Deuteronomy 2
Deuteronomy 2:1 1. Titan we turned, and took our journey into the wilderness, by the way of the Red sea, as the Lord spoke unto me; and we compassed mount Stir many days. 1. Postea reversi profecti sumus in desertum per viam maris Suph, quemadmodum loquutus fuerat Jehova ad me, et circumivimus montem Seir diebus multis.
1. Then we turned and took our journey. The time in which they struck their camp is not stated in the book of Numbers. This verse, therefore, will aptly connect the history, since otherwise there would be an abruptness in what immediately follows, he then briefly indicates what was the nature of their journeying until the time appointed; viz., that, by wearying themselves in vain in circuitous wanderings, they might, at length, learn to follow God directly, and not to decline from the way which He points out.
Leviticus 24:10-14
Leviticus 24
Leviticus 24:10-14 10. And the son of an Israelitish woman, whose father was an Egyptian, went out among the children of Israel; and this son of the Israelitish woman and a man of Israel strove together in the camp: 10. Egressus est autem filius mulieris Israelitidis, qui erat filius viri AEgyptii, in medio filiorum Israel, et jurgati sunt in castris ipsis filius Israelitidis et vir Israelita. 11. And the Israelitish woman’s son blasphemed the name of the Lord, and cursed. And they brought him unto Moses: (and his mother’s name was Shelomith, the daughter of Dibri, of the tribe of Dan:) 11. Et transfixit filius mulieris Israelitidis nomen, et maledixit: ad duxeruntque eum ad Mosen: nomen autem matris ejus erat Selomith filia Dibri, de tribu Dan. 12. And they put him in ward, that the mind of the Lord might be showed them. 12. Et posuerunt eum in custodiam, ut exponeret eis juxta sermonem Jehovse. 13. And the Lord spoke unto Moses, saying, 13. Loquutus est autem Jehova ad Mosen, dicendo: 14. Bring forth him that hath cursed without the camp, and let all that heard him lay their hands upon his head, and let all the congregation stone him. 14. Educ blasphemum extra castra, et ponant omnes qui audierunt manus suas super caput ejus, et lapidet eum universus coetus.
10. And the son of an Israelitish woman. In what year, and in what station in the desert this occurred, is uncertain. I have, therefore, thought it advisable to couple together two cases, which are not dissimilar. It is probable that between this instance of punishment, and that which will immediately follow, there was an interval of some time: but the connection of two similar occurrences seemed best to preserve the order of the history; one of the persons referred to having been stoned for profaning God’s sacred name by wicked blasphemy, and the other for despising and violating the Sabbath. It is to be observed that the crime of the former of these gave occasion to the promulgation of a law, which we have expounded elsewhere: in accordance with the common proverb, Good laws spring from bad habits: for, after punishment had been inflicted on this blasphemer, Moses ordained that none should insult the name of God with impunity.
It was providentially ordered by God that the earliest manifestation of this severity should affect the son of an Egyptian: for, inasmuch as God thus harshly avenged the insult of His name upon the offspring of a foreigner and a heathen, far less excusable was impiety in Israelites, whom God had, as it were, taken up from their mothers’ womb, and had brought them up in His own bosom. It is true, indeed, that on his mother’s side he had sprung from the chosen people, but, being begotten by an Egyptian father, he could not be properly accounted an Israelite. If, then, there had been any room for the exercise of pardon, a specious reason might have been alleged why forgiveness should be more readily extended to a man of an alien and impure origin. The majesty of God’s name, however, was ratified by his death. Hence it follows that it is by no means to be permitted that God’s name should be exposed with impunity to blasphemies among the sons of the Church.
We may learn from this passage that during their tyrannical oppression many young women married into the Egyptian nation, in order that their affinity might protect their relatives from injuries. It might, however, have been the case that love for his wife attracted the father of this blasphemer into voluntary exile, unless, perhaps, his mother might have been a widow before the departure of the people, so as to be at liberty to take her son with her.
