DEUTERONOMY 17 COMMENTARY

EDITED BY GLENN PEASE

1 Do not sacrifice to the Lord your God an ox or

a sheep that has any defect or flaw in it, for that

would be detestable to him.

BARNES, "This verse belongs in subject to the last chapter. It prohibits once more (compare Deu_15:21) that form of insult to God which consists in offering to Him a blemished sacrifice.

Any evil-favoredness - Render any evil thing. The reference is to the faults or maims enumerated in Lev_22:22-24.

CLARKE, "Wherein is blemish - God must not have that offered to him which thou wouldst not use thyself. This not only refers to the perfect sacrifice offered by Christ Jesus, but to that sincerity and uprightness of heart which God requires in all those who approach him in the way of worship.

GILL, "Thou shalt not sacrifice unto the Lord thy God any bullock or sheep wherein is blemish,.... No sacrifice of any sort, whether burnt offering, sin offering, or peace offering, was to have any blemish in it; typical of the unblemished and immaculate Lamb of God, who, being without sin, offered himself without spot to God, and so could take away the sins of others by the sacrifice of himself; see Lev_22:18,

or any evilfavouredness; any sickness or disease upon it of any sort, which made it ill favoured to the sight, or disagreeable to the smell, or however unacceptable for sacrifice:

for that is an abomination to the Lord thy God; every such blemished and ill favoured sacrifice; see Mal_1:8.

HENRY, "Here is, I. A law for preserving the honour of God's worship, by providing that no creature that had any blemish should be offered in sacrifice to him, Deu_17:1. This caveat we have often met with: Thou shalt not sacrifice that which has any blemish, which renders it unsightly, or any evil matter or thing (as the following word night better be rendered), any sickness or weakness, though not discernible at first view; it is an abomination to God. God is the best of beings, and

1

therefore whatsoever he is served with ought to be the best in its kind. And the Old Testament sacrifices in a special manner must be so, because they were types of Christ, who is a Lamb without blemish or spot (1Pe_1:19), perfectly pure from all sin and all appearance of it. In the latter times of the Jewish church, when by the captivity in Babylon they were cured of idolatry, yet they were charged with profaneness in the breach of this law, with offering the blind, and the lame, and the sick for sacrifice, Mal_1:8.

JAMISON, "Deu_17:1. Things sacrificed must be sound.

Thou shalt not sacrifice ... any bullock, or sheep, wherein is blemish — Under the name of bullock were comprehended bulls, cows, and calves; under that of sheep, rams, lambs, kids, he- and she-goats. An ox, from mutilation, was inadmissible. The qualifications required in animals destined for sacrifice are described (Exo_12:5; Lev_1:3).

K&D, "Not only did the inclination to nature-worship, such as the setting up of the idols of Ashera and Baal, belong to the crimes which merited punishment, but also a manifest transgression of the laws concerning the worship of Jehovah, such as the offering of an ox or sheep that had some fault, which was an abomination in the sight of Jehovah (see at Lev_22:20.). “Any evil thing,” i.e., any of the faults enumerated in Lev_22:22-24.

COFFMAN, "There is a brief reminder in Deuteronomy 17:1 that only perfect

sacrifices without spot or blemish are acceptable in the worship of God. There

follows a paragraph (Deuteronomy 17:2-7) on what to do with idolaters. Back in

Deuteronomy 13, Moses had told what to do with persons who seduced others

into idolatry; this tells what to do with the ones who were seduced! Deuteronomy

17:8-13 announce the provisions for a high court at the place of the central

Sanctuary. Rules for the election of a king are set forth in Deuteronomy

17:14-17, and instructions regarding the religious life of the king are laid down

in Deuteronomy 17:18-20.

"Thou shalt not sacrifice unto Jehovah thy God an ox, or a sheep, wherein is a

blemish, or anything evil; for that is an abomination unto Jehovah thy God."

This rule is repeated dozens of times throughout the previous books of Leviticus

and Numbers, but Israel needed it to be stressed frequently. Malachi has the

sordid record of how the priests were offering the blind and the lame and the

crippled sacrifices to God, and this among other sins, resulted in Jehovah's

cursing the Jewish priesthood (Malachi 2:2).

The lesson for all people today in such a passage as this is simply that God is

entitled to receive our very best, and that nothing short of that can be pleasing to

him. "There is always the temptation to offer the second best to Jehovah, which

2

is the common abiding temptation to cheapen religion."[1]

"Or anything evil ..." "This is a reference to the maims or faults enumerated in

Leviticus 22:22-24."[2]

ELLICOTT, "(1) Thou shalt not sacrifice . . .—The law concerning the purity of

victims is given in full in Leviticus 22:17-25. It takes its place there among the

special laws of holiness. The same principle appears to unite the several topics

treated here in Deuteronomy, as the holy days, the administration of justice, the

absence of groves and images, with such a precept as this regarding the

perfection of sacrifices. The holiness of the God of Israel necessitates them all.

Truth, justice, and purity are demanded in all that come nigh Him. The dignity

of His Kingdom is also concerned here. (See Introduction.)

Sheep.—The Hebrew word is sêh (on which see Deuteronomy 14:4, note). It may

be either a lamb or a kid.

The only time in history when the sacrifice of imperfect creatures is complained

of to any great extent is the time of the prophet Malachi (see Malachi 1:7-14).

The laxity of the priests in his time called forth the prophecy that “in every place

incense should be offered to God’s name and a pure offering."

K&D, "Not only did the inclination to nature-worship, such as the setting up of

the idols of Ashera and Baal, belong to the crimes which merited punishment,

but also a manifest transgression of the laws concerning the worship of Jehovah,

such as the offering of an ox or sheep that had some fault, which was an

abomination in the sight of Jehovah (see at Leviticus 22:20.). “Any evil thing,”

i.e., any of the faults enumerated in Leviticus 22:22-24.

PETT, "Introduction

The Covenant Stipulations, Covenant Making at Shechem, Blessings and

Cursings (Deuteronomy 12:1 to Deuteronomy 29:1).

In this section of Deuteronomy we first have a description of specific

requirements that Yahweh laid down for His people. These make up the second

part of the covenant stipulations for the covenant expressed in Deuteronomy

4:45 to Deuteronomy 29:1 and also for the covenant which makes up the whole

book. They are found in chapters 12-26. As we have seen Deuteronomy 1:1 to

Deuteronomy 4:44 provide the preamble and historical prologue for the overall

covenant, followed by the general stipulations in chapters 5-11. There now,

therefore, in 12-26 follow the detailed stipulations which complete the main body

of the covenant. These also continue the second speech of Moses which began in

Deuteronomy 5:1.

Overall in this speech Moses is concerned to connect with the people. It is to the

3

people that his words are spoken rather than the priests so that much of the

priestly legislation is simply assumed. Indeed it is remarkably absent in

Deuteronomy except where it directly touches on the people. Anyone who read

Deuteronomy on its own would wonder at the lack of cultic material it contained,

and at how much the people were involved. It concentrates on their interests, and

not those of the priests and Levites, while acknowledging the responsibility that

they had towards both priests and Levites.

And even where the cultic legislation more specifically connects with the people,

necessary detail is not given, simply because he was aware that they already had

it in writing elsewhere. Their knowledge of it is assumed. Deuteronomy is

building on a foundation already laid. In it Moses was more concerned to get

over special aspects of the legislation as it was specifically affected by entry into

the land, with the interests of the people especially in mind. The suggestion that

it was later written in order to bring home a new law connected with the Temple

does not fit in with the facts. Without the remainder of the covenant legislation in

Exodus/Leviticus/Numbers to back it up, its presentation often does not make

sense from a cultic point of view.

This is especially brought home by the fact that when he refers to their approach

to God he speaks of it in terms of where they themselves stood or will stand when

they do approach Him. They stand not on Sinai but in Horeb. They stand not in

the Sanctuary but in ‘the place’, the site of the Sanctuary. That is why he

emphasises Horeb, which included the area before the Mount, and not just Sinai

itself (which he does not mention). And why he speaks of ‘the place’ which

Yahweh chose, which includes where the Tabernacle is sited and where they

gather together around the Tabernacle, and not of the Sanctuary itself. He wants

them to feel that they have their full part in the whole.

These detailed stipulations in chapters 12-26 will then be followed by the details

of the covenant ceremony to take place at the place which Yahweh has chosen at

Shechem (Deuteronomy 27), followed by blessings and cursings to do with the

observance or breach of the covenant (Deuteronomy 28).

II. INSTRUCTION CONCERNING THE GOVERNING OF THE

COMMUNITY (Deuteronomy 16:18 to Deuteronomy 19:21).

Having established the principles of worship and religious response for the

community based on the dwellingplace where Yahweh would choose to establish

His name, Moses now moved on to various aspects of governing the community.

He had clearly been giving a great deal of thought to what would happen when

he had gone, and to that end had been meditating on God’s promises in Genesis

and the content of God’s Instruction (Torah).

Moses was doing here what he described himself as having done for the previous

4

generation (Deuteronomy 1:15-18). There he had established them with a system

of justice ready for entry into the land but they had refused to enter it when

Yahweh commanded. Now he was preparing their sons for entry into the land in

a similar way.

Justice was to be provided for in a number of ways:

1). By the appointment of satisfactory judges (Deuteronomy 16:18-20)

2). By rejecting Canaanite methods of justice (Deuteronomy 16:21-22). He

reiterated the necessity for the abolition of idolatry and religious impropriety,

and called for the judgment of it in the presence of witnesses (Deuteronomy

16:21 to Deuteronomy 17:7).

3). By setting up a final court of appeal. Here he dealt with what to do when

major judicial problems arose (Deuteronomy 17:8-13).

4). By legislating what kind of king to appoint when they wanted a king. At

present they had him. Shortly he would be replaced by Joshua. Then would come

a time when they needed another supreme leader and here he faced up to the

issue of possible kingship, an issue that, in view of certain prophecies revealed in

the patriarchal records (Genesis 17:6; Genesis 17:16; Genesis 35:11; Genesis

36:31) would certainly arise in the future, and which Balaam had recently drawn

attention to (Numbers 24:17) as on the horizon. Thus it needed to be legislated

for so that when the time came they might not appoint the wrong kind of king,

and especially they were to be guides as to the kind of king that they should

consider (Deuteronomy 17:14-20).

5). By providing for the sustenance of the priesthood and Levites who watch over

their spiritual welfare (Deuteronomy 18:1-8).

6). By warning against looking to the occult for guidance and promising instead

the coming of other prophets like himself (Deuteronomy 18:9-22).

But while we may see this as a separate unit it is not so in the Hebrew. As we

would expect in a speech not prepared by a trained orator it just goes smoothly

forward. ‘Thee, thou’ predominates as befits a section dealing with

commandments with an occasional subtle introduction of ‘ye, your’.

Chapter 17 Honouring Yahweh And Establishing True Justice.

The emphasis on right justice and right behaviour towards Yahweh has led on to

the banning of wooden Asherim and stone Pillars as an approach to God. The

mention of the Asherim and the Pillars leads on to other questions concerning

their approach to God and their attitude towards other gods, blemished offerings

and outright idolatry. That verse 1 connects with Deuteronomy 16:21-22 is

5

suggested by the three fold, ‘you shall not plant yourself an Asherah --- nor shall

you set up to yourself a pillar --- you shall not sacrifice to Yahweh your God an

ox or a sheep in which is a blemish’. These are three angles of one fact, that such

behaviour invalidates those who judge. In order to serve Yahweh it was

necessary to be true within.

