original Elohistic work, which are neither to be found in the
Jehovistic historical narratives, nor in the general commands of a
religious and moral character, by simply collecting together all the
names of these particular things. But what does such a collection
prove I Nothing further than that the contents of the Pentateuch
are very varied, and the same things are not repeated throughout
Could we expect to find beams, pillars, coverings, tapestries, and the
vessels of the sanctuary, or priests' dresses and sacrificial objects,
mentioned in the ten commandments, or among the rights of Israel
(Ex. xx.-xxiii.), or in the laws of marriage and chastity and the
moral commandments (Lev. xvii.-xx.) ? With the exception of the
absence of certain expressions and formulas, which are of frequent
occurrence in the covenant statutes, the critics are unable to adduce
any other ground for excluding the general religious and moral
commandments from the legislation of the so-called original work,
than the a priori axiom, " The Elohist had respect simply to the
theocratic law ; and such laws as are introduced in Ex. xxi.-sxiii.,
in connection with moral and civil life, lay altogether outside his
plan." These are assertions, not proofs. The use of words in the
Pentateuch could only furnish conclusive evidence that it had been
composed by various authors, if the assertion were a well founded
one, that different expressions are employed for the same thing in
different parts of the work. But all that has hitherto been adduced
in proof of this amounts to nothing more than a few words, chiefly
in the early chapters of Genesis ; whilst it is assumed at the same
time that Gen. ii. 4 sqq. contains a second account of the creation,
whereas it simply gives a description of paradise, and a more minute
account of the creation of man than is to be found in Gen. i., the
difference in the point of view requiring different words.
Digitized by
Google
COMPOSITIOH OF THE PEHTATEUCH. 527
To this we have to add the fact, that by no means a small
number of sections exhibit, so far as the language is concerned, the
peculiarities of the two original documents or main sources, and
render a division utterly impossible. The critics have therefore
1 found themselves compelled to assume that there was a third or even
; a fourth source, to which they refer whatever cannot be assigned
to the other two. This assumption is a pure offshoot of critical
j difficulty, whilst the fact itself is a proof that the Pentateuch is
founded upon unity of language, and that the differences which
occur here and there arise for the most part from the variety and
diversity of the actual contents ; whilst in a very few instances
they may be attributable to the fact that Moses availed himself of
existing writings in the composition of the book of Genesis, and in
the middle books inserted public documents without alteration in
his historical account.
The other proofs adduced, for the purpose of supporting the
evidence from language, viz. the frequent repetitions of the same
thing and the actual discrepancies, are even weaker still. No doubt
the Pentateuch abounds in repetitions. The longest and most
important is the description of the tabernacle, where we have, first
of all, the command to prepare this sanctuary given in Ex. xxv.—
xxxi., with a detailed description of all the different parts, and all
the articles of furniture, as well as of the priests' clothing and the
consecration of the priests and the altar ; and then again, in Ex.
xxxv.-xxxix. and Lev. viii., a detailed account of the fulfilment of
these instructions in almost the same words. The holy candlestick
is mentioned five times (Ex. xxv. 31-40, xxvii. 20, 21, xxx. 7, 8,
Lev. xxiv. 1-4, and Num. viii. 1—4) ; the command not to eat
blood occurs as many as eight times (Gen. ix. 4 ; Lev. iii. 17, vii.
