The Fifth Command

CHAPTER 16:18–CHAPTER 18:22

DEUT 16:18–22

18Judges and officers shalt thou make [give] thee in all thy gates, which the Lord thy God giveth thee, throughout thy tribes: and they shall judge the people with just judgment. 19Thou shalt not wrest [bend, turn aside] judgment; thou shalt not respect persons [the face] neither take a gift: for a gift doth blind the eyes of the wise, and pervert the words of the righteous. 20That which is altogether just, [Justice, justice] shalt thou follow, that thou mayest live, and inherit the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee. 21Thou shalt not plant thee a grove [as a tree-pillar]* of any trees near unto the altar of the Lord thy God, which thou shalt make thee. 22Neither shalt thou set thee up any image [image, pillar, statue]; which the Lord thy God hateth.

DEU 17:1.Thou shalt not sacrifice unto the Lord thy God any bullock, or sheep [and goat] wherein is blemish, or any evil favouredness [evil thing]1; for that is an abomination unto the Lord thy God. 2If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the Lord thy God giveth thee, man or woman that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the Lord thy God, in transgressing his covenant, 3And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either [and, indeed, to wit,] the sun, or moon, or any of the host [or the whole host] of heaven, which I have not commanded; 4And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and inquired diligently, and behold it be true, [truth (is it)] and the thing [the word] certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel: 5Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.2 6At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death [to be put to death] be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death. 7The hands of the witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterward the hands of all the people. So thou shalt put the evil away from among you. 8If there arise a matter too hard for thee in judgment, between blood and blood, between plea and plea [cause and cause] and between stroke and stroke, being matters of controversy [contested cases] within thy gates: then shalt thou arise, and get thee up into the place which the Lord thy God shall choose; 9And thou shalt come unto the priests the Levites, and unto the judge that shall be in those days, and inquire; and they shall shew thee the sentence [word, what is right, sentence] of judgment: 10And thou shalt do according to the sentence [the sound, purport of the word]3 which they of that place which the Lord shall choose shall shew thee; and thou shalt observe to do according to all that they inform thee: 11According to the sentence of the law which they shall teach thee, and according to the judgment which they shall tell thee, thou shalt do: thou shalt not decline from the sentence [word] which they shall shew thee, to the right hand, nor to the left. 12And the man that will do presumptuously, and will not [not to] hearken unto the priest that standeth to minister there before the Lord thy God, or unto the judge, even that man shall die: and thou shalt put away the evil from Israel. 13And all the people [the whole people] shall hear, and fear, and do no more presumptuously. 14When thou art come unto the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the nations that are about me; 15Thou shalt in any wise [So shalt thou only set him]4 set him king over thee whom the Lord thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a 16stranger over thee [give over thee a stranger] which is not thy brother. But [Only] he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should multiply horses: forasmuch [since]5 as the Lord hath said unto you, Ye shall henceforth return no more that way. 17Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold. 18And it shall be when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which is 19before the priests the Levites. And it [the law] shall be with him, and he shall read therein [in the book] all the days of his life: that he may learn to fear the Lord his God, to keep all the words of this law and these statutes, to do them: 20That his heart be not lifted up above his brethren, and that he turn not aside from the commandment to the right hand or to the left: to the end that he may prolong 21his days in his kingdom, he, and his children, in the midst of Israel.

DEU 18:1-22.THE priests the Levites, and all the tribe [the whole tribe] of Levi, shall have no part nor inheritance with Israel: they shall eat the offerings of the Lord made by fire, and his inheritance. 2Therefore shall they have no inheritance among their brethren: the Lord is their inheritance, as he hath said unto [promised] them. 3And this shall be the priest’s due [right] from the people, from them that offer a sacrifice, whether it be ox or sheep; and they shall give unto 4the priest the shoulder, and the two cheeks, and the maw. The first-fruit also of thy corn, of thy wine, and of thine oil, and the first of the fleece of thy sheep, shalt thou give him. 5For the Lord thy God hath chosen him out of all thy tribes, to stand to minister in the name of the Lord, him and his sons for eDeut 16:6And if a Levite come from any of thy gates out of all Israel, where he sojourned [where he was lodging, stranger] and come with all the desire of his mind unto the place which the 7Lord shall choose; Then [And] he shall minister in the name of the Lord his God, as all his brethren the Levites do, which stand there before the Lord. 8They shall have like portions to eat [part as part shall they eat] beside that which cometh of the sale of his patrimony.6 9When thou art come into the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations. 10There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth [practiseth]7 divination, or an observer of times [a seer] or an enchanter, or a witch, 11Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer. 12For all that do these things are an abomination unto the Lord: and because of these abominations the Lord thy God doth drive them out from before thee. 13Thou shalt be perfect [whole, entire] with the Lord thy God. 14For these nations, which thou shalt possess, hearkened unto observers of times, and unto diviners: but as for thee, the Lord thy God hath not suffered thee [given to thee] so to do. 15The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken. 16According to all that thou desiredst of the Lord thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again [not will I hear further, continue to hear] the voice of the Lord my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not. 17And the Lord said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken. 18I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put [give] my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. 19And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I 20will require it of him. But [Only] the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or [and] that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. 21And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the Lord hath not spoken? 22When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing [word] follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing [word] which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously [arrogantly]: thou shalt not be afraid of him.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

1. Deu 16:18–17:8 . If Moses will now explain and apply the fifth command in the same manner he has hitherto used, comprehending the whole people, thus according to the end of Deuteronomy, and at the same time out of its fundamental purpose, which as its author he ever follows, he has an appropriate transition to it in the demands which he has made already, 4:9, 10, still more, 6:7, 20 sq.; 11:19, upon parents, and the elder class generally, as the nearest objects of the fifth command. The doctrine of the law for the home life, is the practice of the law for the popular life in reference to justice and injustice. The thought, therefore, “of presenting it as a sacred people of Jehovah even in its political relations,” (KEIL), does not introduce the transition to what follows, although it is true that “the civil order rests upon the conscientious fostering of justice, by virtue of judiciously arranged courts, and an impartial administration of justice.” SCHULTZ, in the derivation from the same idea, refers better to “the leader and instructor who, armed with peculiar power, knowledge of the law, or revelation, puts rightly Israel’s departures over against his piety, and lays claim to his docility.” [Moses as the inspired leader and guide with his subordinate judges, met all the necessities of the people, but now, when he was about to leave them, and they were to enter upon entirely different circumstances, he provides for the new exigencies. The whole section accords with the spirit and design of Deuteronomy.—A. G.]. Deut 16:18. Comp. upon 1:15, 16, 13, and the Doct. and Eth. remark 2. Now, judges in all the cities, on account of the altered relations in Canaan. But even now the institution proceeds from the people—only confidence, as is natural, can establish a position even similar to the parental. Thus the Israel addressed, judges itself best, by means of those chosen from and out of itself. Deut 16:19 gives three negative instructions for the administration of the judicial office, “each one reaching more widely to that which might lead to what was previously forbidden,” SCHULTZ. Comp. Ex. 23:6; Deut. 27:19; 1:17; 10:17; 27:25; Ex. 23:8. The reason “brings into view first the power of judgment, then the word of judgment.” From the righteous judges, what they should be, we pass in Deut 16:20, to the positive qualities of righteousness, made more emphatic through the repetition (1 Tim. 6:11; Phil. 3:12, 14). The promise is similar to that of the fifth command. The examples now following the judicial section, according to the connection, preserve the inward thread of the first table, which the fifth command closes. Deut 16:21, 22. Comp. upon 7:5; 12:31

