John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible.

John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible.

Exodus 21:1



INTRODUCTION TO EXODUS 21



In this, and the two following chapters, are delivered various laws and precepts, partly of a moral, and partly of a religious, but chiefly of a civil nature, respecting the commonwealth of Israel, and its political good. This chapter treats of servants, and laws relating to them; to menservants, how long they shall serve, and what is to be done to those who are desirous of staying with their masters after their time is up, Ex 21:1, to maidservants, and especially betrothed ones, either to a father or a son, Ex 21:7, likewise it contains laws concerning the slaughter of men, whether with design or unawares, Ex 21:12, and concerning the ill usage of parents,

Ex 21:15, and man stealing, Ex 21:16 and of mischief that comes by men's quarrelling and fighting, Ex 21:18 and by smiting a man or maidservant, Ex 21:20, to a woman with child, that is, by means of men's striving and contending with each other, Ex 21:22 and of damages that come by oxen, or to them, Ex 21:28.



Ver. 1. Now these are the judgments,.... The judicial laws respecting the civil state of the people of Israel, so called because they are founded on justice and equity, and are according to the judgment of God, whose judgment is according to truth; and because they are such by which the commonwealth of Israel was to be judged or governed, and were to be the rule of their conduct to one another, and a rule of judgment to their judges in the execution of judgment and justice among them:



which thou shall set before them; besides the ten commands before delivered. They were spoken by God himself in the hearing of the people; these were delivered to Moses after he went up to the mount again, at the request of the people, to be their mediator, to be by him set before them as the rule of their behaviour, and to enjoin them the observance of them; in order to which he was not only to rehearse them, but to write them out, and set them in a plain and easy light before them: and though they did not hear these with their own ears from God himself, as the ten commands; yet, as they had the utmost reason to believe they came from him, and it was at their own request that he, and not God, might speak unto them what was further to be said, with a promise they would obey it, as if they had immediately heard it from him; it became them to receive these laws as of God, and yield a cheerful obedience to them; nor do we find they ever questioned the authority of them; and as their government was a Theocracy, and God was more immediately their King than he was of any other people, it was but right, and what might be expected, that they should have their civil laws from him, and which was their privilege, and gave them the preference to all other nations, De 4:5.





Exodus 21:2



Ver. 2. If thou buy an Hebrew servant,.... Who sells himself either through poverty, or rather is sold because of his theft, see Ex 22:3 and so the Targum of Jonathan paraphrases it,



"when ye shall buy for his theft, a servant, a son of an Israelite;''



agreeably to which Aben Ezra observes, this servant is a servant that is sold for his theft; and he says, it is a tradition with them, that a male is sold for his theft, but not a female; and the persons who had the selling of such were the civil magistrates, the Sanhedrim, or court of judicature; so Jarchi, on the text, says, "if thou buy", &c. that is, of the hand of the sanhedrim who sells him for his theft:



six years he shall serve; and no longer; and the Jewish doctors say {d}, if his master dies within the six years he must serve his son, but not his daughter, nor his brother, nor any other heirs:



and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing; without paying any money for his freedom, as it is explained Ex 21:11, nay, on the other hand, his master was not to send him away empty, but furnish him liberally out of his flock, floor, and wine press, since his six years' servitude was worth double that of an hired servant, De 15:13, and his freedom was to take place as soon as the six years were ended, and the seventh began, in which the Jewish writers agree: the Targum of Jonathan is, at the entrance of the seventh; and Aben Ezra's explanation is, at the beginning of the seventh year of his being sold; and Maimonides {e} observes the same. Now as this servant, in the state of servitude, was an emblem of that state of bondage to sin, Satan, and the law, which man is brought into by his theft, his robbing God of his glory by the transgression of his precepts; so likewise, in his being made free, he was an emblem of that liberty wherewith Christ, the Son of God, makes his people free from the said bondage, and who are free indeed, and made so freely without money, and without price, of pure free grace, without any merit or desert of theirs; and which freedom is attended with many bountiful and liberal blessings of grace.



{d} Maimon. & Bartenora in Misn. Kiddushin, c. 1. sect. 2. {e} Hilchot Abadim, c. 2. sect. 2.





Exodus 21:3



Ver. 3. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself,.... That is, if he came into his servitude "alone", as the Septuagint version has it, he should go out of it in like manner; the word for "by himself", some interpret with "his garment" {f}, or the skirt of one; and then the sense seems to be, that as he was clothed when he was sold, so he should be when made free: but rather the phrase literally is "with his body" {g}; not his naked body, or as destitute of raiment, and the necessaries of life; for, as before observed, his master was to furnish him liberally with good things: but the plain meaning is, that if he was a single or unmarried man when he entered his master's service, he should go out, so; or as a Jewish writer {h} expresses it, as if he should say, with his body, without another body with him, who is his wife, as appears by what follows; unless his master should give him a wife while in his service, which is supposed in the next verse, and even then he was to go out alone, if he chose to go out at all; though Jarchi says, if he was not married at first, his master might not give him a Canaanitish woman to beget slaves of her:



if he were married, then his wife shall go with him; that is, if he had a wife, a daughter of Israel, as the Targum of Jonathan; or an Israelitish woman, as Jarchi, and had her at his coming; for otherwise, if it was one his master after gave him, she might not go out, as appears by the following verse; but being his wife before his servitude, and an Israelitish woman, was not the master's bondmaid, nor bought with his money, and therefore might go out free with her husband.



{f} wpgb "cum quali veste", V. L. "cum veste sua"; some in Vatablus & Drusius. {g} "Cum corpore suo", Munster, Pagninus, Vatablus, Drusius; "solus corpore suo", Junius & Tremellius; "cum solo corpore suo", Piscator. {h} R. Sol. Urbin. Ohel Moed, fol. 15. 1.





Exodus 21:4



Ver. 4. If his master have given him a wife,.... One of his slaves, a Canaanitish woman, on purpose to beget slaves on her, since all born in his house were his own; this is supposed to be after he was come into his house, and into his service:



and she have born him sons or daughters; as she might have born him several of the one sort, or the other, if she was given to him quickly after his servitude began:



the wife and her children shall be her master's: she being his slave, and bought with his money, he had a right unto her, and to the children belonging to her, the birth following the belly; and being born in his house, they were also his. Jarchi here observes, that the Scripture speaks of a Canaanitish woman, for an Hebrew woman went out at the sixth year, and even before the sixth, if she produced the signs, that is, of puberty:



and he shall go out by himself; without his wife and children: if it be objected to this law, that it is contrary to the law of marriage, which is indissoluble, but by this dissolved; it may be replied, that the servant was not obliged by it to leave his wife, unless he chose it; on complying with certain conditions after mentioned, he might continue with her; besides, she was, according to Jarchi, but his secondary wife, and not only so, the marriage was not lawful, being with a Canaanitish woman, and not agreeable to the Lord; and being also her master's slave, to whom he had a right, he could retain her if he pleased, having only given her to his servant to beget slaves on for him.





Exodus 21:5



Ver. 5. And if the servant shall plainly say,.... Or, "in saying shall say" {i} shall express himself in plain and full terms, and repeat his words, and abide by them, signifying it as his last will and determined resolution:



I love my master, my wife, and my children, and I will not go out free; but continue in his servitude, having a great affection for his master, and that he might enjoy his wife and children he dearly loved; and being animated with such a principle, his servitude was a pleasure to him: and when our obedience to God springs from love to him, and to his cause and interest, which should be as dear to us as our families, it is then acceptable to God and delightful to ourselves; in De 15:16,



it is, because he loveth thee, and thine house, because he is well with thee; hence the Jewish writers say {k}, understanding by "house" a family, if a servant has a wife and children and his master not, his ear is not to be bored; and if his master has a wife and children and he has not, his ear is not to be bored; if he loves his master and his master do not love him, or his master loves him and he do not love his master, or if he is sick, &c. his ear is not to be bored.



{i} rmay rma {k} T. Bab. Kiddushin, fol. 22. 1. Maimon. in Misn. Kiddushin, c. 1. sect. 2.





Exodus 21:6



Ver. 6. Then his master shall bring him unto the judges,.... To Elohim, to God, to the judgment seat of God, according to the Septuagint; to some person or persons to inquire of God what is to be done in such a case; but this seems needless, since it is here declared: no doubt civil magistrates or judges are meant by Elohim, or the gods, as in Ps 82:1, and so Jarchi interprets it of the house of judgment, or sanhedrim, the court that had convicted the servant of theft, and had sold him to him, it was proper he should acquaint them with it, have their opinion about it; and especially it was proper to have him to them, that he might before them, even in open court, declare his willingness to abide in his master's service; and from whom, as the Targum of Jonathan, he was to receive power and authority to retain him in his service:



he shall also bring him to the door, or to the doorpost; either of the gate of the city, where the judges were sitting, before whom what follows was to be done, as Aben Ezra suggests; or rather the door of his master, or any other man's, as Maimonides {l}:



and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; or with a needle, as the Targum of Jonathan, which also says it was the right ear; and so Jarchi; and the upper part of it, as says Maimonides, who likewise observes, that that with which it is bored must be of metal; and moreover, that it is the master himself that must do it, and not his son, nor his messenger, nor a messenger of the sanhedrim {m}: the ear is an hieroglyphic of obedience, and the boring of it through to the doorpost denotes the strict and close obedience of such a servant to his master, and how he is, and ought to be, addicted to his service, and be constantly employed in it, and never stir from it, nor so much as go over the threshold of his master's house. This custom of boring a servant's ear continued in Syria till the times of Juvenal, as appears by some lines of his: {n}



and he shall serve him for ever; as long as he lives {o}; however, until the year of jubilee, as the Targum of Jonathan, and so Jarchi; if there was one before his death, for nothing else could free him; denoting freedom by Christ in his acceptable year, and day of salvation.



{l} Hilchot Abadim, c. 3. sect. 9. {m} Ibid. {n} "----Molles quod in aure fenestrae Arguerint, licet ipse negem?" Satyr. 1. {o} "Serviet in aeternum, qui parvo nesciet uti". Horat.





Exodus 21:7



Ver. 7. And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant,.... That is, if an Israelite, as the Targum of Jonathan, sells his little daughter, as the same Targum, and so Jarchi and Aben Ezra, one that is under age, that is not arrived to the age of twelve years and a day, and this through poverty; he not being able to support himself and his family, puts his daughter out to service, or rather sells her to be a servant:



she shall not go out as the menservants do; that are sold, before described; or rather, according to the Targum,



"as the Canaanitish servants go out, who are made free, because of a tooth, or an eye, (the loss of them,

Ex 21:26) but in the years of release, and with the signs (of puberty), and in the jubilee, and at the death of their masters, with redemption of silver,''



so Jarchi.