To proceed, he is said to have “gone out,” not outside the camp, but in public, so that he might be convicted by witnesses; for he would not have been brought to trial if his crime had been secretly committed within the walls of his own house. This circumstance is also worthy of remark, that, although the blasphemy had escaped him in a quarrel, punishment was still inflicted upon him; and assuredly it is a frivolous subterfuge to require that blasphemies should be pardoned on the ground that they have been uttered in anger; for nothing is more intolerable than that our wrath should vent itself upon God, when we are angry with one of our fellow-creatures. Still it is usual, when a person is accused of blasphemy, to lay the blame on the ebullition of passion, as if God were to endure the penalty whenever we are provoked.
The verb נקב, nakab, which some render to express, is here rather used for to curse, or to transfix; and the metaphor is an appropriate one, that God’s name should be said to be transfixed, when it is insultingly abused.
13. And the Lord spoke unto Moses. It must be remembered, then, that this punishment was not inflicted upon the blasphemer by man’s caprice, or the headstrong zeal of the people, but that Moses was instructed by Divine revelation what sentence was to be pronounced. It has been elsewhere stated why God would have malefactors slain by the hands of the witnesses. Another ceremony is here added, viz., that they should lay their hands upon his head, as if to throw the whole blame upon him.
Numbers 15:32-36
Numbers 15
Numbers 15:32-36 32. And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the Sabbath-day. 32. Quum autem essent filii Israel in deserto, invenerunt virum colligentem ligna die Sabbathi: 33. And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation. 33. Et adduxerunt illum qui invenerunt colligentem ligna, ad Mosen et Aharon, et universam congregationem. 34. And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him. 34. Qui posuerunt eum in custodiam: quia nondum patefactum erat quid faciendum esset ei. 35. And the Lord said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp. 35. Et dixit Jehova ad Mosen, Moriendo moriatur vir ille: lapidet eum lapidibus universa congregatio extra castra. 36. And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses. 36. Eduxerunt ergo eum congregatio extra castra, et lapidaverunt eum lapidibus, et mortuus est, quemadmodum praeceperat Jehova Mosi.
32. And while the children of Israel. Since we know not in what year, or in what month this happened, it appeared that nothing would be better than to follow the context of Moses. This history shows that the Israelites were not always affected by the same degree of madness, so as to be rebellious against God; since in this instance their moderation is no less manifested than the fervency of their pious zeal. But as one swallow does not make spring, so we shall form an incorrect judgment of men’s whole lives from one noble action. The transgressor of the law is brought to Moses and Aaron, whose authority retains the whole people in the path of duty. Their humility is also worthy of praise, in that they quietly wait for the decision of God; and finally, must be added, their energy in executing the punishment as soon as God has declared the sentence. You would say that in every point they were rightly conformed to the rules of piety; but, since the most trifling occasion immediately led them astray, their hypocrisy was discovered by this great levity of conduct.
This, however, is the sum of the history, that by the death of one man the obligation of the Sabbath was sanctioned, so that it might henceforth be held in greater reverence. It might indeed be the case that these men, who brought the transgressor of the Sabbath, were careless in other matters, and, as is usual with hypocrites, were excessively rigid in their assertion of the claims of an outward ceremony. From the punishment, however, we may infer that the criminal himself had not erred through inadvertence, but in gross contempt of the Law, so as to think nothing of subverting and corrupting all things sacred. Sometimes, indeed, God has severely avenged inconsideration in the pollution of holy things; but it is probable that He would not have commanded this man to be stoned, unless he had been convicted of willful crime. Moreover, by this severity God testified how much stress He laid upon the observance of the Sabbath. The reason of this has been elsewhere set forth, viz., that by this mark and symbol He had separated His chosen people from heathen nations. Whence also arose the main reproach against the Jews, when they were called Sabbatarians.
But it must be borne in mind that the worship of God was not to consist in mere idleness and festivity; and therefore that what God enjoined respecting the seventh day had another object: not only that they should then employ themselves in meditating upon His works, but that, renouncing themselves and their own works, they should live unto God.
Furthermore, this case shows us in general that the magistracy is appointed no less for the maintenance of the First Table, than the Second; so that, if they inflict punishment upon murder, adultery, and theft, they should also vindicate the worship of God: for it is to be observed that the man was not stoned by a mere unreflecting impulse, but by the direct command of God. They knew, indeed, what he had deserved before God’s tribunal; but, since no political law had been given on this head, Moses was unwilling to come to any decision except by the authority of God.