Deu 17:1. Comp. 15:21. כל דבר רע excludes any and every evil, defects of any kind whatever. Deut 17:2 generalizes concisely the three cases. Comp. 13:13; 4:25, 13, 23. Deut 17:3. As 4:19, (13:7, 14) אשר לא־ which service, sq. Israel is not set right through prohibition alone. Deut 17:4. Comp. 13:15, 16, 19, sq., here the judicial investigation, the proceeding of the court. Deut 17:5. That man or, sq. There is no sparing even of the weaker sex in such a case. Hence it is emphatically repeated. את חדבר which was announced to thee. Unto thy gates, out before the city, as hitherto before the camp, Lev. 24:14; Num. 15:35 sq.; (Acts 7:58; Heb. 13:12). Symbolizing the removing of the evil out of the midst of Israel. Comp. further 13:11. Deut 17:6. Num. 35:30 (Matt. 18:16; John 8:17; 2 Cor. 13:1; Heb. 10:28). הַמֵּת the dying (Gen. 20:3) thus beyond rescue, because he was in a certain sense already dead, (Num. 19:11). על־פי, the mouth condemns the man. Job 15:6; Luke 19:22. Deut 17:7 is as 13:10, 6. Does this at the same time express the entire certainty of the witnesses (KNOBEL), their conviction of the guilt (SCHULTZ)? In any case it symbolized the individual and general readiness to eradicate the evil from the midst of Israel. [“It was calculated to ensure their sincerity and truthfulness, and to deter from false witness.”—A. G.].

2. Deut 17:8–13. A supplementary carrying out of 1:17 (Ex. 18:26, 19) with reference to Canaan, and because Moses was not to be there. Deut 17:8. If there arise a matter too hard for thee. The people is represented as judging itself through the local courts, 16:18Too hard—one which the judge in the case could not or would not decide. He particularizes: blood and blood, as to the killing, whether wilful or unintentional, and hence what is right in the case and what not; (דִּין is the judgment); “according to what law it must be decided; (HERXHEIMER, in money matters”). נֶגַע is the injury resulting from a blow, thus here of bodily wounds (Ex. 21:18 sq.), and not of leprosy. Matters of controversy—not, as KEIL, SCHULTZ, cases of quarrels, but as KNOBEL, legal cases, about which there may be controversy, as to whose decision different opinions may be given. עלה, if it means to ascend, is explained from the great importance, not from the position, and hence not from the location of Jerusalem. (Acts 15:2). According to MEIER the word signifies primarily to press in, draw near. Comp. Gen. 46:31, 29. Deut 17:9. The priests the Levites—See Intro., § 4, I. 22. [Great stress is laid upon this phrase in contrast with that used in the earlier books, “the priests, the sons of Aaron,” by those who oppose the Mosaic authorship. The lapse of time, and the events which had occurred between the earlier books and Deuteronomy, afford an easy and natural explanation of the difference. The position of the priests was now established. No Levite would question the fact that the priesthood attached to the family of Aaron. It was more important now, and more in accordance with the popular character of Deuteronomy, to bring out their popular tribal relations. The Levites, too, were in a sense a priestly tribe. They had in important respects a priestly position, and had priestly functions. They stood between the people and God. There may have been, too, a design on the part of Moses in selecting this phrase, as WORDSWORTH suggests, to appease any jealousies between the priests and the Levites; to remind the priests that the Levites were their brethren, and to remind the Levites that they shared in the honor and dignities of the priests. In any case, however, the explanation of this diversity is much easier upon the supposition that Moses wrote Deuteronomy, than upon that of a later writer, who still assumed to write as Moses. For it is incredible that any one who may have wished to palm off his work as that of Moses, should either have been ignorant of the terms of the earlier books, or should have carelessly neglected them, and thus have drawn attention to his imposture.—A. G.]. The phrase is general, and includes the high-priests. ואל ,אל co-ordinating those who declare the law, the teacher, (Deut 17:11, Lev. 10:11), and the literal actual “judge.” The former precedes here, because in difficult cases like these in Deut 17:8, their activity is first laid under requisition. But the latter receives not “the second” place (KNOBEL), but his official position. Comp. 19:17; 26:3. The passage 2 Chron. 19:8–11, connects itself with this only in the most general way. Whoever has this later supreme court before his mind will not be so unprejudiced, nor distinguish so naturally from the personal position of Moses, the simple outlines of a superior competent court. He speaks freely for the future, but not from a more definite and precise present. The “judge” holds nearly the position of Moses over against the priesthood. That he probably, as a superior judge, as the president of the wider circle of judges (19:17), acted with the priests as a bench or college, upon the questions, the suits, from the local city courts, may be inferred from the words, and they shall show thee, sq.—נָגַד Hiph. to bring near, to point out, to inform. Deut 17:10. Not the litigating Israelite (KNOBEL, SCHULTZ) since it is the execution of the sentence obtained, which is here treated of, but the lower court, which should see that it was done. (KEIL). This injunction was truly in place, where there was a natural feeling of relative independence in the local courts, and to enforce upon every Israelite a more exemplary obedience to the supreme court appointed by God. The place which. Comp. 19:17, which gives the relief and explanation. “If the judgment of any judge is to be regarded (1:17) as of God, so pre-eminently that before the Lord.” (SCHULTZ). The mouth (sound) of the word, is the judicial sentence, which announces the instruction in the case in question, which must be retained as final. Deut 17:11. The sentence is particularized at first as the sound (mouth) of the law with reference to the priestly teacher of the law, because all depends upon the law of God, and then first as judgment with reference to the judge, upon whom rests the obligation of saying what is right, of pronouncing judgment. Observe the הַתּוֹרָה the earlier law, e.g., Ex. 21; not as Deut 17:18, התורה הזאת the deuteronomic. (Intro., § 2). (Matt. 23:2 sq.). Comp. further 5:29. Deut 17:12 closes with the application to every man. The malicious disposition can scarcely be treated otherwise. Comp. 1:43. There also they would not hear. (1 Peter 5:5). It is not men whom they would not hear, but God. Therefore: the priest, which is to be understood not of the High-priest only, if even especially of him (Heb. 8:1), since it is only the official character of the priest generally which is here spoken of, and which presents the disobedience as against Jehovah. The same thing is self-evident from the judge, since he in the place of God speaks in the name of God (1:17). That standeth, sq.—Intro., § 4, I. 22. אֶת־ יְהוָֹה said, as KEIL correctly remarks upon the distinction of the priests from the Levites, somewhat more specifically than לִפְנֵי יהוח. Comp. Gen. 5:22, 24; 6:9; 1 Sam. 2:11; 3:1; Mal. 2:6, to wit, for the more intimate, more confidential converse, their nearness in society, (GESENIUS). The priests served in the holy place, and through the High-priest their representative and head in the most holy. The rest here, as in Deut 17:7. Upon Deut 17:13 comp. 13:12. (1 Tim. 5:20). [There is little room under the theocracy for the distinction between ecclesiastical and civil causes. The priests were no doubt the expounders and judges of the law, but the lay judges were not added to the court, to be judges of the facts in distinction from the law in the case, but in part out of existing and long-continued usage, probably reaching back to the patriarchal times, and partly, as a recognition of the right of the people as such, to be represented in the administration of justice. We do not know how the choice was made. There were probably different methods in use at different times. But the judge seems to have been a representative of the people.—A. G.].