26, 27, xvii. 10-14 ; Deut. xii. 16, 23, 24, and xv. 23), and on
the first three occasions, at all events, in passages belonging to the
so-called original work. Now, if these repetitions have not been
regarded by any of the critics, with the exception of J. Popper, as
furnishing proofs of difference of authorship, what right can we
have to adduce other repetitions of a similar kind as possessing any
such significance ? — But lastly, the critics have involved themselves
in almost incomprehensible contradictions, through the supposed
contradictions in the Pentateuch. Some of them, e.g. Stdkelin and
Bertheau, think these discrepancies only apparent, or at least as of
such a character that the last editor saw no discrepancies in them,
otherwise he would have expunged them. Others, such as Knolel
Digltizi
ed by Google
528 CONCLUDING REMARKS ON THE
and Hup/eld, place them in the foreground, as the main proofs
of a plurality of authors; whilst Hupfeld especially, by a truly
inquisitorial process, has made even the smallest differences into
irreconcilable contradictions. Yet, for all that, he maintains that
the Pentateuch, in its present form, is a work characterized by
unity, arranged and carried out according to a definite plan, in
which the different portions are so arranged and connected together,
" with an intelligent regard to connection and unity or plan," yea,
" dovetailed together in so harmonious a way, that they have the
deceptive appearance of a united whole " {Hupfeld, die Quellen der
Genet, p. 196). In working up the different sources, the editor, it
is said, " did not hesitate to make systematic corrections of the one
to bring it into harmony with the other," as, for example, in the
names Abram and Sarai, which he copied from the original docu-
ment into the Jehovistic portions before Gen. xvii., because " he
would not allow of any discrepancy between his sources in these
points, and in fact could not have allowed it without a manifest
contradiction, and the consequent confusion of his readers" (p. 198).
How then does it square with so intelligent a procedure, to assume
that there are irreconcilable contradictions in the work ? An editor
who worked with so much intelligence and reflection would never
have left actual contradictions standing ; and modern critics have
been able to discover them simply because they judge the biblical
writings according to modern notions, and start in their operations
from a fundamental opinion which is directly .at variance with the
revelation of the Bible.
The strength of the opposition to the unity and Mosaic author-
ship of the Pentateuch arises much less from the peculiarities of
form, which the critics have placed in the foreground, than from
the offence which they take at the contents of the books of Moses,
which are irreconcilable with the naturalism of the modern views
of the world. To the leaders of modern criticism, not only is the
spuriousness, or post-Mosaic origin of the Pentateuch, an established
fact, but the gradual rise of the Mosaic laws in connection with
the natural development of the Hebrew people, without any direct
or supernatural interposition on the part of God, is also firmly
established a priori on dogmatical grounds. This is openly expressed
by De Wette in the three first editions of his Introduction, in which
he opens the critical inquiry concerning the Pentateuch with this
observation (§ 145) : " Many occurrences are opposed to the laws
of nature, and presuppose a direct interposition on the part of
Digitized by
Google
COMPOSITION OF THE PENTATEUCH. 529
God ;" and then proceeds to say, that " if to an educated mind it
is a decided fact that such miracles have never really occurred, the
question arises whether, perhaps, they may have appeared to do so
to the eye-witnesses and persons immediately concerned ; but to
this also we must give a negative reply. And thus we are brought
to the conclusion that the narrative is not contemporaneous, or
derived from contemporaneous sources." Ewald has expressed his
naturalistic views, which acknowledge no supernatural revelation
from God, in his " History of the People of Israel," and developed
the gradual formation of the Pentateuch from the principles involved
in these fundamental views. But just as De Wette expressed this
candid confession in a much more cautious and disguised manner
in the later editions of his Introduction, so have his successors
endeavoured more and more to conceal the naturalistic background
of their critical operations, and restricted themselves to arguments,
the weakness and worthlessness of which they themselves admit in
connection with critical questions which do not affect their natu-
ralistic views. So long as biblical criticism is fettered by naturalism,
it will never rise to a recognition of the genuineness and internal
unity of the Pentateuch. For if the miraculous acts of the living
God recorded in it are not true, and did not actually occur, the
account of them cannot have come down from eye-witnesses, but
can only be myths, which grew up in the popular belief long after
the events referred to. And if there is no prophetic foresight of
the future produced by the Spirit of God, Moses cannot have fore-
told the rejection of Israel and their dispersion among the heathen
even before their entrance into Canaan, whereas they did not take
place till many centuries afterwards.