(In this chapter, up to Deuteronomy 17:16 where it is ‘ye’ (in a quotation), the

singular ‘thou’ is used. After Deuteronomy 17:16 neither occurs).

Verse 1

Chapter 17 Honouring Yahweh And Establishing True Justice.

The emphasis on right justice and right behaviour towards Yahweh has led on to

the banning of wooden Asherim and stone Pillars as an approach to God. The

mention of the Asherim and the Pillars leads on to other questions concerning

their approach to God and their attitude towards other gods, blemished offerings

and outright idolatry. That verse 1 connects with Deuteronomy 16:21-22 is

suggested by the three fold, ‘you shall not plant yourself an Asherah --- nor shall

you set up to yourself a pillar --- you shall not sacrifice to Yahweh your God an

ox or a sheep in which is a blemish’. These are three angles of one fact, that such

behaviour invalidates those who judge. In order to serve Yahweh it was

necessary to be true within.

(In this chapter, up to Deuteronomy 17:16 where it is ‘ye’ (in a quotation), the

singular ‘thou’ is used. After Deuteronomy 17:16 neither occurs).

Nothing Must Be Offered To Yahweh Which Was Blemished (Deuteronomy

17:1).

Deuteronomy 17:1

‘You shall not sacrifice to Yahweh your God an ox, or a sheep, in which is a

blemish, or anything evil, for that is an abomination to Yahweh your God.’

Nothing must be brought to the altar of Yahweh which was blemished or evil.

This included the bringing and sacrificing of blemished animals, whether ox bull

or sheep, or animals with anything at all that could render them unsuitable. To

offer a blemished animal was as bad as introducing false religious symbols. It

was to treat Yahweh as though He could not see what was being offered, and

with unfeigned contempt. Compare Deuteronomy 15:21; Malachi 1:6-8. It would

put them in a condition where they were not fit to pass judgment, for they would

have demonstrated their duplicity. It would be ‘an abomination to Yahweh your

God’.

It is strange how easily even we think that we can deceive God. But we are only

6

deceiving ourselves. When we come to Him with our offerings we must recognise

that He knows precisely what is in our hearts.

HAWKER, "The subject of the divine laws is continued through this Chapter.

Moses under GOD'S authority, points out the unblemished state required of the

animals to be offered in sacrifice; of the punishment of idolaters: of controversies

in judgment: of the election of a king; and of special duties required of him.

Deuteronomy 17:1

I hope the Reader will not overlook, in the frequent notice which he must have

made in the several parts of Moses' writings, concerning the unblemished state of

the animals to be offered in sacrifice, how exceedingly concerned the HOLY

GHOST was, to direct the view of Israel to JESUS, the Lamb without blemish

and without spot. For as all the sacrifices of the Jews were types of him, nothing

can be more pointed than this one feature. Oh my soul, may it be never thy lot, to

offer the blind and the lame in sacrifice! Malachi 1:8.

BENSON, "Deuteronomy 17:1. Having spoken of the principal services and

offerings prescribed in the law for preventing the Israelites from idolatrous

practices, Moses interposes a caution against neglect or profaneness in their own

worship of the true God; which might be committed by offering any beast to him

that had a disease, blemish, or defect in it. See in Leviticus 1:3. Bullock or

sheep — Either greater or smaller sacrifices, all being comprehended under the

two most eminent kinds. All that God receives he requires to be perfect.

WHEDON, "1. Any evil favouredness — Literally, any evil thing. In Leviticus

22:22-24, the faults and blemishes which render the offering unacceptable are

enumerated. The investigation of charges of idolatry, and the punishment of the

guilty, are enjoined upon the magistrates. If a man or woman was charged with

idolatry, and the crime proved, the guilty one was to be led out to the gate and

stoned.

2 If a man or woman living among you in one of

the towns the Lord gives you is found doing evil

in the eyes of the Lord your God in violation of

his covenant,

7

BARNES 2-7, "Compare Deu_13:1 ff. Here special reference is made to the legal forms to be adopted, Deu_17:5-7. The sentence was to be carried into effect at “the gates” (compare Gen_19:1 note) of the town in which the crime was committed; because, as “all the people” were to take a part, an open space would be requisite for the execution. Note the typical and prophetical aspect of the injunction; compare Act_7:58; Heb_13:12.

GILL, "If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the Lord thy God giveth thee,.... In any of their cities in the land of Canaan:

man or woman that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the Lord thy God: as all that is wrought is in the sight of the omniscient God; here it means not any kind of wickedness, for there is none lives without committing sin of one sort or another, all which is known to God the searcher of hearts, but such wickedness as is after described:

in transgressing his covenant; that is, his law, and particularly the first table of it, which respects divine worship, and which is in the nature of a marriage contract or covenant; which, as that is transgressed by adultery committed by either party, so the covenant between God and Israel was transgressed by idolatry, which is spiritual adultery, and going a whoring after other gods, as it follows:

HENRY, "II. A law for the punishing of those that worshipped false gods. It was made a capital crime to seduce others to idolatry (ch. 13), here it is made no less to be seduced. If the blind thus mislead the blind, both must fall into the ditch. Thus God would possess them with a dread of that sin, which they must conclude exceedingly sinful when so many sanguinary laws were made against it, and would deter those from it that would not otherwise be persuaded against it; and yet the law, which works death, proved ineffectual. See here,

JAMISON 2-7, "Deu_17:2-7. Idolaters must be slain.

If there be found among you ... man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness — The grand object contemplated in choosing Israel was to preserve the knowledge and worship of the one true God; and hence idolatry of any kind, whether of the heavenly bodies or in some grosser form, is called “a transgression of His covenant.” No rank or sex could palliate this crime. Every reported case, even a flying rumor of the perpetration of so heinous an offense, was to be judicially examined; and if proved by the testimony of competent witnesses, the offender was to be taken without the gates and stoned to death, the witnesses casting the first stone at him. The object of this special arrangement was partly to deter the witnesses from making a rash accusation by the prominent part they had to act as executioners, and partly to give a public assurance that the crime had met its due punishment.

K&D 2-7, "If such a case should occur, as that a man or woman transgressed the covenant of the Lord and went after other gods and worshipped them; when it was made known, the facts were to be carefully inquired into; and if the charge were substantiated, the criminal was to be led out to the gate and stoned. On the testimony

8

of two or three witnesses, not of one only, he was to be put to death (see at Num_35:30); and the hand of the witnesses was to be against him first to put him to death, i.e., to throw the first stones at him, and all the people were to follow. With regard to the different kinds of idolatry in Deu_17:3, see Deu_4:19. (On Deu_17:4, see Deu_13:15.) “Bring him out to thy gates,” i.e., to one of the gates of the town in which the crime was committed. By the gates we are to understand the open space near the gates, where the judicial proceedings took place (cf. Neh_8:1, Neh_8:3; Job. Deu_29:7), the sentence itself being executed outside the town (cf. Deu_22:24; Act_7:58; Heb_13:12), just as it had been outside the camp during the journey through the wilderness (Lev_24:14; Num_15:36), to indicate the exclusion of the criminal from the congregation, and from fellowship with God. The infliction of punishment in Deu_17:5. is like that prescribed in Deu_13:10-11, for those who tempted others to idolatry; with this exception, that the testimony of more than one witness was required before the sentence could be executed, and the witnesses were to be the first to lift up their hands against the criminal to stone him, that they might thereby give a practical proof of the truth of their statement, and their own firm conviction that the condemned was deserving of death, - “a rule which would naturally lead to the supposition that no man would come forward as a witness without the fullest certainty or the greatest depravity” (Schnell, das isr. Recht).

(Note: “He assigned this part to the witnesses, chiefly because there are so many whose tongue is so slippery, not to say good for nothing, that they would boldly strangle a man with their words, when they would not dare to touch him with one of their fingers. It was the best remedy, therefore, that could be tried for restraining such levity, to refuse to admit the testimony of any man who was not ready to execute judgment with his own hand” (Calvin).)

ה�ת (Deu_17:6), the man exposed to death, who was therefore really ipso facto

already dead. “So shalt thou put the evil away,” etc.: cf. Deu_13:6.

CALVIN, "2.If there be found among you. The same punishment is here decreed

against idolaters, to which apostates had been before condemned; and thus either

transgression is declared a capital crime. Hence we gather that it is accounted before

God no less weighty a sin to violate His worship by gross and impure superstitions, than

openly and professedly to fall away from religion altogether. Thus in Ezekiel 20:39, He

bids farewell to the Jews, and as it were emancipates them, that they may go every one

after his idols, when they are no longer contented with Him alone. Whilst God,

however, is so rigid an exactor of punishment, He would not have judgment pronounced

precipitately. These are tokens of severity, that a woman as well as a man is to be slain;

that the whole people should unite in stoning them; that the evil should be removed

from the midst of the land, lest the abomination should continue unpunished. On the

other hand moderation is to be observed, since diligent inquiry is to be made, nor is

sentence to be pronounced unless the matter is fully proved; and again, that the trial

may be lawful, the accusation of one man is not to convict the accused. God therefore

would not have the judges, under pretext of zeal, shed blood inconsiderately; but only,

after mature inquiry, the criminal was to be punished in proportion to his

transgression. By synecdoche he speaks of their cities under the name of “gates,” and

alludes to the land having been “given” them, that they might not shew their want of

gratitude to God by profaning it. He marks too the heinous nature of the offense, by

9

calling it the “transgressing of God’s covenant;” as much as to say that all who go aside

unto idols are covenant-breakers. For the thief, and the fornicator, and the drunkard,

and such like transgress the Law indeed, but still are not placed in this category. In fine,

it is not simple impiety which is here punished, but the perfidy whereby true religion is

forsaken, after men have devoted themselves to God, and professed themselves to be of

the number of His people. The repetition of the words “that man or that woman,” more

fully confirms what I have said, viz., that although the weakness of the female sex may

extenuate their guilt, yet must they not be pardoned in such a case as this, where God’s

worship is directly violated. Although mention is only made of the sun, and moon, and

stars, the same thing applies to images also; nay, inasmuch as it is baser to transfer

God’s honor to dead stones or stocks, than to those constellations in which something

divine shines forth, so much more detestable are they who plunge themselves into such

stupidity.

COFFMAN, "In all ages, disloyalty to the central government has been counted

as treason, incurring the most severe penalty. Here, the worship of some other

God, other than Jehovah, was high treason, therefore meriting the punishment

prescribed.

Note that the precautions taken here against false accusations have been

honored, in some instances, throughout history. The requirement that the

witnesses themselves should "cast the first stone," taking an active part in the

execution of the condemned must have been a very effective deterrent against

false charges, because as John Calvin put it:

"There are so many whose tongues are so slippery, not to say good for nothing,

that they would boldly strangle a man with their words, when they would not

dare to touch him with one of their fingers. It was an excellent remedy against

false testimony, therefore, to refuse to admit the testimony of any man who was

not ready to execute judgment with his own hand."[3]

"Unto thy gates ..." (Deuteronomy 17:5). "`Gates' here means the open spaces

near the gates where the judicial proceedings took place (Nehemiah 8:1,3; Job

29:7)."[4] Thus, criminals were executed "outside the camp" in the period of the

wanderings, and outside the city in later times. This was considered to be very

significant among the Hebrews. Stephen was stoned outside the city (Acts 7:58),

and even our Lord Jesus Christ "suffered without (outside) the camp" (Hebrews

13:12).