Exodus 21:8



Ver. 8. If she please not her master,.... "Be evil in the eyes of her master" {p}; and he has no liking of her, and love to her, not being agreeable in her person, temper, or conduct, so that he does not choose to make her his wife:



who hath betrothed her to him; but not completed the marriage, as he promised, when he bought her, or at least gave reason to expect that he would; for, according to the Jewish canons, a Hebrew handmaid might not be sold but to one who laid himself under obligation to espouse her to himself, or his son, when she was fit to be betrothed {q}; and so Jarchi says, he ought to espouse her, and take her to be his wife, for the money of her purchase is the money of her espousals. There is a double reading of this passage, the Keri, or marginal reading we follow; the Cetib, or written text, is, "who hath not betrothed her", both may be taken in, "who hath not betrothed her to him", as he said he would, or as it was expected he should; for, had she been really betrothed, what follows could not have been done:



then shall he let her be redeemed; she being at age, and fit for marriage, and her master not caring to marry her, her father shall redeem her, as the Targum of Jonathan; it was incumbent on him to do that, as it was on her master to let her be redeemed, to admit of the redemption of her; or whether, as Aben Ezra says, she redeemed herself, or her father, or one of her relations, if she was near the six years (the end of them), they reckoned how many years she had served, and how many were yet to the seventh, or to the time that she is in her own power, and according to the computation was the redemption: thus, for instance, as it is by others {r} put, if she was bought for six pounds, then one pound is the service of every year; and if she redeemed herself, her master took off of the money for the years she had served; or thus {s}, if she was bought for sixty pence, and had served two years, he must pay her forty pence, and so free her:



to sell her unto a strange nation, he shall have no power; that is, to another man, as both the Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan, even to an Israelite that was of another family, to whom the right of redemption did not belong; for to sell an Israelite, man or woman, to a Gentile, or one of another nation, was not allowed of in any case, as Josephus {t} observes; but the meaning is, he had no power to sell her to another, though of the same nation, to be his handmaid; this power neither her master nor her father had, as Jarchi asserts, she being redeemed, and in her own power:



seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her; in not fulfilling his promise made to her father when he sold her to him, or not answering the expectation he had raised in her; and especially he dealt thus with her, if he had corrupted her, and yet refused to betroth and marry her.



{p} ynyeb her "mala in oculis", Montanus; "mala videbitur in oculis", Junius & Tremellius; "mala fuerit in oculis", Drusius. {q} Maimon. Hilchot Abadim, c. 4. sect. 11. & in Misn. Kiddushin, c. 1. sect. 2. {r} Bartenora in Kiddush. ib. {s} Maimon. in ib. {t} Antiqu. l. 16. c. 1. sect. 1.





Exodus 21:9



Ver. 9. And if he have betrothed her unto his son,.... Not caring to betroth and marry her himself, as being more suitable in age for his son than for himself;



he shall deal with her after the manner of daughters; as if she was his daughter, and give her a dowry: or the son shall treat her after the manner the daughters of Israel are treated when married, by giving her food, raiment, and the duty of marriage, so Jarchi: or after the manner of the daughters of Israel that are virgins, and who are not sold, as Aben Ezra.





Exodus 21:10



Ver. 10. If he take him another wife,.... The father takes another wife for his son, or the son takes another wife to himself after he has betrothed and married his father's maidservant:



her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish; neither deny it her in whole, nor lessen it in part, but give her her full due of each. What is meant by the two former words is easy, and admits of no difficulty, the latter is differently interpreted. Some take it to signify no other than an "habitation" {u}, that as he was to provide food and raiment for her, so an house to dwell, in; but the generality of interpreters, Jewish and Christian, understand it as we do, of the conjugal duty, the use of the marriage bed, or what the apostle calls due benevolence, 1Co 7:3. The word is thought to have the signification of a fixed time for it; and the Misnic doctors {w} are very particular in assigning the set times of it for different persons; and in those countries where there were, and where there still are, plurality of wives, each had, and have their turns, see

Ge 30:15.



{u} htne "habitationem ejus", Montanus, Junius & Tremellius; so some in Aben Ezra. Vid. Pfeiffer. "dubia vexata", cent. 1. loc. 97. {w} Misn. Cetubot, c. 5. sect. 6.





Exodus 21:11



Ver. 11. And if he do not these three unto her,.... Not the three things last mentioned; though this sense, Aben Ezra says, many of their interpreters give, which is rejected by him, so do some Christian expositors; but these three things are, espousing her to himself, or to his son, or redeeming her by the hand of her father; that is, letting her be redeemed by him, as the Targum of Jonathan; and so Jarchi, Aben Ezra, and Ben Melech: the meaning is, if one or other of these things are not done,



then shall she go out free without money; be dismissed from her servitude, and not obliged to pay anything for her freedom; the Targum of Jonathan adds, he shall give her a bill of divorce; that is, the son to whom she had been betrothed, and another wife taken by him, and she denied the above things; which favours the first sense.





Exodus 21:12



Ver. 12. He that smiteth a man, so that he die,.... The Targum of Jonathan is, that smites a man or daughter of Israel with the sword; but there is no need to restrain the words either to persons of any certain nation, nor to any instrument with which a person may be smitten as to die: but any human person, man, woman, or child, of whatsoever nation, and they smitten with anything whatever, that issues in their death:



shall surely be put to death; by the order of the civil magistrate, and by the hand of such as shall be appointed by him; for this is the original law of God, Ge 9:6.





Exodus 21:13



Ver. 13. And if a man lie not in wait,.... For the life of another to take it away; or does not do it willingly, as the Septuagint version, does not seek after it, nor design it:



but God delivers him into his hand; it being suffered and ordered by the providence of God, without whose knowledge and will nothing comes to pass, even what may seem to be a contingent thing, or matter of chance, to us; or it is so brought about in providence, that one man falls into the hands of another, and his life is taken away by him, though not purposely and maliciously; because, as Aben Ezra expresses it, for another sin which he has committed, and for which he must die in this way, though not intended by the person the more immediate cause of his death:



then I will appoint thee a place whither he shall flee; and there be safe both from the avenger of blood, and the civil magistrate; which place, while Israel were in the wilderness, was the camp of the Levites, according to Jarchi, or the altar, as follows; but when they were come to Canaan's land, there were cities of refuge appointed for such persons, that killed a man unawares, to flee to, and where they were safe from private vengeance, and falling a sacrifice to public justice.





Exodus 21:14



Ver. 14. But if a man come presumptuously upon his neighbour, to slay him with guile,.... That comes with malice in his heart, with wrath in his countenance, in a bold, daring, hostile manner, using all the art, cunning, and contrivance he can, to take away the life of his neighbour; no asylum, no refuge, not anything to screen him from justice is to be allowed him: hence, a messenger of the sanhedrim, or an executioner, one that inflicts the forty stripes, save one, or a physician, or one that chastises his son or scholar, under whose hands persons may die, do not come under this law; for though what they do they may do wilfully, yet not with guile, as Jarchi and others observe, not with an ill design, but for good:



thou shalt take him from mine altar, that he may die: that being the place which in early times criminals had recourse unto, Joab and others, as well as in later times, to secure them from vengeance; but a man guilty of wilful murder was not to be protected in this way; and the Targum of Jonathan is,



"though he is a priest, (the Jerusalem Targum has it, an high priest,) and ministers at mine altar, thou shalt take him from thence, and slay him with the sword,''



so Jarchi; but the law refers not to a person ministering in his office at the altar of the Lord, but to one that should flee there for safety, which yet he should not have.





Exodus 21:15



Ver. 15. And he that smiteth his father or his mother,.... With his fist, or with a stick, or cane, or such thing, though they died not with the blow, yet it occasioned any wound, or caused a bruise, or the part smitten black and blue, or left any print of the blow; for, as Jarchi says, the party was not guilty, less by smiting there was a bruise, or weal, made, or any mark or scar: but if so it was, then he



shall be surely put to death; the Targum of Jonathan adds, with the suffocation of a napkin; and so Jarchi says with strangling; the manner of which was this, the person was sunk into a dunghill up to his knees, and two persons girt his neck with a napkin or towel until he expired. This crime was made capital, to show the heinousness of it, how detestable it was to God, and in order to deter from it.





Exodus 21:16



Ver. 16. And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him,.... One of the children of Israel, as the Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan, and so the Septuagint version: but though this law was given to the Israelites primarily, yet was made for men stealers in general, as the apostle observes, who plainly has reference to it, 1Ti 1:9:



or if he be found in his hand; before the selling of him, as Jarchi notes, since he stole him in order to sell him, he was guilty of death, as follows:



he shall surely be put to death; with strangling, as the same Jewish writer remarks, as on the preceding verse; and Jarchi sets it down as a rule, that all death in the law, simply expressed, is strangling.





Exodus 21:17



Ver. 17. And he that curseth his father, or his mother,.... Though he does not smite them with his hand, or with any instrument in it, yet if he smites them with his tongue, reviles and reproaches them, speaks evil of them, wishes dreadful imprecations upon them, curses them by the name explained, as the Targum of Jonathan calls it, by the name Jehovah, wishing the Lord would curse them, or that his curse might light upon them, see Pr 20:20,



shall surely be put to death; or be killed with casting stones on him, as the Targum of Jonathan, or with stoning; so Jarchi, who observes, that wherever it is said, "his blood be upon him", it is meant of stoning, as it is of the man that curses his father or his mother,

Le 20:9 which was after this manner, the place of stoning was two cubits high, to which the malefactor with his hands bound was brought; from whence one of the witnesses against him cast him down headlong, of which, if he did not die, then they took up stones and cast on him, and if he died not through them, then all Israel came and stoned him; that is, the multitude upon the spot: this verse in the Septuagint version follows Ex 21:15, with which it agrees, both respecting the same persons.





Exodus 21:18



Ver. 18. And if men strive together,.... Quarrel and fight, and wrestle with and box one another:



and one smite another with a stone; which lying near him he might take up, and in his passion throw it at his antagonist:



or with his fist; with his double fist, as we express it, with his hand closed, that it might come with the greater force, and give the greater blow:



and he die not, but keepeth his bed; does not die with the blow of the stone or fist, yet receives so much damage by it that he is obliged to take to his bed; or, as the Targum of Jerusalem paraphrases it, is cast on the bed sick; or, as the Targum of Jonathan, falls into a disease, as a fever, or the like, through the force of the blow, so that he is confined to his room and to his bed.