3. Deut 17:14–20. The transition is natural from the judge to the kingdom (1 Sam. 8:5; 2 Sam. 15:4 sq.). Intro., § 4, I. 16. Deut 17:14. Two things are presupposed in this case, settled relations after the entrance into Canaan, and its occupation, then the self-determination of the people, and thus its inward development to the kingdom. As all the nations (heathen).—Not precisely an aberration, but still neither a mere thoughtless conformity. Comp. 6:14; 13:8, where the same expression occurs. (Intro., § 4, I. 16). After such a permission in the case, Deut 17:15 emphasizes the command (שום תשים), omnino non alium, quam quem, sq. (H. MICHAELIS) in order to prevent any possible clashing with the sovereignty of Jehovah. How the people should set the king over them is left open. Perhaps through their elders. How the divine choice should be manifested, whether by Urim, or the prophets, or by some clear fundamental leading is also undetermined. From among, sq., states what must be true under all circumstances, and is therefore once more negatively repeated. A stranger would never be the choice of Jehovah. The earlier restriction respects him who is above, the latter those below. (The historical criticism might with this go down even to John 19:15! 2 Kings 15:19 sq.; 16:7, do not indeed belong here (KNOBEL). As the last repeated determination with a certain sacred simplicity, sounds strangely, so also the first direction for the king in Israel. Deut 17:16. He shall have no fondness for horses, and that indeed not so much from any opposition to a warlike lust of conquest (which was not the case even, 1 Ki. 10:28 sq., where it occurs with reference to a royal pageant) as in opposition to the pride relying upon horses. Ps. 20:7; 33:16 sq.; 147:10. (Isa. 31:1). But this opposition restores in a genuinely Mosaic way the well-remembered historical event, Ex. 14:15; 19:21. It is the opposition between Israel and Egypt, expressed in a form which is intelligible only at the time of Moses, when “the people on the slightest occasion expressed its desire for Egypt, its purpose to return thither (Ex. 14:11; Num. 11:5 sq., 20; 21:5), a reunion of the just sundered bands did not seem impossible.” HENGSTENBERG. Comp. OEHLER in HERZOG’SEncycl. The forbidden return to Egypt is thus placed as the very end of the multiplication of horses. “Moses feared that the king would seek the Egyptian lowlands (11:10, 11) which were so much better fitted for the rearing of horses, instead of the mountainous Palestine. They must remain externally far off, that they may preserve the internal separation entire (Lev. 18:3).” SCHULTZ. Comp. Josh. 11:6, 9; Judg. 5:10; 2 Sam. 8:4. Solomon, even on account of the Mosaic relations, which he only considered, might have regarded the direction as antiquated. [And yet Solomon’s experience shows that the multiplication of horses could not be secured without intercourse with the Egyptians, which Moses saw it was important to prevent.—A. G.]. Nothing is said here “against the continual going to and from Egypt, as e.g., Jer. 2:18, 36.” KNOBEL.—As the Lord hath said (28:68), does not occur literally in the pentateuch, but Moses appeals to what was said, although not written, since this is so understood in the very leading out of Israel especially into Canaan. [“Egypt was the principal source whence the nations of Western Asia drew their supply of horses. It stands also everywhere in Scripture as the antithesis to the theocratic covenant and kingdom on earth. To cause the people to return to Egypt, which the multiplication of horses would naturally do, would be to reverse the great and beneficent work of God, which inaugurated the Mosaic covenant, the deliverance from the bondage of Egypt. Hence the prohibition.” BIB. COM.—A. G.]. The second direction (Deut 17:17) lies against another strong passion of oriental rulers. As the passion for horses would lead back to Egypt, so the multiplication of wives would draw them away from the Lord; the lust itself, indeed, much more if the wives were from the heathen (1 Kings 11:3 sq.) Comp. 11:16. [The restriction however does not forbid polygamy absolutely, but the excessive polygamy, such as was found in Solomon.—A. G.]. “The third prohibition concerns excessive luxury. (1 Kings 10:14, 27). Great wealth begets effeminacy and luxury, as well as pride and oppression.” J. H. MICHAELIS. Deut 17:18 gives the counter-means and way to good against all lust of the eye, lust of the flesh, and pride. Upon the throne. On the summit of human greatness, where all is wont to move according to his will, then he must have the will of the Most High for his aim and standard. He shall write him, if not with his own hand, yet cause to be written, Intro., § 2. Deut 17:19. עמּוֹ (his vade mecum) in his possession, in his mind, thought, and will. Comp. Intro., § 2; 4:10; 5:26; 6:2; 14:23. Deut 17:20. Comp. 8:14; 5:29. An hereditary kingdom. [While permission is given to the chosen people to be like the other nations in this respect, still their king is not to be like other kings. He must be approved by God, from among his brethren, restricted in all indulgences, and bound by the laws and institutions of the nation. The monarchy was allowed but guarded in the most careful way. A copy of this law. Sept. and Vulg., “he shall write for himself the Deuteronomy.” But “this law” includes the whole pentateuch, or rather its legal portions. See 31:9, 11, 26. This passage which has been urged so strenuously as a proof of the later origin of Deuteronomy, contains really a strong proof of its Mosaic authorship. For it is not only conceivable that Moses should have provided for the contingency of the kingdom, such as he saw everywhere around him, and to which allusions had been made in the earlier books, Gen. 17:16; 36:31; but is entirely natural. The request of the people when they came to Samuel for a king, is couched in terms like these used here. Comp. 1 Sam. 8:5, with Deut. 17:14. Samuel also evidently has this passage in his mind. 1 Sam. 10:24; 12:14. Samuel does not reprove the people simply because they desired a king, but because their desire originated in wrong motives, and was pressed under circumstances which should have prevented it, and in the face of the remonstrances of the prophet. It was sinful because in the circumstances it indicated a sinful alienation of heart on the part of the people, from Jehovah, and the institutions He had established. A careful study of the passage 1 Sam. 8–12, will show in what respects the people sinned, and that there is no opposition between that passage and Deut. 17:14–20. But the passage may not only be vindicated from objections which have been urged against it. It bears upon its face the marks of its Mosaic origin. The direction that the king should be taken from among thy brethren would have been out of place after the establishment of the kingdom in the line of David; the reference to Egypt and the return thither, are, as above remarked, intelligible only upon the assumption of the Mosaic authorship; the restrictions under which the king was placed are in full agreement with the whole spirit and tone of the Mosaic legislation, so much so that their absence would have been noticeable as a great omission; the direction as to the copy of this law, carries with it the implication that Moses is speaking, who was then expounding the law, and could not well have been inserted at a later time; in short every feature of the passage is in favor of its Mosaic origin. See also HENGSTENBERG, Authen., KEIL, Introd., HAVERNICK, Einleit., BIB. COM.—A. G.].