If, on the other hand, the reality of the supernatural revelations
of God, together with miracles and prophecies, be admitted, not
only are the contents of the Pentateuch in harmony with its Mosaic
authorship, but even its formal arrangement can be understood and
scientifically vindicated, provided only we suppose the work to have
originated in the following manner. After the exodus of the tribes
of Israel ^rom Egypt, and their adoption as the people of Jehovah
through the conclusion of the covenant at Sinai, when Moses had
been commanded by God to write down the covenant rights"(Ex.
xxiv. 4, and xxxiv. 27), and then formed the resolution not only to
ensure the laws which the Lord had given to the people through
his mediation against alteration and distortion, and hand them down
to futurity by committing them to writing, but to write down all
PENT. — VOL. III. 2 L
Digltizi
ed by Google
530 CONCLUDING REMARKS ON THE
the great and glorious things that the Lord had done for His
people, for the instruction of his own and succeeding generations,
and set himself to carry out this resolution ; he collected together
the traditions of the olden time, which had been handed down in
Israel from the days of the patriarchs, partly orally, and partly in
writings and records, for the purpose of combining them into a
preliminary history of the kingdom of God, which was founded by
the conclusion of the covenant at Sinai. Accordingly, in all prob-
ability during the stay at Sinai, in the five or six months which
were occupied in building the tabernacle, he wrote not only the
book of Genesis, but the history of the deliverance of Israel out of
Egypt and the march to Sinai (Ex. xix.), to which the decalogue,
with the book of the covenant (Ex. xx.-xxiii.), is attached, according
to that plan of the kingdom of God which had then been fully
revealed, or, in other words, from a theocratic point of view. As
he had written the covenant rights in a book by the command of
God, as a preliminary to the conclusion of the covenant itself (Ex.
xxiv. 4), there can be no doubt whatever that he did not merely
publish to the people by word of mouth the very elaborate revelation
and directions of God concerning the construction of the tabernacle
and the apparatus of worship, which he had received upon the
mountain (Ex. xxv.-xxxi.), as well as all the rest of the laws, but
either committed them to writing himself directly after be had
received them from the Lord, or had them written out by one of
his assistants, and collected together for the purpose of forming
them eventually into a complete work. We may make the same
assumption with reference to the most important events which
occurred during the forty years' journey through the desert, so
that, on the arrival of the camp in the steppes of Moab, the whole
of the historical and legal materials for the three middle books of the
Pentateuch were already collected together, and all that remained
to be done was to form them into a united whole, and give them a
final revision. The collection, arrangement, and final working up
of these materials would be accomplished in a very short time, since
Moses had, at all events, the priests and shoterim by his side. — All
this had probably taken place before the last addresses of Moses,
which compose the book of Deuteronomy, so that nothing further
remained to be done but to write down these addresses, and append
them as a fifth book to the four already in existence. With this |
the writing of u all the words of this book of the law " was finished,
so that the whole book of the law could be handed over in a
Digitized by
Google
COMPOSITION OF THE PENTATEUCH. 531
complete state to the priests, to be properly taken care of by them
(Deut. xxxi. 24 sqq.).
A copy of the song of Moses was added to this written work, in
all probability immediately after it had been deposited by the side
of the ark of the covenant ; and, after his death, the blessing pro-
nounced upon the tribes before his departure was also committed
to writing. Finally, after the conquest of Canaan, possibly on the
renewal of the covenant under Joshua, an account of the death of
Moses was added to these last two testimonies of the man of God,
and adopted along with them, in the form of an appendix, into his
book of the law.
END OF VOL. III.
MURRAY AND OIBB, PRINTERS, EDINBURGH.
Digitized by
Google
Digitizi
ed by Google
Digitized by
Google
Date Loaned
$185»2i
//»-/
NSi96523
:-?*<'.
>•»
.
■
Library Burea
iCat No. 1138
Digitized by
Googf
THE BURKE LIBRARY
5 0343 057
The Library of the
Union Theological Seminary
Broadway at 120th St.
New York 27, N. Y.
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11