Exodus 21:19



Ver. 19. If he rise again,.... From his bed, or from his disease, as the last mentioned Targum, recovers again, at least so far as to be able to do what follows:



and walk abroad upon his staff; if he is able to get out of his bed, and especially out of his house, and can be seen walking about in the street or in the field, though he is obliged to make use of a staff, and lean upon it, being yet weak and sickly;



then shall he that smote him be quit; from the judgment of slaying, as the Targum, he shall not be charged with manslaughter, or be found guilty of a capital crime, but discharged from that:



only shall he pay for the loss of his time; as much as he could have got in that time by his labour, from which he was obliged to cease: the Jewish writers add other things also he was to pay for, as the Targum of Jonathan, particularly; as for his pain, and for his loss of any member, and for his shame and disgrace, as well as the physician's fee, which is supposed to be included in the next clause:



and cause [him] to be thoroughly healed; take care that he has a physician or surgeon, and that the proper medicines be applied, and those continued until he is quite well; all which must be at the expense of the smiter.





Exodus 21:20



Ver. 20. And if a man smite his servant or his maid with a rod,.... A Canaanitish servant or maid, as the Targum of Jonathan, and so Jarchi; and that only with a rod for the correction of them, and not with a sword or any such destroying weapon, which would seem as though he intended to kill, yet nevertheless:



and he die under his hand; immediately, while he is smiting or beating him or her, on the same day, as the above Targum interprets it:



he shall be surely punished; or condemned to the punishment of being slain with the sword, as the said Targum and Jarchi explain it: this law was made to deter masters from using severity and cruelty towards their servants.





Exodus 21:21



Ver. 21. Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two,.... And does not die immediately, or the same day, but lives twenty four hours, as the Jewish writers interpret it; so Abendana {x} explains the phrase, "a day or two";



"a day which is as two days, and they are twenty four hours from time to time,''



that is, from the time he was smitten to the time of his continuance; and so it is elsewhere explained {y} by a day we understand a day, which is like two days, that is, from time to time, the meaning of which is, from a certain time in one day to the same in another:



he shall not be punished; that is, with death;



for he [is] his money; is bought with his money, and is good as money, and therefore it is a loss sufficient to him to lose him; and it may be reasonably thought he did not smite his servant with an intention to kill him, since he himself is the loser by it.



{x} Not. in Miclol Yophi in loc. {y} Maimon. & Bartenora in Misn. Zabim, c. 2. sect. 3.





Exodus 21:22



Ver. 22. If men strive,.... Quarrel and fight with one another, which is to be understood of Hebrews, as Aben Ezra observes:



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



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



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



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



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



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



{z} hydly wauyw "et egressi fuerint nati ejus", Pagninus, Montanus, Vatablus, Drusius. {a} Hilchot Chobel Umazzik, c. 4. sect. 1. 2.





Exodus 21:23



Ver. 23. And if any mischief follow,.... According as that is, so shall it be done to the smiter: if death follows,



then thou shalt give life for life; if death to the woman, so Jarchi and Aben Ezra interpret it; to which agrees the Targum of Jonathan,



"but if there is death in her, then ye shall judge or condemn the life of the murderer for the life of the woman;''



about which, Jarchi says, there is a difference among their doctors; some say life properly, absolutely the person himself; others say money, but not life properly; for he that intends to kill one and kills another is acquitted from death, but must pay to the heirs the price (of the person killed) as that person might be sold for in the market: and indeed it seems hard that a person that kills another at unawares should die for it; it is more reasonable that the punishment should in such a case be commuted for something less than life; and that though no satisfaction was to be taken for a wilful murderer, Nu 35:31, yet it seems to imply that it might be taken for one that was so without design; as by another law cities of refuge are appointed for the manslayer at unawares: the canons of the Jews, according to Maimonides {b}, run thus;



"he that strikes a woman, and she miscarries and dies, although it is done ignorantly; lo, such an one is free from payment, and he does not pay anything, as it is said, "if there is no mischief, &c." the Scripture does not distinguish between what is done ignorantly and presumptuously, in a thing in which there is not death by the sanhedrim, to free him from payment; in what things? when he intends the woman; but if he intends his neighbour and strikes the woman, though she dies, since her death is, without intention, lo, this is a thing in which there is not death by the sanhedrim, and he pays the price of the birth:''



the Septuagint version interprets this, not of the woman that miscarries and dies, but of the child that becomes an abortive; if that was not formed and shaped, then only a fine was to be laid, but if it was come to its proper form and shape, and so was animated or quickened, then life was to go for life: and so, according to the Salic laws, he that killed an infant in its mother's womb was to pay 8000 pence, which made two hundred shillings; but if he was the cause of a woman's miscarriage, by blows or otherwise, if the birth was animated, according to the civil law, he was to be punished with death {c}: but one would think, where this is only accidental and not intended, such a punishment is too rigid and severe: however, neither this nor what follows were left to the will of a private person to inflict at his pleasure, but to the civil magistrate; and therefore no ways encourages private revenge, in favour of which it was applied by the Pharisees in Christ's time, whose gloss he refutes, Mt 5:38 nor are the words directed to the offender in this and the following cases, but to Moses, and so to all judges under him and in succession, who were to see these laws put in execution.



{b} Chobel Umazzik, c. 4. sect. 5. 6. {c} Vid L'Empereur in Misn. Bava Kama, c. 3. sect. 2.





Exodus 21:24



Ver. 24. Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot. This is "lex talionis", the law of retaliation, and from whence the Heathens had theirs; but whether this is to be taken strictly and literally, or only for pecuniary mulcts, is a question; Josephus {d} understands it in the former sense, the Jewish writers generally in the latter; and so the Targum of Jonathan paraphrases it;



"the price of an eye for an eye, &c.''



Jarchi on the place observes, that,



"he that puts out his neighbour's eye must pay him the price of his eye, according to the price of a servant sold in the market, and so of all the rest; for not taking away of members strictly is meant, as our doctors here interpret it;''



in a place he refers to, and to which Aben Ezra agrees; and of the difference and dispute between the Jews concerning this matter,

See Gill on "Mt 5:38" and indeed, though these laws of retaliation should, according to the letter of them, be attended to as far as they can; yet, in some cases, it seems necessary that they should not be strictly attended to, but some recompence made in another way, and nothing seems more agreeable than a pecuniary one: thus, for instance, this law cannot be literally executed, when one that has never an eye puts out the eye of another, as it is possible that a blind man may; or one that has no teeth may strike out the tooth of another; in such cases eye cannot be given for eye, nor tooth for tooth; and, as Saadiah Gaon {e} observes, if a man should smite the eye of his neighbour, and the third part of the sight of his eye should depart, how will he order it to strike such a stroke as that, without adding or lessening? and if a man that has but one eye, or one hand, or one foot, should damage another man in those parts, and must lose his other eye, or hand, or foot, he would be in a worse case and condition than the man he injured; since he would still have one eye, or hand, or foot; wherefore a like law of Charondas among the Thurians is complained of, since it might be the case, that a man with one eye might have that struck out, and so be utterly deprived of sight; whereas the man that struck it out, though he loses one for it, yet has another, and so not deprived of sight utterly, and therefore thought not to be sufficiently punished; and that it was most correct that he should have both his eyes put out for it: and hence Diodorus Siculus {f} reports of a one-eyed man who lost his eye, that he complained of this law to the people, and advised to have it altered: this "lex talionis" was among the Roman laws of the "twelve tables" {g}.



{d} Antiqu. l. 4. c. 33. 35. {e} Apud Aben Ezram in loc. {f} Bibliothec. l. 12. par. 2. p. 82, 83. {g} A. Gell. Noct. Attic. l. 20. c. 1.





Exodus 21:25



Ver. 25. Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. This is to be understood of burning a man's flesh with fire; of wounds made by any means, so that the blood is let out; and of blows, and the prints and marks of them; of stripes and weals where the blood is settled, and the part is turned black and blue: the Targum of Jonathan is, the price of the pain of burning for burning, &c. and indeed, in everyone of these cases, the law could not be well literally executed; for it would be very difficult to burn and wound and mangle a man exactly as he had done another: and as Favorinus {h} objects against the law of the twelve tables of the Romans concerning retaliation, how can a man make a wound in another exactly as long, and as broad, and as deep as that he has given? nor would he suffer a larger to be made, as it was not just it should; and to which may be added, that all constitutions are not alike, and burning and wounding and striping, especially in some parts, might prove mortal, and the person might die thereby; to them the law of retaliation would not be observed, the punishment would be exceeded; and it is much more agreeable to justice and equity that it should be lessened rather than increased; and it may be observed, the law of the twelve tables with the Romans, concerning maiming of members, only took place when the parties could not come to an agreement; and with respect to the Jewish law, Josephus {i} himself says, that the man that has his eye put out may receive money for it, if he is willing, which the law allows of.



{h} A. Gell. Noct. Attic. l. 20. c. 1. {i} Ut supra. (Antiqu. l. 4. c. 33, 35.)





Exodus 21:26



Ver. 26. If a man smite the eye of his servant,.... Give him a blow on the eye in a passion, as a correction for some fault he has committed:



or the eye of his maid, that it perish; strike her on that part in like manner, so that the eye is beaten or drops out, or however loses its sight, and "[is] blinded", as the Septuagint version; or "corrupts" it {k}, it turns black and blue, and gathers corrupt matter, and becomes a sore eye; yet if the sight is not lost, or corrupts so as to perish, this law does not take place; the Targum of Jonathan, and to Jarchi restrain this to a Canaanitish servant or maid:



he shall let him go free for his eye's sake; or "them", as the Septuagint; his right to them as a servant was hereby forfeited, and he was obliged to give them their freedom, let the time of servitude, that was to come, be what it would. This law was made to deter masters from using their servants with cruelty, since though humanity and goodness would not restrain them from ill usage of them, their own profit and advantage by them might.



{k} htxv "et corruperit eum", Pagninus, Montanus, Drusius; so Ainsworth.





Exodus 21:27



Ver. 27. And if he smite out his manservant's tooth, or his maidservant's tooth,.... Give them such a slap on the face, or a blow on the mouth, as to strike out one of their teeth; this also the Targum of Jonathan and Jarchi restrain to a Canaanitish servant or maid;



he shall let him go free for his tooth's sake; both him and her, the servant and the maid; this, though of lesser consequence than the loss of an eye, was punished in the same manner with the loss of the servant man or maid, to make masters careful how they abused their servants in any degree. And though only these parts are expressed, yet Jarchi and Aben Ezra observe, that all other principal members of the body, which they reckon to be twenty four, are included, as the fingers, toes, &c.





