Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 21:15-17

15 And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death.

16 And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.

17 And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death.

We have a couple more crimes for which the punishment is death. Verses 15 and 17 both have to do with one’s actions towards their father and mother. If one were to smite a parent, or even if only to curse them, then they would face a death penalty. This is demanding a higher level of respect to one’s parents than for any other person. That being said, the commandment does not require one to actively show love and affection to the parents, but it does deny showing active malice towards them. Perhaps one’s parents behaved so reprehensibly that the child cannot show them sweet devotion, the child would be justified by the law in withholding that, but the child would not be justified in harming or cursing the parent.

As a separate matter, if anyone tried to force another man into slavery, the perpetrator would also be sentenced to death. Recall that a key difference between Israelite servitude and our modern conception of slavery was that the serving party willingly elected to enter that station in return for a price. It was freely entered into, would freely be departed from after six years, and received due compensation. It was entirely different from the sorts of historical slavery where people were kidnapped, carried from their homeland, and forced into lifelong oppression. As we see in today’s verses, that form of slavery was never supported by the Lord, in fact He demanded the death of any who participated in it.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 21:12-14

12 He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death.

13 And if a man lie not in wait, but God deliver him into his hand; then I will appoint thee a place whither he shall flee.

14 But if a man come presumptuously upon his neighbour, to slay him with guile; thou shalt take him from mine altar, that he may die.

We now transition to laws of murder and capital punishment. Verses thirteen and fourteen makes a clear distinction between manslaughter and murder. The description of a man not lying in wait, but having another delivered into his hand by God, is generally understood to mean killing another by happenstance, not by malice aforethought.

We will read later how a man guilty of manslaughter could still legally be executed, but there were certain cities of refuge he could retreat to where it would be illegal to kill him. Thus, he was a man with a foot in two worlds, not entirely guilty but not entirely innocent, and the law was designed to reflect that nuance. But if the man was guilty of premeditated murder, not manslaughter, then there was no question what his outcome would be, the Lord commanded that such a man should be put to death.

This covers two of the most common forms of killing, but not all. What about killing another man in self defense? Verses 18-19 of this chapter, and also verses 2-3 of the next chapter, will give some more details on lawful and unlawful killing, but nothing concrete on self-defense. From the verses in the next chapter it seems like a man might have been justified in slaying an intruder who came into his abode during the dark of knight (when murderous intent was more likely), but not during the day (when thievery was more likely).

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 21:7-11

7 And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do.

8 If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her.

9 And if he have betrothed her unto his son, he shall deal with her after the manner of daughters.

10 If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish.

11 And if he do not these three unto her, then shall she go out free without money.

There were manservants who were purchased to perform the labor of household, but there were also maidservants who were betrothed to be married to the master of the house or one of his sons. Obviously, since the woman was to be a wife, she would not “go out as the menservants” after six years, she would remain a permanent fixture of the dwelling, and she was to be treated the same as a daughter who was born naturally under that household.

If, however, the master of the house changed his mind, he was very limited in what he might do about his marriage contract. If he wished to take another wife, he could, but he could not decrease her own inheritance. Or, he could release her back to where she had come from, but in that case he would receive no return of the price he had paid for her betrothal. It would only come at a loss for him.

I suppose that this arrangement could make an honest man vulnerable to women of ill intent. A young lady could behave kind and charming in order to secure a betrothal from a wealthy man, but once she entered the man’s household she could deliberately make herself bitter, frustrating, and unreasonable until the man just wanted to be rid of her. Then she could be released from her betrothal and play the scam again. However, it makes sense that if there was any asymmetry in the law that it would be tilted in favor of the weaker sex. It was up to the man to be prudent and shrewd, knowing that the woman would be the most protected by the law.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 21:4-6

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

5 And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free:

6 Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him for ever.

In the last verses we heard that a servant would go free after six years of labor, however if he took a wife of his master’s slaves, and had children with her, the wife and children would remain with the master after the servant went free. Of course, the wife would also be freed after her six years of service had transpired if she was a Hebrew, so it would seem that this rule was only applicable when the spouse was a foreigner. In such a case, the man’s union to the woman would have been permitted, but not sanctified. The marriage would not have been a covenant before the Lord to such a degree that the husband and wife were to “cleave to one another, and be one flesh.”

As mentioned in the last post, though, the privileges of Israelite nationality was openly-exclusive. The Lord had already related how any foreigner might become a part of the chosen people, so presumably the foreign wife could take on the Hebrew covenants and be counted among the Lord’s people, and then be eligible for freedom from her servitude and remain with her husband.