The stern commandments here to put idolaters to death is frowned upon by some

whose misguided notions about "a God of love" cause them to criticize a passage

such as this. It is true, of course, that Ezekiel wrote, "I have no pleasure in the

death of him that dieth, saith the Lord God" (Ezekiel 18:32).

"Capital punishment of idolaters was not a desirable thing per se, but it was

enjoined out of regard to the welfare of the whole nation and the security of the

10

central government. God was the King of Israel, and the worship of another God

was simply high treason, thus deserving the most severe penalty."

ELLICOTT, "(2) If there be found . . . man or woman.—This section differs

slightly from the third section of Deuteronomy 13. The penalty there is directed

against the teachers of idolatry, whether prophets, private individuals, or

communities in Israel. Here the penalty of death is enacted for every individual,

man or woman, found guilty of worshipping any other god but Jehovah. We find

traces of this law in the covenant made in the reign of Asa (2 Chronicles 15:13),

“that whosoever would not seek the Lord God of Israel should be put to death,

whether small or great, whether man or woman.

K&D 2-7, "If such a case should occur, as that a man or woman transgressed the

covenant of the Lord and went after other gods and worshipped them; when it

was made known, the facts were to be carefully inquired into; and if the charge

were substantiated, the criminal was to be led out to the gate and stoned. On the

testimony of two or three witnesses, not of one only, he was to be put to death

(see at Numbers 35:30); and the hand of the witnesses was to be against him first

to put him to death, i.e., to throw the first stones at him, and all the people were

to follow. With regard to the different kinds of idolatry in Deuteronomy 17:3, see

Deuteronomy 4:19. (On Deuteronomy 17:4, see Deuteronomy 13:15.) “Bring him

out to thy gates,” i.e., to one of the gates of the town in which the crime was

committed. By the gates we are to understand the open space near the gates,

where the judicial proceedings took place (cf. Nehemiah 8:1, Nehemiah 8:3; Job.

Deuteronomy 29:7), the sentence itself being executed outside the town (cf.

Deuteronomy 22:24; Acts 7:58; Hebrews 13:12), just as it had been outside the

camp during the journey through the wilderness (Leviticus 24:14; Numbers

15:36), to indicate the exclusion of the criminal from the congregation, and from

fellowship with God. The infliction of punishment in Deuteronomy 17:5. is like

that prescribed in Deuteronomy 13:10-11, for those who tempted others to

idolatry; with this exception, that the testimony of more than one witness was

required before the sentence could be executed, and the witnesses were to be the

first to lift up their hands against the criminal to stone him, that they might

thereby give a practical proof of the truth of their statement, and their own firm

conviction that the condemned was deserving of death, - “a rule which would

naturally lead to the supposition that no man would come forward as a witness

without the fullest certainty or the greatest depravity” (Schnell, das isr. Recht).

(Note: “He assigned this part to the witnesses, chiefly because there are so many

whose tongue is so slippery, not to say good for nothing, that they would boldly

strangle a man with their words, when they would not dare to touch him with

one of their fingers. It was the best remedy, therefore, that could be tried for

restraining such levity, to refuse to admit the testimony of any man who was not

11

ready to execute judgment with his own hand” (Calvin).)

תמה (Deuteronomy 17:6), the man exposed to death, who was therefore really

ipso facto already dead. “So�shalt�thou�put�the�evil�away,So�shalt�thou�put�the�evil�away,So�shalt�thou�put�the�evil�away,So�shalt�thou�put�the�evil�away,” etc.:�cf.�Deuteronomy�etc.:�cf.�Deuteronomy�etc.:�cf.�Deuteronomy�etc.:�cf.�Deuteronomy�

13:613:613:613:6....

PETT,�"Verses�PETT,�"Verses�PETT,�"Verses�PETT,�"Verses�2222----7777

Anyone�Found�Worshipping�Other�Gods�Was�To�Be�Stoned�To�Death,�But�Only�Anyone�Found�Worshipping�Other�Gods�Was�To�Be�Stoned�To�Death,�But�Only�Anyone�Found�Worshipping�Other�Gods�Was�To�Be�Stoned�To�Death,�But�Only�Anyone�Found�Worshipping�Other�Gods�Was�To�Be�Stoned�To�Death,�But�Only�

After�Careful�Enquiry�(Deuteronomy�After�Careful�Enquiry�(Deuteronomy�After�Careful�Enquiry�(Deuteronomy�After�Careful�Enquiry�(Deuteronomy�17:217:217:217:2----7777).).).).

The�reference�to�the�abominations�of�Asherah,�Pillar�and�blemished�offerings�leads�The�reference�to�the�abominations�of�Asherah,�Pillar�and�blemished�offerings�leads�The�reference�to�the�abominations�of�Asherah,�Pillar�and�blemished�offerings�leads�The�reference�to�the�abominations�of�Asherah,�Pillar�and�blemished�offerings�leads�

on�the�thought�of�all�idolatry.�The�worshipping�of�other�gods�was�a�capital�offence,�on�the�thought�of�all�idolatry.�The�worshipping�of�other�gods�was�a�capital�offence,�on�the�thought�of�all�idolatry.�The�worshipping�of�other�gods�was�a�capital�offence,�on�the�thought�of�all�idolatry.�The�worshipping�of�other�gods�was�a�capital�offence,�

but�it�was�necessary�that�the�charge�was�proved�to�be�genuinely�true.�Charging�but�it�was�necessary�that�the�charge�was�proved�to�be�genuinely�true.�Charging�but�it�was�necessary�that�the�charge�was�proved�to�be�genuinely�true.�Charging�but�it�was�necessary�that�the�charge�was�proved�to�be�genuinely�true.�Charging�

people�with�blasphemy�on�false�grounds�has�been�the�curse�of�religion�throughout�people�with�blasphemy�on�false�grounds�has�been�the�curse�of�religion�throughout�people�with�blasphemy�on�false�grounds�has�been�the�curse�of�religion�throughout�people�with�blasphemy�on�false�grounds�has�been�the�curse�of�religion�throughout�

history�and�is�sadly�often�the�result�of�a�deeply�religious�bent.�The�Pharisees�and�history�and�is�sadly�often�the�result�of�a�deeply�religious�bent.�The�Pharisees�and�history�and�is�sadly�often�the�result�of�a�deeply�religious�bent.�The�Pharisees�and�history�and�is�sadly�often�the�result�of�a�deeply�religious�bent.�The�Pharisees�and�

Sadducees�did�it�to�Jesus.�It�is�equally�to�be�condemned�between�denominations,�Sadducees�did�it�to�Jesus.�It�is�equally�to�be�condemned�between�denominations,�Sadducees�did�it�to�Jesus.�It�is�equally�to�be�condemned�between�denominations,�Sadducees�did�it�to�Jesus.�It�is�equally�to�be�condemned�between�denominations,�

although�it�is�right�that�genuine�blasphemy�be�so�condemned.�The�point�here�is�that�although�it�is�right�that�genuine�blasphemy�be�so�condemned.�The�point�here�is�that�although�it�is�right�that�genuine�blasphemy�be�so�condemned.�The�point�here�is�that�although�it�is�right�that�genuine�blasphemy�be�so�condemned.�The�point�here�is�that�

it�must�first�be�genuinely�proved.�Then�it�would�result�in�the�death�penalty.it�must�first�be�genuinely�proved.�Then�it�would�result�in�the�death�penalty.it�must�first�be�genuinely�proved.�Then�it�would�result�in�the�death�penalty.it�must�first�be�genuinely�proved.�Then�it�would�result�in�the�death�penalty.

Analysis�in�the�words�of�Moses:Analysis�in�the�words�of�Moses:Analysis�in�the�words�of�Moses:Analysis�in�the�words�of�Moses:

aaaa If�there�be�found�in�the�midst�of�you,�within�any�of�your�gates�which�Yahweh�If�there�be�found�in�the�midst�of�you,�within�any�of�your�gates�which�Yahweh�If�there�be�found�in�the�midst�of�you,�within�any�of�your�gates�which�Yahweh�If�there�be�found�in�the�midst�of�you,�within�any�of�your�gates�which�Yahweh�

your�God�gives�you,�man�or�woman�who�does�that�which�is�evil�in�the�sight�of�your�God�gives�you,�man�or�woman�who�does�that�which�is�evil�in�the�sight�of�your�God�gives�you,�man�or�woman�who�does�that�which�is�evil�in�the�sight�of�your�God�gives�you,�man�or�woman�who�does�that�which�is�evil�in�the�sight�of�

Yahweh�your�God,�in�transgressing�his�covenant�and�has�gone�and�served�other�Yahweh�your�God,�in�transgressing�his�covenant�and�has�gone�and�served�other�Yahweh�your�God,�in�transgressing�his�covenant�and�has�gone�and�served�other�Yahweh�your�God,�in�transgressing�his�covenant�and�has�gone�and�served�other�

gods,�and�worshipped�them,�or�the�sun,�or�the�moon,�or�any�of�the�host�of�heaven,�gods,�and�worshipped�them,�or�the�sun,�or�the�moon,�or�any�of�the�host�of�heaven,�gods,�and�worshipped�them,�or�the�sun,�or�the�moon,�or�any�of�the�host�of�heaven,�gods,�and�worshipped�them,�or�the�sun,�or�the�moon,�or�any�of�the�host�of�heaven,�

which�I�have�not�commanded�(Deuteronomy�which�I�have�not�commanded�(Deuteronomy�which�I�have�not�commanded�(Deuteronomy�which�I�have�not�commanded�(Deuteronomy�17:217:217:217:2----3333).).).).

bbbb And�it�be�told�you,�and�you�have�heard�of�it,�then�shall�you�enquire�And�it�be�told�you,�and�you�have�heard�of�it,�then�shall�you�enquire�And�it�be�told�you,�and�you�have�heard�of�it,�then�shall�you�enquire�And�it�be�told�you,�and�you�have�heard�of�it,�then�shall�you�enquire�

diligently,�and,�behold,�if�it�be�true,�and�the�thing�certain,�that�such�abomination�is�diligently,�and,�behold,�if�it�be�true,�and�the�thing�certain,�that�such�abomination�is�diligently,�and,�behold,�if�it�be�true,�and�the�thing�certain,�that�such�abomination�is�diligently,�and,�behold,�if�it�be�true,�and�the�thing�certain,�that�such�abomination�is�

wrought�in�Israel�(Deuteronomy�wrought�in�Israel�(Deuteronomy�wrought�in�Israel�(Deuteronomy�wrought�in�Israel�(Deuteronomy�17:417:417:417:4).).).).

bbbb Then�shall�you�bring�forth�that�man�or�that�woman,�who�has�done�this�evil�Then�shall�you�bring�forth�that�man�or�that�woman,�who�has�done�this�evil�Then�shall�you�bring�forth�that�man�or�that�woman,�who�has�done�this�evil�Then�shall�you�bring�forth�that�man�or�that�woman,�who�has�done�this�evil�

thing,�to�your�gates,�even�the�man�or�the�woman,�and�you�shall�stone�them�to�death�thing,�to�your�gates,�even�the�man�or�the�woman,�and�you�shall�stone�them�to�death�thing,�to�your�gates,�even�the�man�or�the�woman,�and�you�shall�stone�them�to�death�thing,�to�your�gates,�even�the�man�or�the�woman,�and�you�shall�stone�them�to�death�

12

with�stones�(Deuteronomy�with�stones�(Deuteronomy�with�stones�(Deuteronomy�with�stones�(Deuteronomy�17:517:517:517:5).).).).