Exodus 21:28



Ver. 28. If an ox gore a man or a woman, that they die,.... That are Israelites, of whom only Aben Ezra interprets it; but though they may be principally designed, yet not solely; for no doubt if one of another nation was gored to death by the ox of an Israelite, the same penalty would be inflicted, as follows:



then the ox shall be surely stoned; which is but an exemplification of the original law given to Noah and his sons, Ge 9:5: "at the hand of every beast will I require it"; i.e. the blood of the lives of men; which shows the care God takes of them, that even a beast must die that is the means of shedding man's blood:



and his flesh shall not be eaten; it being as an impure beast according to this sentence, as Maimonides {l} observes; and even though it might have been killed in a regular manner before it was stoned, it was not to be eaten; no, not even by Heathens, nor by dogs might it be eaten, as a dead carcass might by a proselyte of the gate, or a stranger; this might not be given nor sold to him; for, as Aben Ezra observes, all profit of them is here forbidden:



but the owner of the ox [shall be] quit; from punishment, as the last mentioned writer observes, from suffering death; he shall only suffer the loss of his ox: the Targum of Jonathan is,



"he shall be quit from the judgment of slaughter (or condemnation of murder), and also from the price of a servant or maid,''



which was thirty shekels, Ex 21:32.



{l} Hilchot Maacolot Asurot, c. 4. sect. 22.





Exodus 21:29



Ver. 29. But if the ox were wont to push with his horns in time past,.... Or "from or before yesterday, to the third" {m} that is, three days before, and had made three pushes, as Jarchi explains it:



and it hath been testified to his owner; by sufficient witnesses, who saw him push at people for three days past: the Targum of Jonathan is,



"and it hath been testified to the face of his owner three days.''



Concerning this testimony Maimonides {n} thus writes,



"this is a testification, all that testify of it three days; but if he pushes, or bites, or kicks, or strikes even an hundred times on one day, this is no testification (not a sufficient one): three companies of witnesses testify of it in one day, lo, this is a doubt, whether it is a (proper) testimony or not; there is no testification but before the owner, and before the sanhedrim:''



and he hath not kept him in; in some enclosed place, house or field, not frequented by people, and where there was no danger of doing any hurt, if this care was not taken, after a proper testimony had been given of his vicious disposition. By the Roman laws {o} oxen that pushed with their horns were to have hay bound about them, that those that met them might beware of them; hence that of Horace {p}: but that he hath killed a man or a woman; by pushing and goring them with his horns, or any other way, as biting or kicking:



the ox shall be stoned; as is provided for the preceding law:



and his owner shall be put to death; since he was accessory to the death of the person killed, not keeping in his beast, when he had sufficient notice of his vicious temper: the Targum of Jonathan, and so other Jewish writers, interpret this of death sent upon him from heaven, or death by the immediate hand of God, as sudden death, or death by some disease inflicted, or before a man is fifty years of age; but there is no doubt to be made but this intends death by the civil magistrate, according to the original law, Ge 9:6.



{m} Mvlv lmtm "ab heri et nudiustertius", Pagninus, Montanus, Vatablus, Piscator, Drusius. {n} Hilchot Niske Mammon, c. 6. sect. 1, 2. {o} Plutarch. in Crasso. {p} "Foenum habet in cornu, longe fuge". Horat. Sermon. l. 1. Satyr. 4.





Exodus 21:30



Ver. 30. If there be laid on him a sum of money,.... By the decree of the judges, as Aben Ezra, or which the sanhedrim of Israel have laid upon him; if his sentence of death is commuted for a fine, with the consent of the relations of the deceased, who in such a case are willing to show mercy, and take a fine instead of the person's death; supposing it was through carelessness and negligence, and not with any ill design that he did not keep up his ox from doing damage, after he had notice:



then he shall give for the ransom of his life whatever, is laid upon him; whatever mulct or fine he is amerced with by the court, instead of the sentence of death first pronounced. Of this ransom Maimonides {q} thus writes:



"the ransom is according as the judges consider what is the price (or value) of him that is slain; (i.e. according to his rank, whether a noble or common man, a free man or a servant) all is according to the estimation of him that is slain.--To whom do they give the ransom? to the heirs of the slain; and if a woman is killed, the ransom is given to the heirs of her father's (family), and not to her husband.''



{q} Hilchot Niske Mammon, c. 11. sect. 1, 2.





Exodus 21:31



Ver. 31. Whether he have gored a son, or have gored a daughter,.... A little son or daughter, and both Israelites, as Jarchi and Aben Ezra; this is observed, because only a man or woman are made mention of in

Ex 21:29 persons grown up; and lest it should be thought that only adult persons were intended, this is added, to show that the same regard is had to little ones as to grown persons, should they suffer by an ox in like manner as men and women may. The Targum of Jonathan restrains this to a son or daughter of an Israelite; but the life of everyone, of whatsoever nation, is equally provided for, and guarded against by the original law of God:



according to this judgment shall it be done unto him; to the owner of the ox that has gored a child, male or female; that is, he shall be put to death, if he has been warned of the practice of his ox for three days past, and has took no care to keep him in; or he shall pay the ransom of his life, as it has been laid by the court, with the consent of the relations of the children.





Exodus 21:32



Ver. 32. If the ox shall push a manservant, or a maidservant,.... Which the Targum of Jonathan and Jarchi interpret of a Canaanitish servant, man or maid; but no doubt the same provision was made for an Hebrew servant, man or maid, as for a Gentile one:



he shall give unto their master thirty shekels of silver; that is, the owner of the ox shall pay so much to the masters of the servants for the loss they have sustained by his ox goring them; and Maimonides {r} observes, that



"the ransom of servants, whether great or small, whether male or female, is fixed in the law, thirty shekels of good silver, whether the servant is worth a hundred pounds, or whether he is worth but a penny.''



This was the price our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ was sold at,

See Gill on "Mt 26:15".



{r} Hilchot Niske Maimon, c. 11. sect. 1.





Exodus 21:33



Ver. 33. If a man shall open a pit,.... That has been dug in time past, and filled up again, or take the covering from it, and leave it uncovered: "or if a man shall dig a pit, and not cover it": a new one, in the street, as the Targum of Jonathan; or in a public place, as Jarchi and Aben Ezra; otherwise a man might dig one for water, in his own fields, in enclosed places, where there was no danger of cattle coming thither, and falling therein:



and an ox or an ass fall therein; or any other beast, as Jarchi observes; for these are mentioned only as instances, and are put for all others. Maimonides {s} says,



"if a man digs a pit in a public place, and an ox or ass fall into it and die, though the pit is full of shorn wool, and the like, the owner of the pit is bound to pay the whole damage; and this pit (he says) must be ten hands deep; if it is less than that, and an ox, or any other beast or fowl fall into it and die, he is free,''



{s} Hilchot Niske Maimon. c. 12. sect, 1, 10. so Bartenora in Misn. Bava Kama, c. 1. sect. 1.





Exodus 21:34



Ver. 34. The owner of the pit shall make it good,.... Repair the loss of the ox or ass:



and give the money unto the owner of them: the price of them, what they are worth: the Targum of Jonathan is,



"the owner of the pit shall pay the silver, he shall return to its owner the price of the ox or ass:''



and the dead beast shall be his; either the owner of the pit; who pays the full value for the ox or ass killed, which seems but reasonable; or



"the injured person as Jarchi, for he says, they reckon or estimate the carcass, and he takes it for the price;''



that is, for part of the price it is valued at.





Exodus 21:35



Ver. 35. And if one man's ox hurt another's, that he die,.... By pushing with his horns, or his body, or by biting with his teeth, as Jarchi, or by any way whatever:



then they shall sell the live ox, and divide the money; the Scripture speaks, as the same writer observes, of one of equal value, otherwise the man that had his ox killed might be greatly a gainer by it; for if his ox was a poor one, and of little value, and the ox that killed his a good one, of value greatly superior, which according to this law was to be sold, and the money divided between the two owners, the man that lost his ox might have double the worth of it, or more, which was not equitable. On the other hand, according to the Jewish canons {t}, the case stood thus,



"when an ox of the value of one pound strikes an ox of the value of twenty, and kills him, and, lo, the carcass is of the value of four pounds, the owner of the ox is bound to pay him eight pounds, which is the half of the damage, (added to the half part of the price of the carcass,) but he is not bound to pay, but of the body of the ox which hurts, because it is said, "they shall sell the live ox"; wherefore if an ox of the value of twenty pieces of money should kill one of two hundred, and the carcass is valued at a pound, the master of the carcass cannot say to the master of the live ox, give me fifty pieces of money; but it will be said to him, lo, the ox which did the hurt is before thee, take him, and go thy way, although he is worth no more than a penny:''



and the dead ox also they shall divide; the money the carcass is worth; or it is sold for.



{t} Maimon. Hilchot Niske Mammon, c. 1. sect. 1.





Exodus 21:36



Ver. 36. Or if it be known that the ox hath used to push in time past,.... If it is a plain case, and a thing well known in the neighbourhood, and there are witnesses enough to testify it, that it has yesterday, and for two or three days running, pushed with his horns men and cattle, as they have come in his way, See Gill on "Ex 21:29"



and his owner hath not kept him in; took no care to prevent his doing mischief by putting him into a barn or out house, or into an enclosure, where he could do no damage to any:



he shall surely pay ox for ox; that is, he shall give as good an ox to him, whose ox has been killed by his, as that was, or pay him the full worth and value of it: and the dead shall be his own; shall not be divided as in the preceding case, but shall be the proprietor's wholly, that is, the sufferer's; because the owner of the vicious ox took no care of him, though it was well known he was mischievous, for which negligence he was punished this way.

 

John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible.

Exodus 22:1



INTRODUCTION TO EXODUS 22



This chapter contains various laws concerning theft, Ex 22:1, concerning damage done to fields and vineyards by beasts, and to corn in stacks or standing, by fire, Ex 22:5, concerning anything or creature deposited in the hands of a neighbour, and they be stolen or lost by one means or another, Ex 22:7, concerning anything borrowed, and it comes to any damage, Ex 22:14, concerning fornication,

Ex 22:16 concerning witchcraft, bestiality, and idolatry,

Ex 22:18 concerning oppression, and affliction of the stranger, fatherless, and widow, Ex 22:21 concerning taking usury and pledges, Ex 22:25, concerning irreverence to magistrates,

Ex 22:28, concerning the offering of firstfruits to God,

Ex 22:29 and the chapter is concluded with a prohibition of eating anything torn by beasts, Ex 22:31.