Or, if she would not, the husband would also have the opportunity to make himself as a foreigner, testifying before the judges that he would rather remain in servitude than go free, and the master would perform a ritual where he fastened the man to his door, making the man a permanent fixture of his household.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 21:2-3

2 If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing.

3 If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him.

Today we begin the rules that applied to an Israelite slave. As I mentioned in my last post, this subject can be shocking to us today, but we must not take our current privileges and assume that they also existed in these ancient times. The historical context matters.

As we will read in upcoming verses, an Israelite man might end up a servant by selling himself, or by being sold by his father, into that service, presumably due to immense poverty. This was, therefore, a transaction with payment, and the serving participant elected to participate in it. The relationship being described here is not chattel slavery, but probably something between our modern concept of slavery and servanthood.

Today, we might wish that that the slave/servant could have been aided by some sort of welfare program instead, but what if there wasn’t sufficient stability and wealth in the economy to provide that welfare? We might wish that the rich master would simply pay for the man’s livelihood without receiving any service in return, as an act of charity, but what if the rich men of the time would themselves become destitute unless they made some gain after paying for the man’s livelihood?

Freedom is a great good that we should all aspire to, but history has taught us that it is a concept that requires a certain level of infrastructure and stability to exist. The Israelites simply may not have had that necessary infrastructure or stability, given that they were fresh out of Egypt and living in a brutal environment. At least, not enough infrastructure or stability to support it entirely.

Because, even while God’s law was allowing for a form of slavery in this moment, it is already showing the ending of slavery as well. Defined in God’s law was that no Hebrew slave should be forced to stay in such a state for perpetuity. Every seventh year he would have the opportunity to go free, at no cost, and be a free man again. If he found the world still too hard to abide on his own he could presumably sell himself back into servitude again, though after another seven years he would have still have that guaranteed chance for freedom once more.

And if it seems unfair that this option for freedom is only offered to Hebrew slaves, and presumably not the foreign ones, remember that God had already detailed how any foreigner could become a child of the covenant, and would presumably then have the same privilege of freedom.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 21:1

1 Now these are the judgments which thou shalt set before them.

After giving the ten commandments, God goes on to clarify other aspects of His law. The things that we are going to read now are going to look much less like the transcendent, eternal principles of the ten commandments, and more like the nitty-gritty terms of judicial law, meant to help the judges when ruling over a dispute.

And for this study, it is essential to remember that the people and time that the Lord is providing a law to is not the same as the people and time of today. In our next study’s verses we will examine the rules related to servants belonging to their masters. Some of these practices may sound shocking to us, but that is with the lens of today’s unprecedented upwards mobility. We did not live at this time, we did not have the same problems, we did not need the same solutions. It is too shallow, too simplistic, to just dismiss these parts of Jewish law out of hand, and call them unjustifiable in every time and place, and never admit that in actuality we just don’t really know. Most of us don’t even try to study the day-to-day life of these people, and even those who do have never had to face it firsthand. We just don’t know.

And so, if some of these rules feel out-of-place in today’s world then they probably are. That’s alright, because these aren’t eternal commandments that we’re reading about now. These are merely the legal rules and definitions that applied to the local scope that they belonged to.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 20:24-26

24 An altar of earth thou shalt make unto me, and shalt sacrifice thereon thy burnt offerings, and thy peace offerings, thy sheep, and thine oxen: in all places where I record my name I will come unto thee, and I will bless thee.

25 And if thou wilt make me an altar of stone, thou shalt not build it of hewn stone: for if thou lift up thy tool upon it, thou hast polluted it.

26 Neither shalt thou go up by steps unto mine altar, that thy nakedness be not discovered thereon.

In the last post we discussed how the Israelites were not to create any graven image, even of the Lord Himself. Today we see that this forbidding of graven religious artifacts extended also to the altar upon which they would make their sacrifices. They were not to carve the stone into closely-fitting shapes, but instead would lay the rocks in a rough and natural pile.

God goes so far as to say that using a tool on the stone would pollute it. The altar was the most sacred place in the Jewish faith, and so it was to be a work of God alone. God crafted the rocks of the earth, and man was not supposed to try and improve on that. If they did, it would be an altar of men, not of the Lord.