4. Deut 18:1–8. After the transition from the supreme court, especially from the judge to the king, the priests the Levites come into view; at first, indeed, generally, then the priests particularly, and lastly the Levites. Deut 18:1. The addition, all the tribe of Levi, shows that the Levitical priests were not the whole of Levi, that besides these there were Levites simply, and thus that there was a distinction between the two from the beginning. Comp. Num. 18:20, 23 sq.; Deut. 14:27, 29; 12:12; 10:9. אִשֵּׁי יְהוָֹה (Lev. 1:9), i.e., all that was sacrificed upon the altar by fire; as Lev. 24:9 of the show bread, so here of the priest’s portion of the sacrifice.—And his inheritance, whatever beside belonged to Jehovah, and through Him to the tribe of Levi, priests and Levites, as the tithes, firstborn, first fruits. (Lev. 7:4; Num. 18) [“These were God’s portion of the substance of Israel, and as the Levites were His portion of the persons of Israel, it was fitting that the Levites should be sustained from these.” BIB. COM.—A. G.]. The prominent thought that Jehovah is his inheritance, expressly stated in Deut 18:2, (10:9) leads to the detailed supplementary statement in Deut 18:3, which thus presupposes what in general belongs to Levi, on the part of Jehovah, and now details what on the part of the people is the particular due or right of the priests, (4:1; 1 Sam. 8:9 sq.; 10:25) which must be conceded to them by every judge or ruler. Intro., § 4, I. 20. A new assignment, not precisely to those, offering the sacrifies (Num. 18:18; Ex. 29:27; Lev. 7:34) but to the priests in general. זבח as 12:15, 21, to which kind of slaying the article הַזֶּבַח may indicate. KNOBEL understands it of sacrificial victims (comp. 1 Sam. 2:13 sq.) in which case there would be required from the people in this class of sacrifices not only the wave-breast and heave-leg, (shoulder) but also the foreleg (Num. 6:19) the two cheeks, and the maw (the so-called fourth stomach of the ruminants). Something good from each of the three chief parts of the animal (KEIL regards the slaying as connected with the sacrificial feasts in the wider sense, and not as any of the three kinds of expiatory sacrifices). [The portions here assigned to the priests are in addition to those given to them in Leviticus. It seems to be a provision to meet the altered circumstances when the people were located in Canaan, and all the animals could no longer be slain at the door of the tabernacle. It is a “more generous rather than a scantier provision.”—A. G.]. Deut 18:4 contains also, with reference to the first-fruits, on the part of the people, a supplementary direction, beside that well-known in (Num. 18:12 sq.) even the first of the fleece which as resulting from the care and nurture of men is the proper gift of the people. Deut 18:5 gives the ground or reason for this direction, altogether in the style of the time of Moses, for him, the priest, hath God chosen, him as Aaron and his sons (Lev. 7:34); to minister in the name of Jehovah, a more general expression than in 17:12 (comp. 5:7) but the special distinction appears clearly in 21:5. The priest in the strict sense, hence it is said he officiates in charge, stands to minister, in the name of the Lord, at all events in the full power of that mediatorial position assigned him by God. Deut 18:6. Allusion is now made peculiarly to the Levites. In itself the clause here as 27:14; 31:25, might be understood of the priests, but both the expression and the whole statement of the case and the connection, lie against this view of BAUMGARTEN. Intro., § 4, I. 22. The situation implied is that of 12:12; 14:27. Intro., § 4, I. 21. HERXHEIMER: “Where he has officiated as judge, or from one of the Levitical cities.” [The Levite would naturally be called in his official duties to other cities than those assigned him.—A. G.]. With all the desire, sq. (12:15) because he so wishes, and has liberty to do so, and shows such piety, since no other interest impels him, than to share in the services at the sanctuary. [WORDSWORTH: “Not from love of change, or from a restless passion for excitement, or from an ambitious craving for self-display and popular applause in a great and populous city.”—A. G.]. The place of Jehovah is his peculiar home, and all desires for this are a spiritual homesickness. The Levitical service is, also, in the name of the Lord, and although in a subordinate sense, still not less truly nor with any less right Comp. Intro., § 4, I. 22. In the charge of the Lord, in any case in the position assigned by Him (Num. 1:53; 3:7; 8:9–19; chap. 18), they represent the whole people, minister the service of Israel. The expression is the general one for the servant of Jehovah, including both the higher and the lower. With this agrees the purpose in the exposition of the fifth command, to give the Levites a parental character, in accordance with the condensed statement, Deut 18:1, 2, (as 10:8, 9) and this all the more since they were commended to the same love, to guard, preserve the priestly dignity of their tribe. As all his brethren. By itself this (even more than Deut 18:6) might include the priests as Levites, and allude to the whole service at the place of the Sanctuary, but the connection favors the limitation to the Levites simply. There were, as it appears, Levites settled at the sanctuary, or for the time engaged there, placed over against the Levite drawn from his city, perhaps at one of the three feasts, to the sanctuary. Comp. still further Intro., § 4, I. 22. The conclusion, as already prepared for in Deut 18:6, 7, now follows in Deut 18:8. With a similarity in service and dignity, there must be also a like enjoyment. The portions (they had no other חֵלֵק Deut 18:1), which were then given them to eat belonged equally to the one coming from afar, as to those found there. KEIL understands the living from the incoming of the tithes, the portions of the sacrifices, the free-will gifts prescribed by the earlier law, which were not exclusively assigned to the priests.” SCHULTZ more in accordance with the connection, and more reasonably, places it as parallel with Deut 18:3 sq., and regards it as referring “to the tithe, firstborn, and other sacrificial meals arranged at the place of the sanctuary” (12:6 sq.; 17 sq.; 14:22 sq.; 15:19) and the enjoined invitation of the Levites to them. What follows is difficult. Not so much the text; for it comes essentially to the same thing, whether we read with KNOBELלְבַד מִן and point, ממְּכָרָיו (מֶכֶר perhaps the required sale) or take לְכַד for לְכַד מִן and point: מִמְכָּרָיו from מִמְכָּר (מָכַר) the sale, that sold, or to be sold. The difficulty lies in the sense of the words: עַל־הָאָבוֹת. The most obvious sense is by or upon the fathers, i.e., whatever was saleable of his, or belonged to him, (the removed Levite) was laid upon the family fathers at home, to ascertain and offer for sale. In any case, it is not private or personal property which is here regarded. KEIL, KNOBEL, take הָאָכוֹת for אָכוֹת בֵּיח (Ex. 6:25; Num. 2:34) and understand the clause of the private income as a member of the family, through the sale of his family possessions or the profits of them, thus; beside his sales, the net proceeds of them according to the house of the fathers, i.e., determined according to the degree of his genealogy, or his relationship. Not as SCHULTZ and the Sept.: πλὴν τῆς πράσεως αὐτοῦ τῆς κατὰ πατριάν. Comp. Lev. 25:33 sq. The Levite could sell his house, or could draw the rent for it. [The text is difficult, but the sense is perfectly clear. The Levite who came from a distance to the sanctuary to engage in its service, whatever might be his resources from other quarters, was not to be deprived of his equal share with those who were in attendance at the sanctuary. Part as part they shall eat.—A. G.].