aaaa At�the�mouth�of�two�witnesses,�or�three�witnesses,�shall�he�that�is�to�die�be�At�the�mouth�of�two�witnesses,�or�three�witnesses,�shall�he�that�is�to�die�be�At�the�mouth�of�two�witnesses,�or�three�witnesses,�shall�he�that�is�to�die�be�At�the�mouth�of�two�witnesses,�or�three�witnesses,�shall�he�that�is�to�die�be�

put�to�death.�At�the�mouth�of�one�witness�he�shall�not�be�put�to�death.�The�hand�of�put�to�death.�At�the�mouth�of�one�witness�he�shall�not�be�put�to�death.�The�hand�of�put�to�death.�At�the�mouth�of�one�witness�he�shall�not�be�put�to�death.�The�hand�of�put�to�death.�At�the�mouth�of�one�witness�he�shall�not�be�put�to�death.�The�hand�of�

the�witnesses�shall�be�first�on�him�to�put�him�to�death,�and�afterwards�the�hand�of�the�witnesses�shall�be�first�on�him�to�put�him�to�death,�and�afterwards�the�hand�of�the�witnesses�shall�be�first�on�him�to�put�him�to�death,�and�afterwards�the�hand�of�the�witnesses�shall�be�first�on�him�to�put�him�to�death,�and�afterwards�the�hand�of�

all�the�people.�So�you�will�put�away�the�evil�from�the�midst�of�you�(Deuteronomy�all�the�people.�So�you�will�put�away�the�evil�from�the�midst�of�you�(Deuteronomy�all�the�people.�So�you�will�put�away�the�evil�from�the�midst�of�you�(Deuteronomy�all�the�people.�So�you�will�put�away�the�evil�from�the�midst�of�you�(Deuteronomy�

17:617:617:617:6----7777).).).).

Note�that�inNote�that�inNote�that�inNote�that�in ‘aaaa’ the�person�is�found�within�their�gates�transgressing�the�covenant�the�person�is�found�within�their�gates�transgressing�the�covenant�the�person�is�found�within�their�gates�transgressing�the�covenant�the�person�is�found�within�their�gates�transgressing�the�covenant�

and�doing�evil�in�the�eyes�of�Yahweh�their�God�by�worshipping�other�gods,�(thus�and�doing�evil�in�the�eyes�of�Yahweh�their�God�by�worshipping�other�gods,�(thus�and�doing�evil�in�the�eyes�of�Yahweh�their�God�by�worshipping�other�gods,�(thus�and�doing�evil�in�the�eyes�of�Yahweh�their�God�by�worshipping�other�gods,�(thus�

what�they�have�done�has�been�witnessed),�then�at�the�mouths�of�at�least�two�what�they�have�done�has�been�witnessed),�then�at�the�mouths�of�at�least�two�what�they�have�done�has�been�witnessed),�then�at�the�mouths�of�at�least�two�what�they�have�done�has�been�witnessed),�then�at�the�mouths�of�at�least�two�

witnesses�they�must�be�put�to�death,�the�witnesses�throwing�the�first�stones,�witnesses�they�must�be�put�to�death,�the�witnesses�throwing�the�first�stones,�witnesses�they�must�be�put�to�death,�the�witnesses�throwing�the�first�stones,�witnesses�they�must�be�put�to�death,�the�witnesses�throwing�the�first�stones,�

followed�by�the�people.�This�common�action�will�remove�the�evil�from�among�them.�followed�by�the�people.�This�common�action�will�remove�the�evil�from�among�them.�followed�by�the�people.�This�common�action�will�remove�the�evil�from�among�them.�followed�by�the�people.�This�common�action�will�remove�the�evil�from�among�them.�

InInInIn ‘bbbb’ the�enquiry�must�be�detailed�and�fair,�but�if�the�thing�is�certain,�then�in�the�the�enquiry�must�be�detailed�and�fair,�but�if�the�thing�is�certain,�then�in�the�the�enquiry�must�be�detailed�and�fair,�but�if�the�thing�is�certain,�then�in�the�the�enquiry�must�be�detailed�and�fair,�but�if�the�thing�is�certain,�then�in�the�

parallel�they�must�be�brought�to�their�gates�and�stoned�to�death.parallel�they�must�be�brought�to�their�gates�and�stoned�to�death.parallel�they�must�be�brought�to�their�gates�and�stoned�to�death.parallel�they�must�be�brought�to�their�gates�and�stoned�to�death.

PETT,�"Deuteronomy�PETT,�"Deuteronomy�PETT,�"Deuteronomy�PETT,�"Deuteronomy�17:217:217:217:2----3333

‘If�there�be�found�in�the�midst�of�you,�within�any�of�your�gates�which�Yahweh�your�If�there�be�found�in�the�midst�of�you,�within�any�of�your�gates�which�Yahweh�your�If�there�be�found�in�the�midst�of�you,�within�any�of�your�gates�which�Yahweh�your�If�there�be�found�in�the�midst�of�you,�within�any�of�your�gates�which�Yahweh�your�

God�gives�you,�man�or�woman�who�does�that�which�is�evil�in�the�sight�of�Yahweh�God�gives�you,�man�or�woman�who�does�that�which�is�evil�in�the�sight�of�Yahweh�God�gives�you,�man�or�woman�who�does�that�which�is�evil�in�the�sight�of�Yahweh�God�gives�you,�man�or�woman�who�does�that�which�is�evil�in�the�sight�of�Yahweh�

your�God,�in�transgressing�his�covenant,�and�has�gone�and�served�other�gods,�and�your�God,�in�transgressing�his�covenant,�and�has�gone�and�served�other�gods,�and�your�God,�in�transgressing�his�covenant,�and�has�gone�and�served�other�gods,�and�your�God,�in�transgressing�his�covenant,�and�has�gone�and�served�other�gods,�and�

worshipped�them,�or�the�sun,�or�the�moon,�or�any�of�the�host�of�heaven,�which�I�worshipped�them,�or�the�sun,�or�the�moon,�or�any�of�the�host�of�heaven,�which�I�worshipped�them,�or�the�sun,�or�the�moon,�or�any�of�the�host�of�heaven,�which�I�worshipped�them,�or�the�sun,�or�the�moon,�or�any�of�the�host�of�heaven,�which�I�

have�not�commanded,have�not�commanded,have�not�commanded,have�not�commanded,’

What�had�been�previously�mentioned�brought�home�the�dangers�of�idolatry,�and�in�What�had�been�previously�mentioned�brought�home�the�dangers�of�idolatry,�and�in�What�had�been�previously�mentioned�brought�home�the�dangers�of�idolatry,�and�in�What�had�been�previously�mentioned�brought�home�the�dangers�of�idolatry,�and�in�

the�context�of�words�about�establishing�justice�he�now�illustrated�the�approach�that�the�context�of�words�about�establishing�justice�he�now�illustrated�the�approach�that�the�context�of�words�about�establishing�justice�he�now�illustrated�the�approach�that�the�context�of�words�about�establishing�justice�he�now�illustrated�the�approach�that�

must�be�taken�in�all�legal�decisions�by�using�idolatry�as�an�example,�while�at�the�must�be�taken�in�all�legal�decisions�by�using�idolatry�as�an�example,�while�at�the�must�be�taken�in�all�legal�decisions�by�using�idolatry�as�an�example,�while�at�the�must�be�taken�in�all�legal�decisions�by�using�idolatry�as�an�example,�while�at�the�

same�time�again�condemning�it�absolutely.same�time�again�condemning�it�absolutely.same�time�again�condemning�it�absolutely.same�time�again�condemning�it�absolutely.

Suppose�there�was�found�among�them,�within�the�cities�thatSuppose�there�was�found�among�them,�within�the�cities�thatSuppose�there�was�found�among�them,�within�the�cities�thatSuppose�there�was�found�among�them,�within�the�cities�that ‘Yahweh�had�given�Yahweh�had�given�Yahweh�had�given�Yahweh�had�given�

themthemthemthem’,�(cities�therefore�holy�to�Him�as�the�camp�had�been),�a�man�or�woman�who�,�(cities�therefore�holy�to�Him�as�the�camp�had�been),�a�man�or�woman�who�,�(cities�therefore�holy�to�Him�as�the�camp�had�been),�a�man�or�woman�who�,�(cities�therefore�holy�to�Him�as�the�camp�had�been),�a�man�or�woman�who�

did�evil�in�the�sight�of�Yahweh�and�who�was�transgressing�His�covenant�bydid�evil�in�the�sight�of�Yahweh�and�who�was�transgressing�His�covenant�bydid�evil�in�the�sight�of�Yahweh�and�who�was�transgressing�His�covenant�bydid�evil�in�the�sight�of�Yahweh�and�who�was�transgressing�His�covenant�by ‘going�going�going�going�

13

and�serving�other�gods,�and�worshipping�them,�or�the�sun,�or�the�moon,�or�any�of�and�serving�other�gods,�and�worshipping�them,�or�the�sun,�or�the�moon,�or�any�of�and�serving�other�gods,�and�worshipping�them,�or�the�sun,�or�the�moon,�or�any�of�and�serving�other�gods,�and�worshipping�them,�or�the�sun,�or�the�moon,�or�any�of�

the�host�of�heaven,�which�I�have�not�commandedthe�host�of�heaven,�which�I�have�not�commandedthe�host�of�heaven,�which�I�have�not�commandedthe�host�of�heaven,�which�I�have�not�commanded’....

The�thought�is�of�someone�engaged�in�false�worship,�but�this�time�they�had�gone�the�The�thought�is�of�someone�engaged�in�false�worship,�but�this�time�they�had�gone�the�The�thought�is�of�someone�engaged�in�false�worship,�but�this�time�they�had�gone�the�The�thought�is�of�someone�engaged�in�false�worship,�but�this�time�they�had�gone�the�

whole�way.�They�had�deserted�Yahweh�and�were�serving�other�gods�and�whole�way.�They�had�deserted�Yahweh�and�were�serving�other�gods�and�whole�way.�They�had�deserted�Yahweh�and�were�serving�other�gods�and�whole�way.�They�had�deserted�Yahweh�and�were�serving�other�gods�and�

worshipping�them.�This�included�the�worship�of�images�and�idols,�and�the�worship�worshipping�them.�This�included�the�worship�of�images�and�idols,�and�the�worship�worshipping�them.�This�included�the�worship�of�images�and�idols,�and�the�worship�worshipping�them.�This�included�the�worship�of�images�and�idols,�and�the�worship�

of�sun�or�moon�or�stars.of�sun�or�moon�or�stars.of�sun�or�moon�or�stars.of�sun�or�moon�or�stars.