Ver. 1. If a man shall steal an ox or a sheep,.... In which the substance of men chiefly lay in those times, and particularly the people of Israel, who were now come out of Egypt, with their flocks and herds, and these lying near together, were the more liable to be stolen; and hence also the laws in the preceding chapter concerning oxen and damages done by them, and oxen and sheep are only mentioned; perhaps chiefly because used in sacrifice, as well as serviceable for other things; not but that stealing other cattle and other things were criminal and forbidden, and to be punished in proportion:



and kill it, or sell it; either of which cases would plainly show that he took it away with an intention to deprive the owner of it, and to convert it to his own use:



he shall restore five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep; the reason of this difference, five being obliged to be given for the one, and but four for the other, is, because the one was more valuable than the other, as well as more useful, and also more easily stolen, and therefore the greater mulct or fine was laid upon the theft of it, to deter from it: the Targum of Jonathan expresses the reason of the law thus; five for oxen, because the theft of them hindered from ploughing, or made to cease from it; and for sheep but four, because there was trouble in the theft of them, and there was no tillage or agriculture by them: and Saadiah Gaon observes, that the damage that comes to the owner of the ox is more than that by a lamb, because with it, the ox, he ploughs, which is a creature that was used in those countries to be employed in that service, as well as in treading out the corn: Maimonides {u} accounts for it thus,



"the restitution of the theft of oxen is increased by one, because the theft of them is easy; sheep are fed in flocks, and are easily kept and watched, and can scarcely be taken away by theft but in the night; but oxen are fed scattered here and there, and therefore cannot be so easily kept by the herdsmen; hence also their theft used to be more common:''



four fold restitution was in use with the ancient Persians, with whom it was a rule,



"whoever took any substance of another, in retaliation they took fourfold from him, and if he restored it, he gave fourfold of the same {w}.''



{u} Moreh Nevochim, par. 3. c. 41. {w} Lib. Shed-dar, apud Hyde Relig. Vet. Pers. p. 472.





Exodus 22:2



Ver. 2. If a thief be found breaking up,.... An house, in order to steal money, jewels, household goods, &c. or breaking through any fence, hedge, or wall of any enclosure, where oxen, or sheep, or any other creatures are, in order to take them away: the Targum of Jonathan is,



"if in the hole of a wall (or window of it) a thief be found;''



that is, in the night, as appears from the following verse, "if the sun", &c. to which this is opposed, as Aben Ezra observes; some render it, with a digging instrument {x}; and it is a Jewish canon {y}, that



"if anyone enter with a digging instrument: he is condemned on account of his end;''



his design, which is apparent by the instrument found upon him; for, as Maimonides {z} observes,



"it is well known, that if anyone enters with a digging instrument, that he intends, if the master of the house opposes him to deliver his goods out of his power, that he will kill him, and therefore it is lawful to kill him; but it does not signify whether he enters with a digging instrument, either by the way of the court, or roof;''



and be smitten that he die be knocked down with a club, by the master of the house, or any of his servants, or be run through with a sword, or be struck with any other weapon, to hinder him from entrance and carrying off any of the goods of the house, and the blow be mortal: there shall no blood be shed for him: as for a man that is murdered; for to kill a man when breaking into a house, and, by all appearance, with an intention to commit murder, if resisted, in defence of a man's self, his life and property, was not to be reckoned murder, and so not punishable with death: or, "no blood" shall be "unto him" {a}; shall be imputed to him, the man that kills the thief shall not be chargeable with his blood, or suffer for shedding it; because his own life was risked, and it being at such a time, could call none to his assistance, nor easily discern the person, nor could know well where and whom he struck.



{x} trtxmb "cum perfossorio", Pagninus; "cum instrumento perfosserio", Tigurine version. {y} Misn. Sanhedrin, c. 8. sect. 6. {z} Comment. in ib. {a} Mymd wl Nya "non ei sanguines", Montanus, Vatablus, Drusius.





Exodus 22:3



Ver. 3. If the sun be risen upon him,.... Either upon the thief, or upon the master of the house, or the person that finds the thief and smites him that he dies; it matters not which it is interpreted, it is true of both, for when it is risen on the one, it is on the other:



[there shall be] blood [shed] for him; the person that kills him shall die for it: the Targum of Jonathan is,



"if it is as clear as the sun (and so Jarchi), that not to kill any he entered, and he should kill him, there is guilt of shedding innocent blood:''



because coming at broad daylight, and when the sun was up, it was a plain case he came not with a design to murder, but only to steal; besides, being at such a time, the master of the house could call for help and assistance, and take him; which is what is suggested he should do, and not take away his life, but oblige him, if he had got any of his goods, to restore them, as follows:



for he should makes full restitution; by returning them and as much more, as the following verse shows:



if he have nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft, by the sanhedrim, or court, of judicature: as the Targum of Jonathan, before whom he should be brought, and the theft proved upon him, and unto the year of the remission or release, as the same Targum; nor were such to be sold to strangers, or to serve forever, for they were to be dismissed after six years, as Josephus {b} observes: and it is a canon with the Jews {c}, that,



"an Hebrew servant whom the sanhedrim sell, they do not sell him but to an Israelite, or to a proselyte of righteousness;''



according to the Targum of Jonathan, it seems as if he was to be sold to the person from whom he stole, since it is,



"he shall he sold to him;''



but if not, however, the price he was sold at was to be given to him for a recompence of his loss; so says Maimonides {d},



"if he have not goods, neither movable nor immovable the sanhedrim sell him, and give the price to him that is injured, as it is said: "if he have nothing", &c. and adds, a man is sold for his theft but not a woman {e}:''



from hence it appears that theft was not a capital crime by the law of Moses: Draco is said to be the first who made it so; but his law being thought by the Athenians to be too severe, was annulled by them {f}: the law of the twelve tables, with the Romans greatly agrees with the Mosaic laws about theft; these permitted to kill a thief who should be taken in open theft, if either when he committed the theft it was night or if in the daytime, and he defended himself with weapons when about to be taken {g} or, as elsewhere expressed {h}, an open thief was delivered to servitude to him who was robbed, but nocturnal thief it was lawful to kill by the law of the twelve tables.



{b} Antiqu. l. 16. c. 1. sect. 1. {c} Maimon. Abadim. c. 1. sect. 3. {d} Hilchot Genubah, c. 3. sect. 11. {e} So Misn. Sotah, c. 3. sect, 8. {f} A. Gell Noct. Attic. l. 11. c. 18. {g} Ib. {h} Ib. l. 20. c. 1.





Exodus 22:4



Ver. 4. If the theft be certainly found in his hand alive,.... Or, "in finding be found" {i}, be plainly and evidently found upon him, before witnesses, as the Targum of Jonathan; so that there is no doubt of the theft; and it is a clear case that he had neither as yet killed nor sold the creature he had stolen, and to could be had again directly, and without any damage well as it would appear by this that he was not an old expert thief, and used to such practices, since he would soon have made away with this theft in some way or another:



whether it be ox, or ass, or sheep, or any other creature; and even, as Jarchi thinks, anything else, as raiment, goods, &c.



he shall restore double; two oxen for an ox, two asses for an ass, and two sheep for a sheep: and, as the same commentator observes, two living ones, and not dead ones, or the price of two living ones: so Solon made theft, by his law, punishable with death, but with a double restitution {k}; and the reason why here only a double restitution and not fourfold is insisted on, as in Ex 22:1 is, because there the theft is persisted in, here not; but either the thief being convicted in his own conscience of his evil, makes confession, or, however, the creatures are found with alive, and so more useful being restored, and, being had again sooner, the loss is not quite so great.



{i} aumt aumh "inveniendo inventum fuerit", Pagninus, Montanus, Piscator. {k} A. Gell, l. 11. c. 18.





Exodus 22:5



Ver. 5. If a man shall cause a field or vineyard to be eaten,.... Which is not his own, by putting cattle into it to feed upon it, as it is explained in the next clause:



and shall put in his beast, and shall feed in another man's field; do damage in one or both those two ways, either by his feet treading down the grass and fruits of the earth, which the Rabbins, as Jarchi says, think, is meant by putting in his beast; or with his beast eating up the same, which is intended by the latter phrase:



of the best of his own field, and of the best of his own vineyard, shall he make restitution for what damage is done by his beast in his neighbour's field or vineyard; and this held good of any garden or orchard injured in like manner; and it is a general rule with the Jews, that when any damage is sustained, he that does the damage is obliged to pay with the best the earth produces {l}, even though better than was the man's that suffered the loss, that for the future he might be more careful of doing injury to another {m}.



{l} Misc. Bava Kama, c. 1. sect. 1. {m} Bartenora in Misn. Gittin, c. 5. sect. 1.





Exodus 22:6



Ver. 6. If fire break out,.... Even though of itself, as Jarchi interprets it:



and catch in thorns a thorn hedge or fence, with which cornfields might be en closed:



so that the stacks of corn, or the standing corn, or the field, be consumed [therewith]; whether it be corn cut down, bound up in sheaves, and laid up in heaps or stacks, or whether it be yet growing, and not fully ripe, at least not cut down, or any other fruits of the field; if the fire that takes the thorns which are near them should reach to those, and kindle upon them and destroy them:



he that kindleth the fire, shall surely make restitution: that is, though he kindles the fire upon his own ground, yet being careless of it, it breaks out without his intention and design, and catches hold on a thorn hedge between him and his neighbour's field, and so spreads itself to the corn there, whether standing or in stacks, or to other fruits either lying or growing there; now, though he did not kindle the fire in the corn, and among the stacks or heaps of fruit in his neighbours field, yet, for his carelessness in not looking after the fire he had kindled in his own field, he was to make good all the damages his neighbour sustained hereby: the Jewish canons relating to this affair are these;



"if a man kindles a fire by the hands of a deaf man, or a fool, or a child, he is free by human judgment, but he is bound by the judgment of heaven (that is, to make restitution); if he kindles it by the hand of a knowing and understanding man, he is bound; one brings fire and another "afterwards" brings wood, he that brings the wood is bound; one brings wood and another "afterwards" brings fire, he that brings the fire is bound; "after that", another comes and blows the flame (or fire), he is bound; "but if" the wind blows it they are all free; he that kindles fire and it consumes wood or stones, or dust, he is bound, as it is said,

Ex 22:6 "if fire break out", &c. if the fire passes over a fence four cubits high, or a public road, or a river, he is free {n};''



those two things last mentioned, feeding on another man's field and fire, with the ox and the pit, observed in the preceding chapter, are with the Misnic doctors {o}, the four fathers' fountains, or sources of damages.



{n} Bartenora in Misn. Gittin, c. 5. sect. 4. {o} Ib. c. 1. sect. 1.