5. Deut 18:9–22. Finally, as a conclusion, partly supplementary to the previous official personages and arrangements, partly controlling them, at the same time completing the compensation for the departing Moses, is the prophetic institution, and indeed growing out of the necessity for an authentic revelation of God, against the varied heathen superstitions and apostasy. Deut 18:9. Comp. 17:14. Thou shalt not learn—(5:1; 14:23; 17:19). There will be teachers enough of the falsehood (Deut 13). “The abominations are set over against the holy service.” HERXHEIMER. Comp. 12:30 sq.; 7:25. Deut 18:10 refers at once to the Moloch-worship, (Lev. 18:21; 20:2 sq.), as SCHULTZ remarks, “because all the following individual dark arts arise out of the demonized cultus which represents the destructive potencies of nature through Moloch, as witchcraft goes hand in hand with the devil among the old Germans.” KNOBEL holds that the Moloch-worship is “placed here at the very beginning of this enumeration as the worst kind of idolatry, out of which these dark arts are born.” The descriptive term chosen, עָבַר Hiph., reminds us significantly of the venerable national name “Hebrews,” (15:12) and may at the outset call attention to the opposition between all such conduct and the national consciousness. The act was purificatory (a consecration). See Art. Moloch, HERZ.Enc., IX., p. 717. [But also SMITH’SBib. Dict., Art. Moloch, in which the expiatory nature of the rite is defended.—A. G.]. Comp. KEIL upon Lev. 18:21. The general designation for soothsayer is קָֹסַם, to divide, decide, give an oracle; a pun upon כֹּזֵב liar, Ezek. 13:6. Comp. Josh. 13:22. Observer—according to MEIERענן to cover, hence of secret discourses; the whispering magician. According to others (SCHULTZ) from עָנַן thick cloud: cloud interpreter, or from עַיִן (eye) either one who fascinates through an evil eye, or one who observes signs, an Augur (Lev. 19:26) Enchanter—נָחַשׁ agrees well with serpent, as significant of its movements. The serpent is נָחַש from its thrusting, piercing bite, according to the primitive signification of the verb, which is not as KEIL, to hiss, but to press, to seize, and hence inwardly to forebode, conceive, to understand by signs, Gen. 44:5; Num. 24:1; 23:23. Hence well used here for sign interpreter. Comp. HENGST.Balaam, p. 122 sq. Witch—כָשׁף to divide, unveil, (MEIER), the adjurer. Deut 18:11. Charmer—binding or making fast through magic, without, however, thinking of magic knots (KEIL); as fascinare, κατάδησμος. אֹוב is the spirit ghost, not as turning back, but as drawing back, returning, shade (Sept.: Ventriloquist from the hollow tone [“bottle”]). One who possesses a kind of power over spirits, so that he needs only to ask or inquire. Lev. 19:31; 20:6, 27; 1 Sam. 28:7 sq. Wizard, a prudent, cunning man (as the wise woman). Lastly, one who seeks from the dead, i.e., cites, adjures them. Deut 18:12. Comp. Lev. 18:24 sq.; 20:23. A resumption of Deut 18:9. Deut 18:13. As the abomination from תָעַב to retire, withdraw, so תָּמִים from תָּמַם to shut up, bring together; thus as opposed to each other. God must withdraw Himself from that, and Israel should cleave together with Jehovah. The perfect, entire dependence upon Him distinguishes the people of God from the heathen. Deut 18:14. 9:1. Comp. upon Deut 18:10. Not so does Israel hearken, should it hearken, or need to hearken. Upon the “gift” rests the duty; that granted, this is conceded. Deut 18:15 carries out perfectly that already given, through that which is now first to be given, and indeed in a parallel manner (Deut 18:18) with the king, 17:15: from the midst of thee, by which also in opposition to Deut 18:9 it is said, that Israel would have no occasion to stray into heathenism, and would not need any Balaam. For נָבִיאComp. Doct. and Eth., Deut 13:1. As in 17:14 the discourse is of the kingdom, so here of the prophetic order as it ever and always through a prophet (not one only) corresponds to the necessity made so clear at Sinai, and to the desire of the people. Of thy brethren, connected with thee in the closest manner; thy duty his, and thy sorrow his sorrow, etc. Like unto me. This is not explained by from the midst of thee, scarcely to fix the limits towards the heathen divination, but becomes clear through what follows, from which it is clear also, that the comparison is not as to the peculiar personality of Moses in the individuality of his revelation, (34:10), but only as to what he had done and had been at Sinai at the request of Israel (As I am one such), Lange, Pos. Dog., p. 609. It is the promise “of a line of prophets, which is embraced in the prophet, who is the counterpart of Moses.” Typical and Messianic, John 1:45; 6:14; 4:25; 5:44 sq.; Acts 3:22; 7:37; Luke 24:19. See Doctrinal and Ethical.—Will raise up, with reference to 13:2. Also: Unto him ye shall hearken, in allusion to 13:4 and Deut 18:14 (Matt. 17:5). Deut 18:16. God through this promise granted the desire of the people, which, after the departure of Moses, would become a necessity. Comp. upon 5:20 sq.; 9:10; 10:4. Deut 18:17. Comp. 5:25. Deut 18:18. Moses already at that time received the promise, but announces it here first, because, in its personal reference to Moses (Introd. § 4, I. 16), the right point of time was now first reached with his approaching departure, and thus in Deuteronomy. The import of the as me, Deut 18:15, gives now the explanation of as thee, 1) the mediated word of God, as through Moses, God no longer speaking directly to the people: thus far the preparation (the divine inspiration, Num. 23:5); 2) the unconditional certainty of the word: thus now the legitimation, the official character. To the office so legitimated a corresponding conduct is due on the part of Israel, Deut 18:19, which indeed follows already from the fact that Israel had asked such a mediation at Sinai (Deut 18:16). Moses thus shows how the true prophet will speak the words of Jehovah given into his mouth, namely, simply give them again, not perhaps to conceal the threatening by the promise, but speak all that is given him by the Lord. דָרַשׁ, literally, to reclaim, as out of the hand of the doer (Gen. 9:5), thus here מֵעִמּו, de chez-lui. With regard to the prophetic order promised, something is given over to Israel, and indeed to every individual, which he has with him, of which he is conscious, and as to which Jehovah demands the proper use, the fitting honor or obedience, but in case this fails, then calls to account, demands restitution and satisfaction through punishment, and in this way reclaims that which was given from the disobedient.—[See Acts 3:23, in which the apostle brings out more fully than even the Sept.: I will take vengeance, the full meaning of these words. It is equivalent to the “highest theocratical punishment, that of excision from the chosen people.” See ALEXANDERin loco.—A. G.]—But still the prophet must be legitimated according to Deut 18:18, and hence the resumption, Deut 18:20, of the words in question, and (17:12, 13) the declared penalty on account of the flagrant offence in two cases. Finally we have the criterion of the false prophet in the first case. Deut 18:21, 22. In a prophet of false gods, the thing announced (13:3) may happen; in the false prophet of Jehovah, the first case, 5:20, tho non-occurrence gives the criterion. Fear, horror, hence forbearance, were possible on account of the name of Jehovah, in which the prophet spake.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. Comp. Doct. and Eth. 2, upon 1:6–4:40.