The�worship�of�the�sun�was�unquestionably�practised�in�Canaan,�for�at�least�one�city�The�worship�of�the�sun�was�unquestionably�practised�in�Canaan,�for�at�least�one�city�The�worship�of�the�sun�was�unquestionably�practised�in�Canaan,�for�at�least�one�city�The�worship�of�the�sun�was�unquestionably�practised�in�Canaan,�for�at�least�one�city�

was�namedwas�namedwas�namedwas�named ‘the�house�of�Shemeshthe�house�of�Shemeshthe�house�of�Shemeshthe�house�of�Shemesh’ (Bethshemesh),�while�in�Egypt�Ra�or�Aten�were�(Bethshemesh),�while�in�Egypt�Ra�or�Aten�were�(Bethshemesh),�while�in�Egypt�Ra�or�Aten�were�(Bethshemesh),�while�in�Egypt�Ra�or�Aten�were�

sun�gods�who�were�seen�as�profoundly�affecting�things�day�by�day�(and�in�unseen�sun�gods�who�were�seen�as�profoundly�affecting�things�day�by�day�(and�in�unseen�sun�gods�who�were�seen�as�profoundly�affecting�things�day�by�day�(and�in�unseen�sun�gods�who�were�seen�as�profoundly�affecting�things�day�by�day�(and�in�unseen�

battles�at�night).�It�is�probable�that�Abrahambattles�at�night).�It�is�probable�that�Abrahambattles�at�night).�It�is�probable�that�Abrahambattles�at�night).�It�is�probable�that�Abraham’s�father�was�a�moons�father�was�a�moons�father�was�a�moons�father�was�a�moon----worshipper,�for�worshipper,�for�worshipper,�for�worshipper,�for�

Haran�was�a�centre�of�moonHaran�was�a�centre�of�moonHaran�was�a�centre�of�moonHaran�was�a�centre�of�moon----worship,�and�in�Egypt�Thoth�was�at�one�time�a�moon�worship,�and�in�Egypt�Thoth�was�at�one�time�a�moon�worship,�and�in�Egypt�Thoth�was�at�one�time�a�moon�worship,�and�in�Egypt�Thoth�was�at�one�time�a�moon�

god.�In�Canaan�Yerah�was�the�moon�god,�possibly�worshipped�atgod.�In�Canaan�Yerah�was�the�moon�god,�possibly�worshipped�atgod.�In�Canaan�Yerah�was�the�moon�god,�possibly�worshipped�atgod.�In�Canaan�Yerah�was�the�moon�god,�possibly�worshipped�at ‘YeriYeriYeriYeri----chochochocho’

(Jericho).�The�term(Jericho).�The�term(Jericho).�The�term(Jericho).�The�term ‘host�of�heavenhost�of�heavenhost�of�heavenhost�of�heaven’ was�well�known�in�Israel�(see�was�well�known�in�Israel�(see�was�well�known�in�Israel�(see�was�well�known�in�Israel�(see�1�1�1�1�Kings�Kings�Kings�Kings�22:1922:1922:1922:19;�;�;�;�

compare�Deuteronomy�compare�Deuteronomy�compare�Deuteronomy�compare�Deuteronomy�33:233:233:233:2)�and�the�concept�as�old�as,�and�older�than,�Genesis�)�and�the�concept�as�old�as,�and�older�than,�Genesis�)�and�the�concept�as�old�as,�and�older�than,�Genesis�)�and�the�concept�as�old�as,�and�older�than,�Genesis�

32:232:232:232:2.�It�originally�referred�to�heavenly�beings.�But�every�night�men�around�the�.�It�originally�referred�to�heavenly�beings.�But�every�night�men�around�the�.�It�originally�referred�to�heavenly�beings.�But�every�night�men�around�the�.�It�originally�referred�to�heavenly�beings.�But�every�night�men�around�the�

world�would�look�up�and�see�the�stars,�and�various�aspects�of�them�would�be�world�would�look�up�and�see�the�stars,�and�various�aspects�of�them�would�be�world�would�look�up�and�see�the�stars,�and�various�aspects�of�them�would�be�world�would�look�up�and�see�the�stars,�and�various�aspects�of�them�would�be�

worshipped,�which�was�why�in�some�places�learned�men�tracked�their�movements.�worshipped,�which�was�why�in�some�places�learned�men�tracked�their�movements.�worshipped,�which�was�why�in�some�places�learned�men�tracked�their�movements.�worshipped,�which�was�why�in�some�places�learned�men�tracked�their�movements.�

So�recognition�of�them�as�YahwehSo�recognition�of�them�as�YahwehSo�recognition�of�them�as�YahwehSo�recognition�of�them�as�Yahweh’s�hosts,�an�easy�step�to�make,�could�easily�turn�to�s�hosts,�an�easy�step�to�make,�could�easily�turn�to�s�hosts,�an�easy�step�to�make,�could�easily�turn�to�s�hosts,�an�easy�step�to�make,�could�easily�turn�to�

worship�of�them�as�the�host�of�heaven.�Genesis�worship�of�them�as�the�host�of�heaven.�Genesis�worship�of�them�as�the�host�of�heaven.�Genesis�worship�of�them�as�the�host�of�heaven.�Genesis�1:16�1:16�1:16�1:16�with�itswith�itswith�itswith�its ‘and�made�the�stars�and�made�the�stars�and�made�the�stars�and�made�the�stars�

alsoalsoalsoalso’ would�appear�to�have�been�a�deliberate�attempt�to�play�the�stars�down.�would�appear�to�have�been�a�deliberate�attempt�to�play�the�stars�down.�would�appear�to�have�been�a�deliberate�attempt�to�play�the�stars�down.�would�appear�to�have�been�a�deliberate�attempt�to�play�the�stars�down.�

Worship�of�sun,�moon�and�stars�goes�back�into�the�mists�of�time.�They�had�a�Worship�of�sun,�moon�and�stars�goes�back�into�the�mists�of�time.�They�had�a�Worship�of�sun,�moon�and�stars�goes�back�into�the�mists�of�time.�They�had�a�Worship�of�sun,�moon�and�stars�goes�back�into�the�mists�of�time.�They�had�a�

fascination�for�men�and�were�mysteries�that�drew�menfascination�for�men�and�were�mysteries�that�drew�menfascination�for�men�and�were�mysteries�that�drew�menfascination�for�men�and�were�mysteries�that�drew�men’s�veneration.s�veneration.s�veneration.s�veneration.

By�so�worshipping�they�would�have�broken�the�covenant�and�done�what�Yahweh�By�so�worshipping�they�would�have�broken�the�covenant�and�done�what�Yahweh�By�so�worshipping�they�would�have�broken�the�covenant�and�done�what�Yahweh�By�so�worshipping�they�would�have�broken�the�covenant�and�done�what�Yahweh�

had�not�commanded.�Indeed�He�had�commanded�that�they�should�not�do�it.�They�had�not�commanded.�Indeed�He�had�commanded�that�they�should�not�do�it.�They�had�not�commanded.�Indeed�He�had�commanded�that�they�should�not�do�it.�They�had�not�commanded.�Indeed�He�had�commanded�that�they�should�not�do�it.�They�

must�therefore�face�the�judgment�of�His�justices�and�officials.must�therefore�face�the�judgment�of�His�justices�and�officials.must�therefore�face�the�judgment�of�His�justices�and�officials.must�therefore�face�the�judgment�of�His�justices�and�officials.

BENSON,�"Deuteronomy�BENSON,�"Deuteronomy�BENSON,�"Deuteronomy�BENSON,�"Deuteronomy�17:217:217:217:2.�In�transgressing�his�covenant.�In�transgressing�his�covenant.�In�transgressing�his�covenant.�In�transgressing�his�covenant — That�is,�in�idolatry,�That�is,�in�idolatry,�That�is,�in�idolatry,�That�is,�in�idolatry,�

as�it�is�explained�Deuteronomy�as�it�is�explained�Deuteronomy�as�it�is�explained�Deuteronomy�as�it�is�explained�Deuteronomy�17:317:317:317:3,�which�is�called�a�transgression�of�God,�which�is�called�a�transgression�of�God,�which�is�called�a�transgression�of�God,�which�is�called�a�transgression�of�God’s�s�s�s�

14

covenant�made�with�Israel,�both�because�it�was�a�breach�of�their�faith�given�to�God,�covenant�made�with�Israel,�both�because�it�was�a�breach�of�their�faith�given�to�God,�covenant�made�with�Israel,�both�because�it�was�a�breach�of�their�faith�given�to�God,�covenant�made�with�Israel,�both�because�it�was�a�breach�of�their�faith�given�to�God,�

and�of�that�law�which�they�covenanted�to�keep;�and�because�it�was�a�dissolution�of�and�of�that�law�which�they�covenanted�to�keep;�and�because�it�was�a�dissolution�of�and�of�that�law�which�they�covenanted�to�keep;�and�because�it�was�a�dissolution�of�and�of�that�law�which�they�covenanted�to�keep;�and�because�it�was�a�dissolution�of�

that�matrimonial�covenant�with�God,�a�renouncing�of�God�and�his�worship,�and�a�that�matrimonial�covenant�with�God,�a�renouncing�of�God�and�his�worship,�and�a�that�matrimonial�covenant�with�God,�a�renouncing�of�God�and�his�worship,�and�a�that�matrimonial�covenant�with�God,�a�renouncing�of�God�and�his�worship,�and�a�

choosing�other�gods.choosing�other�gods.choosing�other�gods.choosing�other�gods.

3�3�3�3�and�contrary�to�my�command�has�worshiped�and�contrary�to�my�command�has�worshiped�and�contrary�to�my�command�has�worshiped�and�contrary�to�my�command�has�worshiped�

other�gods,�bowing�down�to�them�or�to�the�sun�or�other�gods,�bowing�down�to�them�or�to�the�sun�or�other�gods,�bowing�down�to�them�or�to�the�sun�or�other�gods,�bowing�down�to�them�or�to�the�sun�or�

the�moon�or�the�stars�in�the�sky,the�moon�or�the�stars�in�the�sky,the�moon�or�the�stars�in�the�sky,the�moon�or�the�stars�in�the�sky,

GILL,�"And�hath�goneGILL,�"And�hath�goneGILL,�"And�hath�goneGILL,�"And�hath�gone,....�The�Targum�of�Jonathan�adds,�after�the�evil�imagination�or�

concupiscence,�lusting�after�other�lovers,�and�forsaking�the�true�God,�and�departing�from�his�

worship:

and�served�other�godsand�served�other�godsand�served�other�godsand�served�other�gods;�strange�gods,�the�idols�of�the�people,�other�gods�besides�the�true�

God;�the�creature�besides�the�Creator:

and�worshipped�themand�worshipped�themand�worshipped�themand�worshipped�them;�by�bowing�down�before�them,�praying�to�them,�or�ascribing�their�

mercies�and�blessings�to�them,�and�giving�them�the�glory�of�them:

either�the�sun,�or�moon,�or�any�of�the�host�of�heaveneither�the�sun,�or�moon,�or�any�of�the�host�of�heaveneither�the�sun,�or�moon,�or�any�of�the�host�of�heaveneither�the�sun,�or�moon,�or�any�of�the�host�of�heaven:�the�two�great�luminaries,�and�the�

planets,�constellations,�and�stars,�any�of�them;�which�kind�of�idolatry�very�early�obtained,�and�

was�in�use�at�this�time�among�the�Heathens,�and�was�an�iniquity�to�be�punished�by�the�judge,�

Job_31:26,�which�sin,�though�so�strictly�forbidden,�the�people�of�Israel�sometimes�fell�into,�

2Ki_21:3.

15

which�I�have�not�commandedwhich�I�have�not�commandedwhich�I�have�not�commandedwhich�I�have�not�commanded:�and�which�is�a�sufficient�reason,�in�matters�of�worship,�to�

avoid�and�abstain�from�anything,�that�God�has�not�commanded�it;�for�in�things�of�that�nature�

nothing�should�be�done�but�what�he�has�ordered,�who�is�a�jealous�God,�and�will�not�suffer�any�

to�take�upon�them�to�direct�what�should�be�done�as�a�religious�service�and�duty;�and�if�any�

are�so�presumptuous,�they�must�expect�it�will�be�resented;�see�Isa_1:12 and�especially�with�

respect�to�the�object�of�worship,�as�here,�and�which�relate�to�things�if�not�forbid�expressly,�yet�

tacitly,�to�do�which�was�an�abomination�to�the�Lord.