Neither were they to craft stairs leading up to the altar, but approach it on level ground. The reason given is not because the stairs would be a constructed edifice, though, but because there might be a risk of the priestly skirt exposing a man as he ascended the stairs. For later altars the Lord would instruct the Israelites to elevate it up in the air, but by that point He also would have instructed the priests to wear breeches underneath their skirts.

This is a recurring pattern in the Biblical account. The Lord requires a holy practice of His people, but He modifies its requirement according to their capability at the time. Another example would be how the newly-freed Israelites, wandering back-and-forth through the wilderness, were told to construct a tabernacle that was portable and modest, whereas at the height of their power—under the reign of King Solomon—the temple would be a vast and permanent construction. In some things the Lord demands sudden, dramatic changes, but in other things He leads His people by degrees.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 20:22-23

22 And the Lord said unto Moses, Thus thou shalt say unto the children of Israel, Ye have seen that I have talked with you from heaven.

23 Ye shall not make with me gods of silver, neither shall ye make unto you gods of gold.

God had commanded the people that they were not to make any graven images. In today’s verses He goes further to say that they must not make idols even of Him. Yes, He is their God, but they are not to try and recreate Him in any physical fashion.

One obvious reason for this is so that the idol would not become a distraction from the actual God. By pouring their devotion into a figure, they might compromise their relationship with the actual, living Lord. We do something similar when we obsess over a particular interpretation of the gospel, and hold to it at the expense of all other parts. We are more devoted to the image in our head of God, than to God Himself.

Another reason for not creating any idols of God is because God would create His own image. It would be a living, walking, talking image, even a man in the flesh, Jesus Christ. All the worshippers of Horus and Ra and Baal and Ashtaroth made images that were static, mute, and dead, just as the gods they represented were dead. Only God could create a living image, because only God was truly alive.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 20:20-21

20 And Moses said unto the people, Fear not: for God is come to prove you, and that his fear may be before your faces, that ye sin not.

21 And the people stood afar off, and Moses drew near unto the thick darkness where God was.

I find very interesting the last phrase in today’s verses: “Moses drew near unto the thick darkness where God was.” This sounds counterintuitive. The scriptures describe God as being synonymous with the light, the entity that dispels the darkness. Why would Moses go into darkness to meet the Lord?

We have to ask, “what was causing the darkness that Moses stepped into?” Looking back on verse 18, I assume that it was “the mountain smoking.” It seems that Moses stepped into the darkness of the smoke to find the Lord within. But, of course, what one finds within smoke is a flame. It wasn’t that God was the darkness, but that He was the light within the darkness. This idea returns at other points as well, such as when John gives his testimony of the Word that was with God, and he uses the phrase: “the light shineth in darkness.”

We do not come across God as a bright spot in an already well-lit room. We find Him shining in the midst of the deepest darkness, darkness that we must step into before we find Him. Stepping into that darkness means facing our deepest fears, confessing our most shameful secrets, enduring our most painful afflictions, and ultimately passing into the darkness of death itself. This is a most fascinating aspect of our faith. We do not just believe that God is good, but that He is the good that we can only find through the darkest experiences of our life.

Posted on by Abe Austin

Scriptural Analysis- Exodus 20:18-19

18 And all the people saw the thunderings, and the lightnings, and the noise of the trumpet, and the mountain smoking: and when the people saw it, they removed, and stood afar off.

19 And they said unto Moses, Speak thou with us, and we will hear: but let not God speak with us, lest we die.

Today’s verses seem to go back before Moses ascended the mountain and received the ten commandments, the first moment the noise and power of the Lord was made manifest upon the mountain. These verses seem to take place in-between, or just after, Exodus 19:19 and Exodus 19:25.

In this account it is apparent how great of a fear came upon the people, and how they desired not to draw near to or speak with the Lord, for fear that they would die under the power of His word. To be clear, we have not heard of any threatening word or action from the Lord in this moment, His power has been restricted to the mountain, not invading into their camp. So the Israelites fear of God is not based on any malice, but because His glory and power is too great for them to bear.

There are those today who make light of God, openly mocking Him and portraying Him as a bumbling fool. It is safe that no one who does this has actually glimpsed the true Lord of Heaven and Earth. No one would dare to speak irreverently if they had seen and known the terrible majesty of His purifying glory. One day, all of us will witness that tremendous glory, and when we do it is said that even the kings and the mighty will beg the “mountains and rocks, to fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne!” (Revelations 6:16). Like the Israelites, we will be in terrible fear, and we would then desire a representative, even a mediator, to be able to stand before God in our place.