2. “The necessity for a king is the necessity for a head, who embracing the entire external, natural and civil community in his person, might be able to defend and regulate. As soon as Israel, from its beginnings fixed by God, had grown into an actual nation, it so developed itself, that it must have a natural head, and thus preserve its perfectly free organic form (Gen. 17:6, 16; 35:11; 36:31; Num. 23:21; 24:7, 17). The king is the natural manifestation of the perfectly free and independent man. Is there a true king in Israel, then Israel must be perfectly free and independent; for it lies in the very nature of the king that his perfection is not for himself; he must permit his whole fulness to flow out over his people. Hence the true king is the completion of the freedom, and generally of the history of Israel.” BAUMGARTEN.

3. The kingdom and the prophetic order are parallel developments of the future in Israel, as they appear also in this section. They represent the two extreme points of the Israelitish national life, the most external and inward sides of that life, which have their reconciliation in the high-priesthood. The distinction between the kingly and prophetic order, growing into an opposition, is a tragic element in the future history of Israel. It must be so that the Scripture may be fulfilled, although first of all the bare variance of the offices which circumscribe the nationality of Israel, kindles the ever-burning desire after that which should unite them all and the whole Israelitish nationality in itself.

4. “The prophetic order is not made superfluous or unnecessary through the revelation of the law; but the path for it is thus opened.” SCHULLZ. “Moses foresaw that Israel through disobedience, thus through the great deep of dissolution, would break through all the strength of the ordinances established by the law.” BAUMGARTEN. For the insufficiency of the “judges and king, the priests and Levites,” SCHULTZ appeals to “that transition to more settled relations now in prospect,” according to 17:14, to the “elders of the people” (4:25), to the approaching “error and apostacy (chap. 31),” the threatened “seducing through the false prophets (13:2; 18:20),” “the restoration according to 4:29; 30:1 sq. It becomes the pure, fundamental spiritual power of the word” (BAUMGARTEN), and indeed of the authentic word, “which the Lord speaks,” to lead over, preserve, and help, and heal. But to these representatives of God, who keep the revelation of God continually present and living, for the special necessities of the time, and indeed in intelligible words, who thus literally deserve the name of parental teachers, a fitting, natural reverence shown through obedience, is due, which is no more to be rendered upon the mere authority derived from the revelation of the law, but upon the original force of the continuously efficient word” (SCHULTZ).

5. “As nature preserves its consecration to the divine service and its sacred functions for the existence of the divine kingdom in the cultus, so history in the promise” (BECK, Christl. Lehrn. I. 398). The “gradually unfolding and organically united promises” marking the secret advance of the history of salvation which should come from the Jews, down to its consummation, are the building-stones of the temple in which humanity shall worship the Father, as they, the promises, form the mystical body of the Messiah before the Word was made flesh. Comp. LANGE’S Pos. Dogm., the thoughtful, § 67, and upon Gen., p. 247 sq. The promise of salvation in the progress of the centuries from its general, human, real character, arrives in Abraham and Isaac at the cradle of the people, advances to the popular national character of its organs in Jacob from whom the tribes spring, to its tribal distinction in Moses, the prophet-prince, representing the whole economy of God, in whom thus centres, not as in the seed of Eve the simple idea of the human race, nor as in the patriarchs the idea of the people, nor as in Judah the idea of the tribe, but the idea of the divine civil officer (Heb. 3:5), appears here in the divine civil service, centralizing itself in the personality of Moses as the bearer of the future salvation.” BECK.