HENRY,�"HENRY,�"HENRY,�"HENRY,�"1.�What�the�crime�was�against�which�this�law�was�levelled,�serving�or�worshipping�

other�gods,�Deu_17:3.�That�which�was�the�most�ancient�and�plausible�idolatry�is�specified,�

worshipping�the�sun,�moon,�and�stars;�and,�if�that�was�so�detestable�a�thing,�much�more�was�it�

so�to�worship�stocks�and�stones,�or�the�representations�of�mean�and�contemptible�animals.�Of�

this�it�is�said,�(1.)�That�it�is�what�God�had�not�commanded.�He�had�again�and�again�forbidden�

it;�but�it�is�thus�expressed�to�intimate�that,�if�there�had�been�no�more�against�it,�this�had�been�

enough�(for�in�the�worship�of�God�his�institution�and�appointment�must�be�our�rule�and�

warrant),�and�that�God�never�commanded�his�worshippers�to�debase�themselves�so�far�as�to�

do�homage�to�their�fellow-creatures:�had�God�commanded�them�to�do�it,�they�might�justly�

have�complained�of�it�as�a�reproach�and�disparagement�to�them;�yet,�when�he�has�forbidden�

it,�they�will,�from�a�spirit�of�contradiction,�put�this�indignity�upon�themselves.�(2.)�That�it�is�

wickedness�in�the�sight�of�God,Deu_17:2.�Be�it�ever�so�industriously�concealed,�he�sees�it,�

and,�be�it�ever�so�ingeniously�palliated,�he�hates�it:�it�is�a�sin�in�itself�exceedingly�heinous,�and�

the�highest�affront�that�can�be�offered�to�Almighty�God.�(3.)�That�it�is�a�transgression�of�the�

covenant.�It�was�on�this�condition�that�God�took�them�to�be�his�peculiar�people,�that�they�

should�serve�and�worship�him�only�as�their�God,�so�that�if�they�gave�to�any�other�the�honour�

which�was�due�to�him�alone�that�covenant�was�void,�and�all�the�benefit�of�it�forfeited.�Other�

sins�were�transgressions�of�the�command,�but�this�was�a�transgression�of�the�covenant.�It�was�

spiritual�adultery,�which�breaks�them�marriage�bond.

CALVIN,�"CALVIN,�"CALVIN,�"CALVIN,�"4444.Then�three�shalt�inquire�(.Then�three�shalt�inquire�(.Then�three�shalt�inquire�(.Then�three�shalt�inquire�(307307307307)�diligently.�Although�this�moderation�here�)�diligently.�Although�this�moderation�here�)�diligently.�Although�this�moderation�here�)�diligently.�Although�this�moderation�here�

refers�only�to�the�present�matter,�yet�should�it�always�be�maintained�in�judicial�refers�only�to�the�present�matter,�yet�should�it�always�be�maintained�in�judicial�refers�only�to�the�present�matter,�yet�should�it�always�be�maintained�in�judicial�refers�only�to�the�present�matter,�yet�should�it�always�be�maintained�in�judicial�

proceedings,�lest�innocent�persons�should�be�treated�with�undue�severity.�Again,�we�must�proceedings,�lest�innocent�persons�should�be�treated�with�undue�severity.�Again,�we�must�proceedings,�lest�innocent�persons�should�be�treated�with�undue�severity.�Again,�we�must�proceedings,�lest�innocent�persons�should�be�treated�with�undue�severity.�Again,�we�must�

16

remember�what�I�have�said�elsewhere,�that�judges�are�here�not�only�restrained�from�remember�what�I�have�said�elsewhere,�that�judges�are�here�not�only�restrained�from�remember�what�I�have�said�elsewhere,�that�judges�are�here�not�only�restrained�from�remember�what�I�have�said�elsewhere,�that�judges�are�here�not�only�restrained�from�

precipitate�condemnation,�but�also�stimulated�to�beware�of�passing�over,�in�idleness�or�precipitate�condemnation,�but�also�stimulated�to�beware�of�passing�over,�in�idleness�or�precipitate�condemnation,�but�also�stimulated�to�beware�of�passing�over,�in�idleness�or�precipitate�condemnation,�but�also�stimulated�to�beware�of�passing�over,�in�idleness�or�

negligence,�anything�that�was�necessary�to�be�known.�For�they�often�fail�in�their�duty,�negligence,�anything�that�was�necessary�to�be�known.�For�they�often�fail�in�their�duty,�negligence,�anything�that�was�necessary�to�be�known.�For�they�often�fail�in�their�duty,�negligence,�anything�that�was�necessary�to�be�known.�For�they�often�fail�in�their�duty,�

because�they�wilfully�connive�at�guilt;�and�thus�that�which�would�be�manifest�if�they�would�because�they�wilfully�connive�at�guilt;�and�thus�that�which�would�be�manifest�if�they�would�because�they�wilfully�connive�at�guilt;�and�thus�that�which�would�be�manifest�if�they�would�because�they�wilfully�connive�at�guilt;�and�thus�that�which�would�be�manifest�if�they�would�

be�at�the�pains�to�make�more�diligent�inquiry,�does�not�come�to�light.�God,�then,�would�not�be�at�the�pains�to�make�more�diligent�inquiry,�does�not�come�to�light.�God,�then,�would�not�be�at�the�pains�to�make�more�diligent�inquiry,�does�not�come�to�light.�God,�then,�would�not�be�at�the�pains�to�make�more�diligent�inquiry,�does�not�come�to�light.�God,�then,�would�not�

have�them�slumber�nor�take�no�notice�of�sinister�reports,�but�rather�inquire�diligently�as�to�have�them�slumber�nor�take�no�notice�of�sinister�reports,�but�rather�inquire�diligently�as�to�have�them�slumber�nor�take�no�notice�of�sinister�reports,�but�rather�inquire�diligently�as�to�have�them�slumber�nor�take�no�notice�of�sinister�reports,�but�rather�inquire�diligently�as�to�

things�which�may�have�come�to�their�cars,�so�that�no�crime�may�remain�unpunished.�The�things�which�may�have�come�to�their�cars,�so�that�no�crime�may�remain�unpunished.�The�things�which�may�have�come�to�their�cars,�so�that�no�crime�may�remain�unpunished.�The�things�which�may�have�come�to�their�cars,�so�that�no�crime�may�remain�unpunished.�The�

same�is�the�case�as�to�witnesses;�for�whilst�it�would�be�unjust�to�pronounce�sentence�on�the�same�is�the�case�as�to�witnesses;�for�whilst�it�would�be�unjust�to�pronounce�sentence�on�the�same�is�the�case�as�to�witnesses;�for�whilst�it�would�be�unjust�to�pronounce�sentence�on�the�same�is�the�case�as�to�witnesses;�for�whilst�it�would�be�unjust�to�pronounce�sentence�on�the�

testimony�of�one�man,�still,�if�two�or�three�will�not�suffice,�there�would�be�no�end�to�testimony�of�one�man,�still,�if�two�or�three�will�not�suffice,�there�would�be�no�end�to�testimony�of�one�man,�still,�if�two�or�three�will�not�suffice,�there�would�be�no�end�to�testimony�of�one�man,�still,�if�two�or�three�will�not�suffice,�there�would�be�no�end�to�

litigation.�Fitly,�then,�has�God�prescribed�to�judges�both�that�they�shall�not�be�rashly�litigation.�Fitly,�then,�has�God�prescribed�to�judges�both�that�they�shall�not�be�rashly�litigation.�Fitly,�then,�has�God�prescribed�to�judges�both�that�they�shall�not�be�rashly�litigation.�Fitly,�then,�has�God�prescribed�to�judges�both�that�they�shall�not�be�rashly�

credulous,�and�yet�that�they�shall�be�content�with�the�lawful�number�of�witnesses;�but�this�credulous,�and�yet�that�they�shall�be�content�with�the�lawful�number�of�witnesses;�but�this�credulous,�and�yet�that�they�shall�be�content�with�the�lawful�number�of�witnesses;�but�this�credulous,�and�yet�that�they�shall�be�content�with�the�lawful�number�of�witnesses;�but�this�

point�will�be�more�largely�treated�of�elsewhere�in�commenting�both�on�the�Sixth�and�Ninth�point�will�be�more�largely�treated�of�elsewhere�in�commenting�both�on�the�Sixth�and�Ninth�point�will�be�more�largely�treated�of�elsewhere�in�commenting�both�on�the�Sixth�and�Ninth�point�will�be�more�largely�treated�of�elsewhere�in�commenting�both�on�the�Sixth�and�Ninth�

Commandments.Commandments.Commandments.Commandments.

ELLICOTT,�"(ELLICOTT,�"(ELLICOTT,�"(ELLICOTT,�"(3333)�Either�the�sun,�or�moon,�or�any�of�the�host�of�heaven.)�Either�the�sun,�or�moon,�or�any�of�the�host�of�heaven.)�Either�the�sun,�or�moon,�or�any�of�the�host�of�heaven.)�Either�the�sun,�or�moon,�or�any�of�the�host�of�heaven.—The�oldest�and�The�oldest�and�The�oldest�and�The�oldest�and�

simplest,�and�apparently�most�innocent�form�of�idolatry.�If�this�was�punishable�with�death,�simplest,�and�apparently�most�innocent�form�of�idolatry.�If�this�was�punishable�with�death,�simplest,�and�apparently�most�innocent�form�of�idolatry.�If�this�was�punishable�with�death,�simplest,�and�apparently�most�innocent�form�of�idolatry.�If�this�was�punishable�with�death,�

obviously�no�grosser�form�of�idolatry�could�be�spared.�The�Book�of�Job,�which�knows�no�obviously�no�grosser�form�of�idolatry�could�be�spared.�The�Book�of�Job,�which�knows�no�obviously�no�grosser�form�of�idolatry�could�be�spared.�The�Book�of�Job,�which�knows�no�obviously�no�grosser�form�of�idolatry�could�be�spared.�The�Book�of�Job,�which�knows�no�

other�idolatry,�admits�this�to�be�a�denialother�idolatry,�admits�this�to�be�a�denialother�idolatry,�admits�this�to�be�a�denialother�idolatry,�admits�this�to�be�a�denial “of�the�God�that�is�aboveof�the�God�that�is�aboveof�the�God�that�is�aboveof�the�God�that�is�above” (Job�(Job�(Job�(Job�31:2631:2631:2631:26----28282828).).).).