Exodus 22:7



Ver. 7. If a man shall deliver unto his neighbour money or stock to keep,.... Without any reward for keeping it, as the Targum of Jonathan; and so other Jewish writers {p} understand this passage of such as keep a deposit freely, having nothing for it; whether it be money or goods, gold, silver, jewels, raiment, household stuff or any kind of vessels or instruments used in the house, or in trade; and also cattle, as appears from Ex 22:9



and if it be stolen out of the man's house; into whose custody it was delivered:



if the thief be found, let him pay double: the worth of what is stolen, agreeably to the law in Ex 22:4 that is, if it was found in his hands; but if he had disposed of it, then he was to pay five fold or four fold, as in Ex 22:1, and so runs the Jewish canon {q},



"if anyone delivers to his neighbour a beast or vessels, and they are stolen or lost, he shall make restitution; but if he will not swear, for they say, one that keeps for nothing, may swear and be free; then if the thief should be found he shall pay double; if he has killed or sold, he shall pay four fold or five fold: to whom shall he pay? to him with whom the depositum is: if he swears, and will not pay, and the thief is found, he shall pay double; if he has killed or sold he shall pay four fold and five fold: to whom shall he pay? to the owner of the depositum.''



{p} Jarchi in ver. 10. Bartenora in Misn. Shebuot, c. 6. sect. 5. {q} Misn. Bava Metzia, c. 3. sect. 1.





Exodus 22:8



Ver. 8. If the thief be not found,.... And so no account can be given of the goods deposited, what is become of them, and it becomes a doubtful case whether they have been stolen or embezzled, and there is suspicion of the latter:



then the master of the house shall be brought unto the judges: here called Elohim, gods, because they were God's vicegerents, and represented him, and acted under his power and authority; and who at this present were Moses, and those that judged the people under him, and afterwards the seventy elders, and all such who in succeeding times were judges in Israel, and bore the office of civil magistrates; before these the master of the house, or the person who had any goods committed to his care, and they were lost, was to be brought and put to his oath, and upon it examined, in order to find out what was become of the goods committed to him: to see whether he has put his hand to his neighbour's goods: took them to himself, made use of them, or disposed of them to his own advantage, and which was no other than a kind of theft.





Exodus 22:9



Ver. 9. For all manner of trespass,.... With respect to what is committed to a man's trust, and it is lost to the owner of it, there must be somewhere or other a trespass committed, either by the person into whose hands it was put, or by a thief that has stolen it from him:



whether it be for ox, for ass, for sheep, for raiment, or for any manner of lost thing by which it appears that either of these, or any other cattle not named, as well as money and vessels, or household goods, or goods in trade, were sometimes, or might be lodged in the hands of another as a depositum for safety or convenience; and for which, or any other so deposited, and lost,



which another challengeth to be his, or affirms that he put into the hands of his neighbour, to be kept by him for him; "or who shall say this is he", or "he is" the person into whose hands I put it, or this is "it" {r}; such and such were the thing or things I delivered to him:



the cause of both parties shall come before the judges; who were to hear what each party had to say, and to examine the witnesses each of them brought, and consider the nature of the evidence given, and to judge and determine:



and whom the judges shall condemn; or "pronounce wicked" {s}, as having done a wicked thing; either the one as having brought a false accusation against his neighbour, charging him with a depositum he never had, or the other as having converted it to his own use:



he shall pay double unto his neighbour; either the depositor, who pretended to be so and was not, but brought a false charge against his neighbour, or a false witness, as Jarchi, such as one was to pay double to the person charged wrongfully; or, on the other hand, the person with whom the depositum was put, if it appeared that he had acted a fraudulent part, and abused his trust, then he was to pay double to the depositor.



{r} hz awh yk rmay rva "qui dixerit quod illud hoc", Montanus; "quum dixerit illud ipsum esse", Junius & Tremellius; "de qua dixerit aliquis illum ipsum esse", Piscator; so Ainsworth. {s} Neyvry Vid. Ainsworth.





Exodus 22:10



Ver. 10. If a man deliver to his neighbour an ass, or an ox, or a sheep, or any beast to keep,.... And he keeps it without a reward, as the Targum of Jonathan; but Jarchi and Aben Ezra more rightly interpret this of one that keeps for hire, as herdsmen, shepherds, &c. The Jews say {t} there are



"four sorts of keepers; he that keeps for nought (or freely), he that borrows, he that takes hire, and he that hires; he that keeps for nought swears in all cases (and is free), he that borrows pays for all (that is lost or stolen, &c.) he that takes hire, and he that hires, swear on account of that which is torn, or carried away, or dies, and they pay for that which is lost or stolen,''



which are the cases after supposed:



and it die; either of the above, or any other under the care of another; that is, dies of itself, not being killed by any, and its death sudden, and not easily accounted for:



or be hurt; receive any damage in any part, though it die not; or "be broken" {u}; have any of its limbs or bones broken; or be torn by a wild beast, as the Targum of Jonathan adds:



or driven away; from the flock or herd by thieves or robbers, or rather carried captive by an enemy in an hostile way, see Ex 22:12:



no man seeing it; die, or be hurt, or carried off; and so, as the above Targum paraphrases it, there is no witness that sees and can bear witness, that is, to any of the said things which have happened to it.



{t} Misn. Bava Metzia, c. 7. sect. 8. {u} rbvn "confractum", Pagninus, Montanus; "fractum", Junius & Tremelius, Piscator, Drusius; so Ainsworth.





Exodus 22:11



Ver. 11. Then shall an oath of the Lord be between them both,.... Either by the one, the keeper, for the satisfaction of the owner, or by them both; by the owner, that he delivered such and such cattle to the keeper; and by the keeper, that he was no ways concerned in the death, hurt, or carrying off of the same: and this is called "the oath of the Lord", not only because in this law required by him, but because sworn by him, or in his name, and made before him, in his presence, who is hereby appealed unto; and who is called upon to take vengeance on the person that takes the oath of perjury; and such an oath only is a lawful one, men are to swear only by the Lord. But this oath was not tendered to anyone:



"if a man was suspected of an oath (i.e. of perjury) they might not give him his oath, neither the oath of the law, nor the oath from their words (the scribes), nor the oath of imposition (imposed by the wise wen); and even though he that brought the action would have it, they might not hearken unto him: if a man has swore falsely a rash oath, or an oath of testimony, or an oath concerning anything deposited, or a vain oath, lo, he is suspected of an oath, and so everyone that is rejected for witness on account of any transgression {w}.''



The oath to be taken by the keeper, and who indeed seems to be the only person that was to take one, was, "that he hath not put his hand unto his neighbour's goods"; so as either to kill or maim, or drive away, or suffer to be driven away, any of the cattle committed to his care, or that he had not disposed of them to his own use and profit:



and the owner of it shall accept thereof; of the oath, as the Targum of Jonathan and Jarchi, and so be satisfied, and give no further trouble, such an oath being for the confirmation of the thing, and to put an end to strife; or he shall take the ass, ox, or sheep, as it was, and be content; but then, though he might take the dead or maimed one, he could not take that which was driven or carried away, wherefore the first sense, is best:



and he shall not make [it] good; or pay for it to the owner what it was worth.



{w} Maimon. Hilchot Toan Venitan, c. 2. sect. 1, 2.





Exodus 22:12



Ver. 12. And if it be stolen from him,.... Or "but if" {x} it was taken away by theft; and that "from with him" {y}, as it may be literally rendered, from among his own cattle, and they not taken; and he being present, pretending to have an eye upon them and keep them, but was careless and negligent, at least, if he did not connive at the theft:



he shall make restitution to the owner thereof; for in such a case there was ground for suspicion of fraud; however, there was apparent carelessness, and it was but just he should make restitution, since he had hire or wages for keeping it; which is the reason Aben Ezra gives for it, and is suggested by the Targum of Jonathan; which adds to the former clause, by way of explanation,



"that which was with him to be kept for a reward.''



{x} Ma yk "si autem", Drusius. {y} wmem "e cum eo", Montanus.





Exodus 22:13



Ver. 13. If it be torn in pieces,.... By some wild beast, at least as pretended:



[then] let him bring it for witness; part of that which is torn, that it may be witness for him that it was torn, as in Am 3:12 as Aben Ezra observes; and so the Jerusalem Targurn,



"let him bring of the members of it a witness,''



which would make it a clear case that it had been so used; but it is possible that the whole carcass might be carried off, and nothing remain to be brought as a proof of it; wherefore the Targum of Jonathan is,



"let him bring witnesses;''



and so some versions render it {z}; and to this agrees Jarchi, whose note is,



"let him bring witnesses of its being torn by violence, and he is free,''



such who saw it done; but it is before supposed, that such cattle may be hurt, broken, or maimed, no man seeing it, Ex 22:10 and therefore in such a case no witnesses could be brought, wherefore the first sense seems best:



[and] he shall not make good that which was torn; or shall not pay for it, pay the price of it, as much as it is worth. Here Jarchi distinguishes,



"there is that which is torn, for which a man pays, and there is that which is torn, for which he does not pay; that which is torn by a cat, or a fox, or a marten (a kind of weasel), he pays for, but that which is torn by a wolf, a lion, or a bear, he does not pay for:''



the reason of which is, because it is thought the keeper might have preserved and delivered from the former, and therefore was culpable, when it was not in his power to save from the latter; and the Misnic doctors observe, that one wolf is not violence, but two are; so that what is torn by one, the keeper is bound to pay for, but not what is torn by more. But two dogs are not violence, unless they come from two different quarters, and then they are: a single thief is violence, and so is a lion, a bear, a leopard, a basilisk, and a serpent, and this only when they come willingly, and of themselves; but if they (the cattle) are brought to places where there are troops of wild beasts, and thieves, it is no violence {a}, and in such a case the keepers are liable to pay; and so unless he makes use of staves, and calls in other shepherds to his assistance, as Maimonides {b} observes, when it is in his power to do it; and so at least might make an attempt to save or rescue the cattle.



{z} de whaby "adducet eum testem", Pagninus, Montanus; "adducat ille testem", Munster, Fagius. {a} Misn. Bava Metzia, c. 7. sect. 9. {b} Hilchot Shecirat, c. 3. sect. 6.





Exodus 22:14



Ver. 14. And if a man borrow [ought] of his neighbour,.... Any beast, as it should seem, as an ox to plough with, an ass, horse, or camel to ride on, though the Jewish writers carry it also to any kind of household stuff:



and if he be hurt or die; if any damage comes to it, or it dies while it is in the borrower's hands, and when employed in that work for which he borrowed it; the Targum of Jonathan is,



"and the vessel should be broke, or the beast die:''



and the owner thereof being not with it; at the time of its being hurt, or of its death, and so could not be so well satisfied whether used well or not, nor how the damage and death came to it:



he shall surely make it good; pay the full price for it it is worth; which, though it may seem hard, was necessary, in order to make men careful of things they borrowed, and that lenders may not be losers for their kindness.