6. As to the Messianic character of the passage, 18:15, 18, as “the promise of God is mediated and introduced through the condition and character of men, it is the fore-announcement of the future as it is contained in the germ of the present” (LANGE). The “constellation of the present” does not proclaim the necessity for a second Moses. For without regarding the general historical law, according to which so comprehensive a genius does not soon repeat itself, only an Elisha follows an Elijah, the stand-point of the law rules still in Deuteronomy, fixes the institution, determines the arrangement, ordains the officers (Intro. 4, I. 16), for the peculiar historical, national development of Israel in Canaan, in which individual personalities must first form and mould themselves. Joshua is the personal deputy of Moses truly, but in limited, specific labors. For the present there was no need for the individual further, but for the condition in which the essential mediation of Moses, the prophetic, might be sown by God as a fruitful seed which should ever put forth personalities until the last, whom they all together typify, and who fulfils them perfectly in himself (1 Pet. 1:11). With this agrees the singular form of the promise here, and the express comparison with Moses as it is actually and historically explained, Deut 18:16 sq. The latter explanation especially, which must give the limitation to the “as I,” “as thee,” opposes every exposition which emphasizes the peculiar method of Moses in a wider (HAVERNICK8) (HOFMANN9), or a narrower sense (KURTZ,10 AUBERLEN, THOLUCK. The typico-Messianic interpretation agrees best, both with the letter, and with the development of the Old Testament promise of the Messiah generally, and with the Mosaic time especially. In the latter reference LANGE calls attention “to the completion of the prophecy of Moses through that of Balaam.” as Melchisedec appears by the side of Abraham. Balaam (Num. 24:17) predicts the glory and the power of the kingdom out of Jacob—Israel. Thus the earlier (3) hinted distinction between the kingdom and the prophetic order is characteristically personified in the two prophets. The typical priesthood, as it is contained in the priestly royal Israel (Ex. 19:6) comes first into view, Deut. 33. A direct reference to the Messiah must moreover lead beyond the likeness to Moses, indeed to an opposition with him, into which even KURTZ and SCHULTZ fall (Isa. 42, 49, 50, 61). [See also and with reference to these same passages, ALEXANDER on Isa., Vol. II., Introduction. While it is true that the promise runs parallel with the history in its progress, and is more or less determined by the condition and circumstances of men, this does not lie against the direct Messianic interpretation of this passage. It is not Messianic only in its germ-like character, unfolding itself through the long line of prophets until it reaches perfection in him who is the prophet. It has evidently from the connection in which it stands, on the one hand, opposed to the magic arts which the people were to shun, and on the other to the false prophets; and from the necessities of the people of God, after the departure of Moses, a distinct reference to that line of prophets, who were all like unto Moses so far as this, that God “put his words into their mouth.” But its main reference is to Christ. The New Testament constantly so represents it, Acts 3:22, 23; 7:37; John 1:19; 4:25; Luke 11:50, 51; Matt. 17:5. The earlier Jewish expositors all applied the passage to the Messiah, and the great body of Christian commentators so explain it; only they do not make this its exclusive meaning. The question whether Moses understood his prophecy as thus pointing out the person of the Messiah has nothing to do with its interpretation. The prophets sometimes uttered what they did not fully understand, and they were often perhaps more distinctly conscious of the scope and meaning of the prophecies than we are disposed to admit. But it is clear that this question, whatever view may be held in regard to it, has no real bearing upon the exegesis. That must be settled upon other grounds. Nor is it of any weight against the direct Messianic interpretation, that Christ is in so many respects unlike Moses, greater than Moses, or even provided he is like unto him in this, that as a prophet he stands between men and God, and speaks the words of God, John 8:28. But if there is nothing in the person who speaks this prophecy, nor in the time at which it was uttered, nor in the immediate connection in which it stands, nor in its general relation to the whole progressive unfolding of the promise of salvation, inconsistent with the direct reference to the Messiah, if all these are much more in favor of that reference, as might be shown, then the passages in the New Testament which expressly apply it to Christ would seem to leave no room to doubt that this is the correct view.—A. G.]

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

Deut 16:18 sq. LUTHER: “Thou seest here that God Himself administers His own law, ordains judges, etc. Thou seest also what a disposition a judge must have, viz. that he must overcome all lusts and the enticements of fear, love, favor, compassion, of avarice, expectation, reputation, life and death, and prefer simply the simplest truth and righteous judgment. How will he look to God alone, if the heart has not been made strong by faith? A very difficult, rare and exalted thing, is a single and righteous eye in a judge, and men without avarice are rare birds, rarer than a black swan.” [Still they are found. LUTHER’S experience led him to a severe judgment. But it is sad to think that there is so much ground for the severity.—A. G.]

Deut 17:1. STARKE: “In collections we should give good and not uncurrent coin.” Deut 17:2. LUTHER: “He well says: wickedness in the sight of the Lord, for nothing is fairer, better, more sacred in the sight of men, than idolatry, godlessness, dissimulation, and a careful appearance of reverence.” Deut 17:4. BERL. BIB.: “No connivance, but also no reception of every accusation as true, without investigation.” Deut 17:12. RICHTER: “How strictly God requires obedience to rulers and overseers.” Deut 17:15. PISCATOR: “The great virtues of a Christian ruler: he must be a brother, care for the common good, have a compassionate heart, and thus not cause the severe punishments and service of a foreign ruler; he must not hold too splendid a court, nor use too great expense, not rely upon his power, strength, wealth, etc., and thus without the utmost need, from pride and haughtiness cause war; he must not be hindered in his administration by pleasure, idleness, and the like; he must not from avarice burden his subjects, and occasion sin in the magistrates: above all he must diligently read the word of God for himself, that he may not be led away from the light by unchristian theologians, study humility as a man among men, direct his whole administration by the will of God.” BAUMGARTEN: “It was the last stubborn act of the Egyptian king, that he with his chariots pursued the defenceless Israel (Ex. 14:6 sq.; 23), but even in this his pride, with his chariots and riders, sank in the depths of the sea (Ex. 14:25 sq.; 15:2, 4, 18) and thus completed the separation between Israel and Egypt.” STARKE: “Kings and lords are for the people, not the reverse.” Deut 17:16. WURTH. BIB.: “Great lords have also their laws.” STARKE: “He is the richest king who has the richest subjects.” The Bible the best glass for rulers—Judgment and dominion have their roots in righteousness (16:12) and faithfulness (17:16 sq.).