BENSON,�"Deuteronomy�BENSON,�"Deuteronomy�BENSON,�"Deuteronomy�BENSON,�"Deuteronomy�17:317:317:317:3.�The�host�of�heaven.�The�host�of�heaven.�The�host�of�heaven.�The�host�of�heaven — Those�glorious�creatures,�which�are�Those�glorious�creatures,�which�are�Those�glorious�creatures,�which�are�Those�glorious�creatures,�which�are�

to�be�admired�as�the�wonderful�works�of�God,�but�not�to�be�set�up�in�Godto�be�admired�as�the�wonderful�works�of�God,�but�not�to�be�set�up�in�Godto�be�admired�as�the�wonderful�works�of�God,�but�not�to�be�set�up�in�Godto�be�admired�as�the�wonderful�works�of�God,�but�not�to�be�set�up�in�God’s�stead.�By�s�stead.�By�s�stead.�By�s�stead.�By�

condemning�the�most�specious�of�all�idolatries,�he�intimates�how�absurd�a�thing�it�is�to�condemning�the�most�specious�of�all�idolatries,�he�intimates�how�absurd�a�thing�it�is�to�condemning�the�most�specious�of�all�idolatries,�he�intimates�how�absurd�a�thing�it�is�to�condemning�the�most�specious�of�all�idolatries,�he�intimates�how�absurd�a�thing�it�is�to�

worship�stocks�and�stones,�the�works�of�menworship�stocks�and�stones,�the�works�of�menworship�stocks�and�stones,�the�works�of�menworship�stocks�and�stones,�the�works�of�men’s�hands.�I�have�not�commandeds�hands.�I�have�not�commandeds�hands.�I�have�not�commandeds�hands.�I�have�not�commanded — That�is,�I�That�is,�I�That�is,�I�That�is,�I�

have�forbidden.�Such�negative�expressions�are�emphatical.have�forbidden.�Such�negative�expressions�are�emphatical.have�forbidden.�Such�negative�expressions�are�emphatical.have�forbidden.�Such�negative�expressions�are�emphatical.

4�4�4�4�and�this�has�been�brought�to�your�attention,�then�and�this�has�been�brought�to�your�attention,�then�and�this�has�been�brought�to�your�attention,�then�and�this�has�been�brought�to�your�attention,�then�

you�must�investigate�it�thoroughly.�If�it�is�true�and�you�must�investigate�it�thoroughly.�If�it�is�true�and�you�must�investigate�it�thoroughly.�If�it�is�true�and�you�must�investigate�it�thoroughly.�If�it�is�true�and�

it�has�been�proved�that�this�detestable�thing�has�it�has�been�proved�that�this�detestable�thing�has�it�has�been�proved�that�this�detestable�thing�has�it�has�been�proved�that�this�detestable�thing�has�

17

been�done�in�Israel,been�done�in�Israel,been�done�in�Israel,been�done�in�Israel,

CLARKE,�"If�it�be�told�thee�CLARKE,�"If�it�be�told�thee�CLARKE,�"If�it�be�told�thee�CLARKE,�"If�it�be�told�thee�---- In�a�private�way�by�any�confidential�person.�And�thou�hast�

heard�of�it;�so�that�it�appears�to�be�notorious,�very�likely�to�be�true,�and�publicly�scandalous.�

And�hast�inquired�diligently�- sought�to�find�out�the�truth�of�the�report�by�the�most�careful�

examination�of�persons�reporting,�circumstances�of�the�case,�etc.�And,�behold,�it�be�true�- the�

report�is�not�founded�on�vague�rumor,�hearsay,�or�malice.�And�the�thing�certain�-

substantiated�by�the�fullest�evidence.�Then�shalt�thou�bring�forth�that�man,�Deu_17:5.�As�the�

charge�of�idolatry�was�the�most�solemn�and�awful�that�could�be�brought�against�an�Israelite,�

because�it�affected�his�life,�therefore�God�required�that�the�charge�should�be�substantiated�by�

the�most�unequivocal�facts,�and�the�most�competent�witnesses.�Hence�all�the�precautions�

mentioned�in�the�fourth�verse�must�be�carefully�used,�in�order�to�arrive�at�so�affecting�and�so�

awful�a�truth.

GILL,�"And�it�be�told�thee,�and�thou�hast�heard�of�it,�and�inquired�diligentlyGILL,�"And�it�be�told�thee,�and�thou�hast�heard�of�it,�and�inquired�diligentlyGILL,�"And�it�be�told�thee,�and�thou�hast�heard�of�it,�and�inquired�diligentlyGILL,�"And�it�be�told�thee,�and�thou�hast�heard�of�it,�and�inquired�diligently,....�A�report�of�

this�kind�was�not�to�be�neglected;�though�it�was�not�to�be�concluded�upon�as�certain�by�

hearsay,�it�was�to�be�looked�into,�and�the�persons�that�brought�it�thoroughly�examined;�so�the�

Targum�of�Jonathan,"and�inquired�the�witnesses�well,''what�proof�and�evidence�they�could�

give�of�the�fact,�who�the�persons�were,�when�and�where,�and�in�what�manner�the�sin�was�

committed:

and,�behold,�and,�behold,�and,�behold,�and,�behold,�it�beit�beit�beit�be true,�true,�true,�true,�andandandand the�thing�certainthe�thing�certainthe�thing�certainthe�thing�certain;�upon�examining�the�witnesses�the�case�is�plain�

and�out�of�all�question:

that�such�abomination�is�wrought�in�Israelthat�such�abomination�is�wrought�in�Israelthat�such�abomination�is�wrought�in�Israelthat�such�abomination�is�wrought�in�Israel;�to�do�it�in�any�country�was�abominable,�but�much�

more�so�in�the�land�of�Israel,�among�the�professing�people�of�God,�who�had�the�knowledge�of�

the�true�God,�and�had�had�so�many�proofs�of�his�deity,�his�power�and�providence,�as�well�as�

received�so�many�favours�and�blessings�from�him,�and�had�such�laws�and�statutes�given�them�

as�no�other�people�had.

HENRY,�"HENRY,�"HENRY,�"HENRY,�"That�it�is�abomination�in�Israel,�Deu_17:4.�Idolatry�was�bad�enough�in�any,�but�

18

it�was�particularly�abominable�in�Israel,�a�people�so�blessed�with�peculiar�discoveries�of�the�

will�and�favour�of�the�only�true�and�living�God.

2.�How�it�must�be�tried.�Upon�information�given�of�it,�or�any�ground�of�suspicion�that�any�

person�whatsoever,�man�or�woman,�had�served�other�gods,�(1.)�Enquiry�must�be�made,�Deu_

17:4.�Though�it�appears�not�certain�at�first,�it�may�afterwards�upon�search�appear�so;�and,�if�it�

can�possibly�be�discovered,�it�must�not�be�unpunished;�if�not,�yet�the�very�enquiry�concerning�

it�would�possess�the�country�with�a�dread�of�it.

PETT,�"PETT,�"PETT,�"PETT,�"Deuteronomy�Deuteronomy�Deuteronomy�Deuteronomy�17:417:417:417:4----5555

‘And�it�be�told�you,�and�you�have�heard�of�it,�then�shall�you�enquire�diligently,�and,�And�it�be�told�you,�and�you�have�heard�of�it,�then�shall�you�enquire�diligently,�and,�And�it�be�told�you,�and�you�have�heard�of�it,�then�shall�you�enquire�diligently,�and,�And�it�be�told�you,�and�you�have�heard�of�it,�then�shall�you�enquire�diligently,�and,�

behold,�if�it�be�true,�and�the�thing�certain,�that�such�abomination�is�wrought�in�behold,�if�it�be�true,�and�the�thing�certain,�that�such�abomination�is�wrought�in�behold,�if�it�be�true,�and�the�thing�certain,�that�such�abomination�is�wrought�in�behold,�if�it�be�true,�and�the�thing�certain,�that�such�abomination�is�wrought�in�

Israel,�then�shall�you�bring�forth�that�man�or�that�woman,�who�has�done�this�evil�Israel,�then�shall�you�bring�forth�that�man�or�that�woman,�who�has�done�this�evil�Israel,�then�shall�you�bring�forth�that�man�or�that�woman,�who�has�done�this�evil�Israel,�then�shall�you�bring�forth�that�man�or�that�woman,�who�has�done�this�evil�

thing,�to�your�gates,�even�the�man�or�the�woman,�and�you�shall�stone�them�to�death�thing,�to�your�gates,�even�the�man�or�the�woman,�and�you�shall�stone�them�to�death�thing,�to�your�gates,�even�the�man�or�the�woman,�and�you�shall�stone�them�to�death�thing,�to�your�gates,�even�the�man�or�the�woman,�and�you�shall�stone�them�to�death�

with�stones.with�stones.with�stones.with�stones.’

But�when�they�heard�of�such�a�thing�happening�they�must�make�diligent�enquiry.�But�when�they�heard�of�such�a�thing�happening�they�must�make�diligent�enquiry.�But�when�they�heard�of�such�a�thing�happening�they�must�make�diligent�enquiry.�But�when�they�heard�of�such�a�thing�happening�they�must�make�diligent�enquiry.�

We�can�compare�this�with�Deuteronomy�We�can�compare�this�with�Deuteronomy�We�can�compare�this�with�Deuteronomy�We�can�compare�this�with�Deuteronomy�13:1413:1413:1413:14.�We�need�hardly�doubt�that�Moses�.�We�need�hardly�doubt�that�Moses�.�We�need�hardly�doubt�that�Moses�.�We�need�hardly�doubt�that�Moses�

intended�them�to�see�this�as�a�pattern�which�should�be�followed�in�all�cases�to�be�intended�them�to�see�this�as�a�pattern�which�should�be�followed�in�all�cases�to�be�intended�them�to�see�this�as�a�pattern�which�should�be�followed�in�all�cases�to�be�intended�them�to�see�this�as�a�pattern�which�should�be�followed�in�all�cases�to�be�

brought�before�the�justices.�And�it�was�only�if�the�matter�was�true�and�the�thing�brought�before�the�justices.�And�it�was�only�if�the�matter�was�true�and�the�thing�brought�before�the�justices.�And�it�was�only�if�the�matter�was�true�and�the�thing�brought�before�the�justices.�And�it�was�only�if�the�matter�was�true�and�the�thing�

certain�that�they�were�to�proceed.certain�that�they�were�to�proceed.certain�that�they�were�to�proceed.certain�that�they�were�to�proceed.

“Such�abomination�was�wrought�in�Israel.Such�abomination�was�wrought�in�Israel.Such�abomination�was�wrought�in�Israel.Such�abomination�was�wrought�in�Israel.” Although�it�was�only�given�as�an�Although�it�was�only�given�as�an�Although�it�was�only�given�as�an�Although�it�was�only�given�as�an�

example,�that�did�not�lessen�the�crime.�He�had�chosen�the�worst�possible�case�to�use�example,�that�did�not�lessen�the�crime.�He�had�chosen�the�worst�possible�case�to�use�example,�that�did�not�lessen�the�crime.�He�had�chosen�the�worst�possible�case�to�use�example,�that�did�not�lessen�the�crime.�He�had�chosen�the�worst�possible�case�to�use�

as�his�illustration�of�justice.�False�worship�struck�at�the�very�root�of�the�covenant.�It�as�his�illustration�of�justice.�False�worship�struck�at�the�very�root�of�the�covenant.�It�as�his�illustration�of�justice.�False�worship�struck�at�the�very�root�of�the�covenant.�It�as�his�illustration�of�justice.�False�worship�struck�at�the�very�root�of�the�covenant.�It�

replaced�Yahweh�as�Supreme.�It�was�totally�unacceptable.�It�was�something�that�replaced�Yahweh�as�Supreme.�It�was�totally�unacceptable.�It�was�something�that�replaced�Yahweh�as�Supreme.�It�was�totally�unacceptable.�It�was�something�that�replaced�Yahweh�as�Supreme.�It�was�totally�unacceptable.�It�was�something�that�

Yahweh�was�against�with�all�His�being.�It�wasYahweh�was�against�with�all�His�being.�It�wasYahweh�was�against�with�all�His�being.�It�wasYahweh�was�against�with�all�His�being.�It�was ‘abominableabominableabominableabominable’.�And�yet�even�that�must�.�And�yet�even�that�must�.�And�yet�even�that�must�.�And�yet�even�that�must�

be�subject�to�fair�trial.be�subject�to�fair�trial.be�subject�to�fair�trial.be�subject�to�fair�trial.