Exodus 22:15



Ver. 15. But if the owner thereof be with it,.... When it is hurt or dies; for in some cases the owner might go along with his beast, being borrowed or hired to do work with it; or, however, being upon the spot, must be satisfied that it was not ill used; and it may be reasonably presumed he would do all he could to preserve it: and this being the case,



he shall not make it good; that is, the borrower, but the loss would lie upon the lender; seeing this might have been the case if it had been at home, and not borrowed or lent. The Jewish writers understand all this in a different manner, that if the owner is not with it in the time of borrowing, though he is with it in the time of its being hurt, or of its death, the borrower must pay; but if he was with it in the time of borrowing, though not in the time of its receiving damage, or of its death, the borrower was free {c}; for, as Jarchi says, whether it be in that work (for which he was borrowed), or in another work (it matters not), if he was with it at the time of borrowing, there was no necessity of his being with it at the time of its hurt or death. The reason of which, I must confess, I do not understand; unless the meaning is, that it was necessary that the owner, and the beast, should be both borrowed or hired together; and which indeed seems to be the sense of the Misnah, or tradition {d}, which runs thus,



"if a man borrows a cow, and borrows or hires its owner with it; or if he hires or borrows the owner, and after that borrows the cow, and it dies, he is free, as it is said,

Ex 22:15 but if he borrows the cow, and afterwards borrows or hires the owner, and it dies, he is bound to pay, as it is said, Ex 22:13 if his owner is not with it, &c.''



If it be an hired thing, it came for its hire; that is, if the beast which was come to some damage, or was dead, was hired, and not borrowed, then, whether the owner was with it or not at that time, he could demand no more than hire, and the person that hired it was obliged to pay that and no more; or if the owner himself was hired along with his beast, and so was present when it received its damage, or its death, nothing more could come to him than what he agreed for.



{c} Misn. Bava Metzia, c. 8. sect. 1. Maimon. & Bartenora in ib. {d} Ibid.





Exodus 22:16



Ver. 16. And if a man entice a maid, that is not betrothed,.... For one might be betrothed according to the custom of those times, and not be married, or the nuptials consummated, and so be yet a maid or virgin; but being betrothed, it made the case different, because such an one was as a wife to a man: but the case here supposed is of a maid not betrothed, and also not forced, but yielding to the solicitations of a man, as is implied by her being enticed; which signifies his gaining upon her affections, and obtaining her consent by expressing strong affection for her, and making large promises to her, and so both by words and gestures prevailing with her to yield to his desire:



and lie with her; in a way of carnal copulation; and such an action between two single persons, by consent, is what is called simple fornication: if this was done in a field, the maid was supposed to be forced, since there she might cry out, and not be heard; but if in a city, she is supposed to be enticed, and consent, since if she cried out she might be heard; this the Jewish writers gather from

De 22:23, though the law there respects a betrothed damsel:



he shall surely endow her to be his wife; give her a dowry in order to be his wife, or, however, such an one as he would or must give if she became his wife, even one suitable to her rank and dignity, whether he married her or not; for he was not obliged to it whether he would or not, and in some cases could not if he would, as follows.





Exodus 22:17



Ver. 17. If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him,.... For wife, either because of his character, family, or circumstances; or, however, being disagreeable to him on one account or another, and therefore will by no means agree to marry his daughter to him, and not only give him an absolute denial, but resolutely persist in it: the Targum of Jonathan has it,



"if it seems not good to him;''



if he do not like nor choose to marry her; and some add also, if she herself do not approve of marrying him:



he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins; as virgins on marriage have usually given them, according to their rank and dignity: here is no sum fixed, but the Targum of Jonathan is,



"he shall be mulcted in fifty shekels of silver,''



which is taken from De 22:29 though that seems to be not altogether a like case with this; for though it respects a virgin not betrothed, as here, yet one that has been forced, and therefore the man was obliged to marry her, and never put her away; and the mulct or fine was to be paid to the damsel's father and not to her: the Septuagint version here says, it was to be paid to the father.





Exodus 22:18



Ver. 18. Thou shall not suffer a witch to live. Such that had familiar spirits, and conversed with them, and by means thereof got knowledge of many things relating to persons, at least pretending they did; and who did or seemed to do many strange and surprising feats, as even to raise the spirits of departed persons, to converse with them and gain knowledge by them, though in reality they did not, and could not do such things, but used some juggling tricks to deceive the people, and in which they might be assisted by evil spirits; as appears from the case of the witch of Endor, who was surprised at the appearance of Samuel, it being out of the ordinary course of her art and practice really to bring up the spirit of a man deceased, whatever pretensions might be made to it; however, such being deceivers of the people, and leading them into unwarrantable practices, and off of a dependence on God and his providence, and from seeking to him, and asking counsel of him, they are by this law condemned to death, such an one was not to be suffered to live; not that it was lawful for anybody to kill her, or that any private person might or must do it that knew her, or took her to be a witch; but she was to be had before a court of judicature and tried there, and, if found guilty, to be put to death by the civil magistrate: so Jarchi's note is,



"but she shall die by the house of judgment;''



or the sanhedrim; for these words are spoken to Moses the chief judge, and to those that were under him, and succeeded him and them; though the Targum of Jonathan prefaces them thus:



"and my people, the children of Israel, thou shalt not, &c.''



and though only a witch is mentioned, or this is only expressed in the feminine gender, because a multitude of this sort of people were found among women, as Ben Melech observes, and so Aben Ezra; yet wizards, or men that dealt with familiar spirits, are included; and it may be reasonably concluded from hence, that if women, who generally have more mercy and compassion shown them, yet were not suffered to live when found criminal in this way, then much less men: and this law is thought by some to follow upon the other, concerning enticing and lying with a virgin not betrothed; because such sort of persons were made use of to entice and decoy maids to gratify the lusts of men.





Exodus 22:19



Ver. 19 Whosoever lieth with a beast,.... In like manner as a man and woman, by carnal copulation; this is a crime so detestable and abominable, so shocking and dishonourable to human nature, that one would think it could never be committed by any of the human species, and that there was no occasion for making a law against it; but, such is the depravity and corruption of mankind, that divine wisdom saw it necessary, and, to deter from it, made it death, as follows; such an one



shall surely be put to death; no mercy shown him, no pardon or respite given him by the civil magistrate: according to the Targum of Jonathan, the death of such a person was by stoning, for it paraphrases the words,



"he shall be killed with the casting of stones.''





Exodus 22:20



Ver. 20. He that sacrificeth unto [any] god,.... To Elohim, to strange gods, to the idols of the people, as the Targum of Jonathan; to the Egyptian deities, to the gods of the Moabites, Amorites, Edomites, Canaanites, Philistines, or any other: Aben Ezra says the word Elohim comprehends angels; and by the exceptive clause it is plain it takes in all that had been, were, or ever would be the objects of idolatrous worship, especially the sun, moon, and stars, the principal objects of worship in those days:



save unto the Lord only; the true and living God; Jehovah, the self-existent, immutable, and eternal Being; the Creator of all things, the possessor of heaven and earth, the most high God, and the only one: sacrificing takes in all the acts of service performed to an idol as to the true God, as offering incense, pouring out a libation, as well as slaying and burning an animal as Jarchi observes: he shall be utterly destroyed; be accursed, anathematized, devoted to destruction, as the word used signifies: the Targum of Jonathan is,



"he shall be killed with the sword, and his goods consumed,''



not only lose his life but his substance, and so be destroyed in body and estate.





Exodus 22:21



Ver. 21. Thou shall not vex a stranger,.... One that is not born in the same country, but comes into another country to sojourn, as Jarchi; not a native of the place, but of another kingdom or country; a stranger to the commonwealth of Israel, that is only in it for a time on trade and business, or through one providence or another; or else a proselyte is meant, not a proselyte of righteousness, who has embraced the true religion; but a proselyte of the gate, that takes upon him the commands of the sons of Noah; or, as Aben Ezra here expresses it, who takes upon him not to serve idols; such were allowed to dwell among the Israelites, and they were to carry it friendly and kindly to them, and "not vex" them, nor irritate them with words, as the Targum of Jonathan, and so Jarchi; by calling them names, Gentiles, uncircumcised persons, and the like; upbraiding them with their country, ignorance, and manner of life; they were not to say to a proselyte, as Ben Melech observes, remember thy former works; or, if the son of a proselyte, remember thy father's works:



nor oppress him; by taking his goods, as the above Targum, and so Jarchi; by refusing to assist him with advice or otherwise, to trade with him, or to give him lodging, and furnish him with the necessaries of life:



for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: out of which they were but just come, and therefore such a reason must be very striking and moving upon them: the Targum of Jonathan prefaces it,



"and my people, the house of Israel, remember that ye were strangers, &c.''



this they could not have forgot in so short a time, and the remembrance of this should move their compassion to strangers hereafter, when they came to settle in their own land; and therefore, as they would that men should have done to them when in such circumstances, the same they should do to others; and besides, the remembrance of this would serve to abate their pride and vanity, and their overbearing disposition.





Exodus 22:22



Ver. 22. Ye shall not afflict any widow or fatherless child. Who have no friends, husband, or father to be on their side and protect them, and are weak and helpless to defend themselves, and therefore it must be barbarous to do them any injury, either to their persons or property; no one ought to be afflicted and distressed by another, either in body or mind, or substance, and especially such as have no helper, not any to assist them and sympathize with them; for this is a law for every man, as Jarchi observes, is binding upon all; only the Scripture speaks of these, because of their weakness, and because they are more frequently afflicted than others, cruel and unmerciful men taking the advantage of their inability to defend themselves.





Exodus 22:23



Ver. 23. If thou afflict them in any wise,..... In any way, or by any means whatever; their minds, by reproaches, censures, insults, and their bodies by stripes, false imprisonment, &c. and in their substance, by withholding from them what belongs to them, taking what they have, or cheating and defrauding them in any respect; or, "in afflicting afflict them" {e}; afflict them much, and continue to do so:



and they cry at all unto me; in prayer, as the Targum of Jonathan; or, "in crying cry" {f}; cry vehemently, or importunately, and with constancy, or rather, cry ever so little:



I will surely hear their cry; the voice of their prayer, as the same Targum; or, "in hearing I will hear" {g}; will certainly take notice of their cries, and return an answer to them, by appearing on their side, and avenging their injuries; for God is the Father of the fatherless, and the husband of the widow, and the Judge of them both: the manner of speaking or form of expression is the same in all these clauses, the words being doubled.