Deut 18:1 sq. BAUMGARTEN: “Not merely in the arrangement of the camp, but in the abode in the promised land, Levi appears as the innermost and spiritual Israel, since Levi has no inheritance in the land, but as if a quickening spirit is scattered through all the tribes in his cities.” SCHULTZ: “As they lose their position they gain in the Lord ideally the possession of the whole.” STARKE: “Christians, for the sake of Christ, must cheerfully forego all temporal things lying against their eternal inheritance in heaven.” PISCATOR: “The servants of the church and school should not be burdened with care for their support.” [WORDSWORTH: “A memento for the priesthood in every age of the Church, that they be not entangled with the affairs of this life.”—A. G.]. Deut 18:6. PISCATOR: “The way should not be barred to any one, but whoever desired to serve the Lord, to study the law, and learn the will of God, should be permitted to do so, should be helped on his way, and be provided with everything necessary.” Deut 18:9. STARKE: “A Christian at a godless place should not follow the people there in wickedness, 1 Pet. 4:1 sq.” Deut 18:10–14. BERL. BIB.: “The believer should seek after the wisdom which is from above. James 3:17. (Col. 2:8).” BAUMGARTEN: “In the general uncertainty and perplexity of life, and the shortsightedness of men, even the heathen desires a divine word. Thus they turn in various ways to the spirits of nature, but which make themselves known as the gods of the dead, and are an abomination in the eyes of the living and good God.” [The intense desire to know what is future or unseen leads men now to resort to these modes of divination. WORDSW.: “These abominable sins have even found an entrance, and a welcome, into the saloons of the cities of Christendom, comp. Rev. 21:8.”—A. G.]. Deut 18:15. LUTHER: “This is the most renowned passage of this book, and Moses introduces it here in the most fitting way when he was speaking of the priesthood, the authorities, and of all the servants of God.” BAUMGARTEN: “Israel was to receive the divine word in extraordinary cases in a purely human and historical way. The mediation of Moses, the type of the prophets of Israel, to whom he attributes the same originality. Even the dead synagogue had such an idea of the originality and independence of the prophetic word, that it is a sentence of the Talmud,” (MAIMONIDES on the Mischna). “In all that the prophet says to thee you should hearken to him, even if he oversteps the law, the service of idols excepted.” PISCATOR: “A glorious testimony by Moses to Christ, the chief of all the prophets.” RISSLER: “Moses a type of Christ in the circumstance of his life, and his pre-eminence in his office. Moses at his birth in great danger of being destroyed, as the other children, at the command of the king; the child Jesus was to be killed soon after His birth, with the other children, at the command of Herod. Moses through his foster-mother kept in life; Jesus rescued from the danger of death through His foster-father. When Moses came to the help of his oppressed brethren they thrust him from them (Acts 7:25); Jesus came to His own, but they received Him not, John 1:11. Moses was, notwithstanding, the redeemer of his people; Jesus has redeemed men from the service of Satan and sin, and brought His spiritual Israel into the liberty of the children of God. Heb. 2:14 sq.; John 8:36. Moses was the mediator of the Old Covenant, Jesus of the New Testament. Heb. 8:5 sq.; 9:15 sq. Moses with his zeal, placed himself in the breach for his people. Ex. 32:22 sq.; Jesus was actually cut off from the land of the living. Isa. 53:8. Moses is the only person who united in himself, as long as he lived, the prophetic, priestly, and kingly offices; Jesus is the only teacher, high-priest, and King of His Church eternally. Moses was faithful in all his house as a servant; Jesus as a Son over His own house. Even the contrast between the office of the two is emphasized in 2 Cor. 3.” [WORDSWORTH abounds in similar analogies,—A. G.]. BERL. BIB.: “As in the first four books there are four glorious types of the priestly office and work of Christ; Isaac, the passover lamb, the goat on the day of atonement, and the brazen serpent; so now of his prophetic office.” PISCATOR: “The distinction between Moses and Christ: 1) In person: Moses a poor sinful man; Christ a true man without sin. 2) In doctrine: Moses taught the law which no man can bear; Christ preaches the Gospel to troubled hearts. John 1:18. 3) In their benefits: Moses an earthly ruler could not destroy sin and death; Christ is the true Mediator. 1 Tim. 2:5.” [See also HENRY, SCOTT, CALVIN, for further practical hints.—A. G.].

Footnotes:

*[Deu 16: 21. Lit., Thou shalt not plant thee as an Asherah any tree. The Asherah was an image of Astarte.—A. G.].

1[Deu 17:1. מוּם,—Sept. μῶμος—Christ is ἄμωμος, 1 Pet. 1:19. WORDSWORTH.—A. G.].

2[Deu 17:5. Lit., And they shall die.—A. G.].

3[Deu 17:10. Lit., The mouth of the word which they shall declare to thee from that place, etc.—A. G.].

4[Deu 17:15. Lit., Setting thou shalt set over thee a king of whom Jehovah thy God shall choose him.—A. G.]

5[Deu 17:16. Lit., And Jehovah.—A. G.].

6[Deu 18:8. SCHROEDER: As the margin, his sales (i.e., his saleable or sold possession) by the fathers.—A. G.].

7[Deu 18:10. The Kosem. The word is connected with the idea of cutting, and probably means an astrologer. The Meonen, one who uses hidden arts. The Menachesh, a serpent charmer. The Mecashaphim, from a root to reveal, and thus a fortune-teller—a revealer of secrets. The Chober, one who binds, fascinates, and thus a charmer. The Shoel-Ob, probably ventriloquists, who used these arts in the pretended conversations with their familiars. See further on the significance of these names, FARRAR, in SMITH’S Bib. Dict. art Divination. THOMSON, Land and Book, I., pp. 214, 215. —A. G.].

8Theol. of the O. T., p. 130: “The essential identity of the contents of prophecy and the law.”

9Schrift. II. 1 ff. 139: “The human mediation of the revelation of God in opposition to the overwhelming manifestation of God Himself.”

10Gesh. des A. B. II., p. 522: “One entrusted with the whole house of Jehovah, conversing with God face to face.” Num. 12:6 sq.; Deut. 34:10; Heb. 3.