{e} hnet hne "affligendo afflixeris", Pagninus, Piscator, Ainsworth, Montanus, Junius & Tremellius. {f} qeuy qeu "clamando clamaverit", Pagninus, Montanus, Piscator, Ainsworth. {g} emva emv "audiendo audiam", Pagninus, Montanus, Piscator, Ainsworth.





Exodus 22:24



Ver. 24. And my wrath shall wax hot,.... Against those that afflict them, being so devoid of humanity, compassion, and tenderness, and so guilty of oppression and injustice, which are aggravated by the circumstances of the persons they ill treat, and therefore the more provoking to God:



and I will kill you with the sword; with the sword of death, says the Targum of Jonathan; it designs one of God's sore judgments, the sword of an enemy; the meaning is, that when such evils should become frequent among them, God would suffer a neighbouring nation to break in upon them in an hostile way, and put them to the sword; hence it follows:



and your wives shall be widows, and your children fatherless; be in the same circumstances with those they have injured, and therefore should consider not only the destruction that would come upon themselves, being cutoff by the sword, but the case of their families; and how, could they be sensible of it, they would like to have their wives and children used as they have used the widows and fatherless.





Exodus 22:25



Ver. 25. If thou lend money to any of my people that is poor by thee, &c,] Such only need to borrow money, and to whom it should be freely lent, when it may be to the good of the borrower, and not any injury to the lender: this law, according to the Jewish writers, only respects Israelites, and not Gentiles; agreeably to which is Jarchi's note,



"if thou lend, that is, not to a Gentile; and to which of my people? the poor, and to which of the poor? that is with thee:''



thou shalt not be to him as an usurer; that will not lend without usury, nor without an exorbitant interest, and deals very hardly with the borrower if he is not punctual in the payment of it; the Israelites were not only not to be usurers, but they were not to be like them; they were not to require anything for lending a poor man a little money; as not any settled interest, so neither were they to take any previous gift or reward later, see Lu 6:34



neither shalt thou lay upon him usury; or oblige him to give interest for money borrowed: it is in the plural, number, "neither shall ye lay"; and Aben Ezra observes, that the lender, scribe, and witness, all transgress this law; that is, when a man lends money on interest, and a bond is made by the scribe for it, and this signed by witnesses, all are guilty of the breach of it: yea, some Jewish writers {h} say, not only those, but whoever is a surety or bondsman for the payment, and even the borrower himself, See Gill on "Ps 15:5".



{h} Misn. Bava Metzia, c. 5. sect. 11. Maimon. & Bartenora in ib.





Exodus 22:26



Ver. 26. If thou at all take thy neighbour's raiment to pledge,.... So that it seems that the lender, though he might not impose usury on the borrower, or oblige him to pay interest for what he lent him, yet for the security of his money he might take his clothes, either his bed clothes or wearing apparel, or any instruments or goods of his; but when he did, he was bound to what follows:



thou shalt deliver it to him by that the sun goeth down; the reason of which appears in the next verse, with respect to his bed clothes, should that be the pledge: but Jarchi interprets it, not of his nocturnal clothes, but of his apparel in the daytime, and paraphrases it thus,



"all the day thou shalt restore it to him until the setting of the sun; and when the sun is set, thou shalt return and take it until the morning of the morrow comes; the Scripture speaks of the covering of the day, of which there is no need at night;''



but rather night clothes are meant by what follows.





Exodus 22:27



Ver. 27. For that is his covering only,.... All that he has to cover him, the only covering he has when he lies down to sleep; and therefore should be restored to him by the time of sunset, at which time he returns from his labour; and after some refreshment retires to his bed for rest, when his covering will be necessary:



it is his raiment for his skin; which is next to his skin, and covers his naked body, as it is when he lies down to sleep; and therefore if not returned, he must lie naked without any covering, which to deprive him of would be cruel: Jarchi interprets this covering of his shirt, but it rather means his bed clothes: the Septuagint version calls it the clothes of his shame, what cover and hide the shame of nakedness:



wherein shall he sleep? what shall he have to sleep in if this is detained from him? nothing at all; or it may be read without an interrogation, wherein he should sleep, or was used to sleep:



and it shall come to pass, when he crieth unto me; and complains of ill usage, that he has nothing to cover him in the night season, when he lies down to sleep, which is very uncomfortable, as well as unhealthful and dangerous:



that I will hear; his cry and complaint, take notice of it, and resent the usage of him:



for I am gracious; or merciful; and therefore everything cruel and uncompassionate is disagreeable, and even abominable to him, and he will take care in his providence that the injured person shall be redressed and the injurer punished.





Exodus 22:28



Ver. 28. Thou shalt not revile the gods,.... Meaning not the idols of the Gentiles, which they reckon gods, and worship as such; which is the sense of Philo, and some others, particularly Josephus {i}, who, to curry favour with the Roman emperors given to idolatry, has from hence inserted the following among the laws given to Moses;



"let no man blaspheme the gods, which other cities think are such, nor rob strange sacred places, nor receive a gift dedicated to any deity;''



but this cannot be the sense of the text, being contrary to De 12:2 nor can it be thought that care should be taken, lest the honour of the Heathen deities should be detracted from; but civil magistrates, the judges of the land, and the like, are meant, who are powers ordained of God, are in his stead, and represent him, and therefore respect should be shown them; nor should they be treated with any degree of slight and contempt, which may discourage and intimidate them, and deter them from the execution of their office: the Targum of Jonathan interprets them of judges very rightly, agreeably to Ps 82:1 and so Aben Ezra says,



"they are the judges and the priests, the sons of Levi, with whom the law is:''



nor curse the ruler of thy people whether civil or ecclesiastic; the last mentioned Jewish writer intend of the king, who is the supreme ruler in things civil, and ought to be honoured and loved, served and obeyed, and not hated and cursed, no, not secretly, not in the bedchamber, nor in the thought of the heart, since not only the thing is criminal but dangerous; it is much if it is not discovered, and then ruin follows upon it, Ec 10:20. The Apostle Paul applies it to the high priest among the Jews, who was the ruler in sacred things, Ac 23:5 and may be applicable to the prince of the sanhedrim, or chief in the grand court of judicature; and even to all dignified persons, who ought not to be spoken ill of, and to be abused in the execution of their office, and especially when they perform well.



{i} Antiqu. l. 4. c. 8. sect. 10. Contr. Apion. 1. 2. c. 33.





Exodus 22:29



Ver. 29. Thou shall not delay to offer the first of thy ripe fruits,.... Which, according to Maimonides {k}, were of seven kinds only; for he says,



"they do not bring the firstfruits, but of the seven kinds, said in the praise of the land, (the land of Canaan), De 8:8 and they are wheat, barley, grapes, figs, pomegranates, olives, and dates;''



and how much of these were to be offered is not fixed by the law, but were left to the generosity of the people: the above mentioned writer asks {l},



"what measure do the wise men set? a good eye (or a bountiful man) brings one of forty (or the fortieth part of his fruits); a middling one (one that is neither liberal nor niggardly) brings one of fifty (or the fiftieth part); and an evil one (a covetous man) one of sixty (or the sixtieth part), but never less than that.''



Now this was not to be delayed, but to be brought as soon and as early as could be: the Jewish writers seem to understand this of postponing things, or inverting the order of them, bringing that first which should be last, and that last which should be first; so Jarchi interprets it,



"thou shall not change the order of their separation, to postpone that which should be first, and to put before that which should be last; for the first oblation should not be brought before the firstfruits, and the tithes before the first oblation.''



And thus runs one of their canons or traditions {m},



"if anyone brings the first oblation before the firstfruits, the first tithe before the first oblation, the second tithe before the first, it is as if he transgressed a negative precept: "thou shalt not delay or postpone", &c. Ex 22:29'



And of thy liquors: and these, according to Maimonides {n}, were only the firstfruits of liquors of olives and grapes:



the firstborn of thy sons thou shall give unto me; which is a repetition of the law. See Gill on "Ex 13:2".



{k} Hilchot Biccurim, c. 2. sect. 2. {l} Hilchot Trumot, c. 3. sect. 2. {m} Misn. Trumot, c. 3. sect. 6. {n} Biccurim, ut supra. ({k})





Exodus 22:30



Ver. 30. Likewise shalt thou do with thine oxen, and with thy sheep,.... That is, with the firstborn, which were to be set apart to the Lord; and so the Targum of Jonathan paraphrases it,



"the firstborn of thine oxen, and of thy sheep;''



for having spoken of the firstborn of men, the Scripture proceeds to speak of the firstborn of cattle, great and small, the separation of which was enjoined in one and the same precept, Ex 13:2,



seven days it shall be with his dam; whether it be a calf or a lamb; before it was seven days old it was not to be taken from it, and given to the Lord:



on the eighth day thou shall give it me; that is, they might do it then, but not before; yet they were not obliged to bring it exactly on that day, but they might do it any time within the month, and at a month's end they were obliged to redeem it, that is, give the priest the sum of five shekels for it, Nu 18:16. The Jewish canon runs thus {n};



"how long are Israelites bound for the bringing of the firstborn, i.e. before they offer it to the priest? in small cattle thirty days, in large cattle fifty days.''



{n} Misn. Becorot, c. 4. sect. 1.





Exodus 22:31



Ver. 31. And ye shall be holy men unto me,.... They were so by God's act of election, not special and particular, but general and national; choosing and separating them to be an holy people to him, above all the people on the face of the earth, and in a ceremonial sense they observing laws and appointments of God of this kind; which is the sense here intended, as appears by what follows: all men, and so these Israelites, ought to be holy in a moral sense, and some are holy in a spiritual and evangelical sense, being made holy by the Spirit of God; of these the Apostle Peter speaks, in allusion to this, and such like passages, 1Pe 2:9



neither shall ye eat any flesh that is torn of beasts in the field; or in the house, as Jarchi notes; but the Scripture, as he observes, speaks of the place where it is more usual for beasts to tear, and so Aben Ezra; otherwise what is torn elsewhere, or by whatsoever accident it is bruised and maimed, was not to be eaten: ye shall cast it to the dogs: for even a stranger was not to eat of it, or if he did he was unclean, and was obliged to wash his clothes, and bathe himself,

Le 17:15 and yet Jarchi interprets this figuratively of such as are like dogs, meaning the Gentiles, whom the Jews used to call so, see

Mt 15:26. An Heathen poet gives instructions perfectly agreeable to this law;



"do not (says he) eat flesh fed upon by beasts, but leave the remains to the swift dogs {o}.''



{o} mhde ti yhroboron &c. Phocylides, ver. 136, 137.

 

John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible.

↑ Back to top