On�the�case�being�proved,�the�man�or�woman�who�had�done�this�evil�was�to�be�On�the�case�being�proved,�the�man�or�woman�who�had�done�this�evil�was�to�be�On�the�case�being�proved,�the�man�or�woman�who�had�done�this�evil�was�to�be�On�the�case�being�proved,�the�man�or�woman�who�had�done�this�evil�was�to�be�

brought�forth�to�the�gates,�to�the�place�of�justice,�and�once�the�case�was�brought�forth�to�the�gates,�to�the�place�of�justice,�and�once�the�case�was�brought�forth�to�the�gates,�to�the�place�of�justice,�and�once�the�case�was�brought�forth�to�the�gates,�to�the�place�of�justice,�and�once�the�case�was�

satisfactorily�proved,�the�man�or�woman�was�to�be�stoned�to�death�with�stones,�the�satisfactorily�proved,�the�man�or�woman�was�to�be�stoned�to�death�with�stones,�the�satisfactorily�proved,�the�man�or�woman�was�to�be�stoned�to�death�with�stones,�the�satisfactorily�proved,�the�man�or�woman�was�to�be�stoned�to�death�with�stones,�the�

19

first�stones�being�thrown�by�the�witnesses.�Stoning�was�always�the�penalty�for�this�first�stones�being�thrown�by�the�witnesses.�Stoning�was�always�the�penalty�for�this�first�stones�being�thrown�by�the�witnesses.�Stoning�was�always�the�penalty�for�this�first�stones�being�thrown�by�the�witnesses.�Stoning�was�always�the�penalty�for�this�

crime�in�Israel,�for�it�prevented�anyone�having�to�touch�those�who�had�been�defiled.crime�in�Israel,�for�it�prevented�anyone�having�to�touch�those�who�had�been�defiled.crime�in�Israel,�for�it�prevented�anyone�having�to�touch�those�who�had�been�defiled.crime�in�Israel,�for�it�prevented�anyone�having�to�touch�those�who�had�been�defiled.

In�the�wilderness�the�stoning�had�to�take�placeIn�the�wilderness�the�stoning�had�to�take�placeIn�the�wilderness�the�stoning�had�to�take�placeIn�the�wilderness�the�stoning�had�to�take�place ‘outside�the�campoutside�the�campoutside�the�campoutside�the�camp’,�but�this�would�,�but�this�would�,�but�this�would�,�but�this�would�

not�now�be�possible.�The�equivalent�of�the�camp�was�the�whole�of�the�land�of�Israel,�not�now�be�possible.�The�equivalent�of�the�camp�was�the�whole�of�the�land�of�Israel,�not�now�be�possible.�The�equivalent�of�the�camp�was�the�whole�of�the�land�of�Israel,�not�now�be�possible.�The�equivalent�of�the�camp�was�the�whole�of�the�land�of�Israel,�

and�to�take�them�to�the�borders�of�the�land�would�have�been�impractical.�But�the�and�to�take�them�to�the�borders�of�the�land�would�have�been�impractical.�But�the�and�to�take�them�to�the�borders�of�the�land�would�have�been�impractical.�But�the�and�to�take�them�to�the�borders�of�the�land�would�have�been�impractical.�But�the�

gate�of�the�city�was�the�equivalent.�The�person�had�been�brought�out�from�where�gate�of�the�city�was�the�equivalent.�The�person�had�been�brought�out�from�where�gate�of�the�city�was�the�equivalent.�The�person�had�been�brought�out�from�where�gate�of�the�city�was�the�equivalent.�The�person�had�been�brought�out�from�where�

the�people�dwelt�and�was�executed�at�the�place�of�sentence,�away�from�the�sphere�the�people�dwelt�and�was�executed�at�the�place�of�sentence,�away�from�the�sphere�the�people�dwelt�and�was�executed�at�the�place�of�sentence,�away�from�the�sphere�the�people�dwelt�and�was�executed�at�the�place�of�sentence,�away�from�the�sphere�

of�their�living�accommodation.of�their�living�accommodation.of�their�living�accommodation.of�their�living�accommodation.

5�5�5�5�take�the�man�or�woman�who�has�done�this�evil�take�the�man�or�woman�who�has�done�this�evil�take�the�man�or�woman�who�has�done�this�evil�take�the�man�or�woman�who�has�done�this�evil�

deed�to�your�city�gate�and�stone�that�person�to�deed�to�your�city�gate�and�stone�that�person�to�deed�to�your�city�gate�and�stone�that�person�to�deed�to�your�city�gate�and�stone�that�person�to�

death.death.death.death.

GILL,�"Thou�shall�bring�forth�that�man�or�that�woman�which�have�committed�the�wicked�GILL,�"Thou�shall�bring�forth�that�man�or�that�woman�which�have�committed�the�wicked�GILL,�"Thou�shall�bring�forth�that�man�or�that�woman�which�have�committed�the�wicked�GILL,�"Thou�shall�bring�forth�that�man�or�that�woman�which�have�committed�the�wicked�

thingthingthingthing,....�Idolatry�in�any�of�the�above�instances:�this�must�be�supposed�to�be�done�after�he�or�

she�have�been�had�before�a�court�of�judicature,�and�have�been�tried�and�found�guilty,�and�

sentence�passed�on�them,�then�they�were�to�be�brought�forth�to�execution:

unto�thy�gatesunto�thy�gatesunto�thy�gatesunto�thy�gates;�the�Targum�of�Jonathan�says,�unto�the�gates�of�your�sanhedrim,�or�court�of�

judicature;�but�Jarchi�observes,�that�this�is�a�mistake�of�the�paraphrase,�for�he�says,�we�are�

taught�by�tradition�that�"thy�gate"�is�the�gate�in�which�he�has�served�or�committed�idolatry;�

and�so�says�Maimonides�(d),�they�do�not�stone�a�man�but�at�the�gate�where�he�served�or�

worshipped;�but�if�the�greatest�part�of�the�city�are�Heathens,�they�stone�him�at�the�door�of�

20

the�sanhedrim;�and�this�is�received�from�tradition,�that�"to�thy�gates"�is�the�gate�at�which�he�

served,�and�not�where�his�judgment�is�finished:

eveneveneveneven that�man�or�that�womanthat�man�or�that�womanthat�man�or�that�womanthat�man�or�that�woman;�this�is�repeated,�and�the�woman�as�well�as�the�man�is�

expressed,�to�show�that�no�compassion�is�to�be�had�on�her�as�is�usual,�nor�to�be�spared�on�

account�of�the�weakness�and�tenderness�of�her�sex,�but�she�as�well�as�the�man�must�be�

brought�forth�and�executed�according�to�her�sentence,�without�any�mercy�shown;�and�this�is�

observed�to�show�the�resentment�of�the�divine�Majesty,�and�his�indignation�at�this�sin:

and�shalt�stone�them�with�stones�until�they�dieand�shalt�stone�them�with�stones�until�they�dieand�shalt�stone�them�with�stones�until�they�dieand�shalt�stone�them�with�stones�until�they�die;�of�the�manner�of�stoning�men�and�women;�

see�Gill�on�Act_7:58.

HENRY,�"HENRY,�"HENRY,�"HENRY,�"What�sentence�must�be�passed�and�executed.�So�great�a�punishment�as�death,�

so�great�a�death�as�stoning,�must�be�inflicted�on�the�idolater,�whether�man�or�woman,�for�the�

infirmity�of�the�weaker�sex�would�be�no�excuse,�Deu_17:5.�The�place�of�execution�must�be�the�

gate�of�the�city,�that�the�shame�might�be�the�greater�to�the�criminal�and�the�warning�the�more�

public�to�all�others.�The�hands�of�the�witnesses,�in�this�as�in�other�cases,�must�be�first�upon�

him,�that�is,�they�must�cast�the�first�stone�at�him,�thereby�avowing�their�testimony,�and�

solemnly�imprecating�the�guilt�of�his�blood�upon�themselves�if�their�evidence�were�false.�This�

custom�might�be�of�use�to�deter�men�from�false-witness�bearing.�The�witnesses�are�really,�and�

therefore�it�was�required�that�they�should�be�actually,�the�death�of�the�malefactor.�But�they�

must�be�followed,�and�the�execution�completed,�by�the�hands�of�all�the�people,�who�were�thus�

to�testify�their�detestation�of�the�crime�and�to�put�the�evil�away�from�among�them, as�before,�

Deu_13:9.

WHEDON,�"WHEDON,�"WHEDON,�"WHEDON,�"5555.�Unto�thy�gates.�Unto�thy�gates.�Unto�thy�gates.�Unto�thy�gates — The�punishment�was�to�be�in�public�before�the�whole�The�punishment�was�to�be�in�public�before�the�whole�The�punishment�was�to�be�in�public�before�the�whole�The�punishment�was�to�be�in�public�before�the�whole�

people.�By�the�gate�is�to�be�understood�the�open�space�near�the�gate,�where�in�Eastern�people.�By�the�gate�is�to�be�understood�the�open�space�near�the�gate,�where�in�Eastern�people.�By�the�gate�is�to�be�understood�the�open�space�near�the�gate,�where�in�Eastern�people.�By�the�gate�is�to�be�understood�the�open�space�near�the�gate,�where�in�Eastern�

cities�judicial�proceedings�take�place.�Comp.�Nehemiah�cities�judicial�proceedings�take�place.�Comp.�Nehemiah�cities�judicial�proceedings�take�place.�Comp.�Nehemiah�cities�judicial�proceedings�take�place.�Comp.�Nehemiah�8:18:18:18:1;�Nehemiah�;�Nehemiah�;�Nehemiah�;�Nehemiah�8:38:38:38:3;�Job�;�Job�;�Job�;�Job�29:729:729:729:7.�The�.�The�.�The�.�The�

sentence�was�to�be�carried�into�execution�outside�of�the�city,�as�in�Acts�sentence�was�to�be�carried�into�execution�outside�of�the�city,�as�in�Acts�sentence�was�to�be�carried�into�execution�outside�of�the�city,�as�in�Acts�sentence�was�to�be�carried�into�execution�outside�of�the�city,�as�in�Acts�7:587:587:587:58;�Hebrews�;�Hebrews�;�Hebrews�;�Hebrews�

13:1213:1213:1213:12,�as�in�the�wilderness�it�had�been�outside�of�the�camp:�to�denote�that�the�criminal�was�,�as�in�the�wilderness�it�had�been�outside�of�the�camp:�to�denote�that�the�criminal�was�,�as�in�the�wilderness�it�had�been�outside�of�the�camp:�to�denote�that�the�criminal�was�,�as�in�the�wilderness�it�had�been�outside�of�the�camp:�to�denote�that�the�criminal�was�

excluded�from�the�congregation.excluded�from�the�congregation.excluded�from�the�congregation.excluded�from�the�congregation.

21

6�6�6�6�On�the�testimony�of�two�or�three�witnesses�a�On�the�testimony�of�two�or�three�witnesses�a�On�the�testimony�of�two�or�three�witnesses�a�On�the�testimony�of�two�or�three�witnesses�a�

person�is�to�be�put�to�death,�but�no�one�is�to�be�put�person�is�to�be�put�to�death,�but�no�one�is�to�be�put�person�is�to�be�put�to�death,�but�no�one�is�to�be�put�person�is�to�be�put�to�death,�but�no�one�is�to�be�put�

to�death�on�the�testimony�of�only�one�witness.to�death�on�the�testimony�of�only�one�witness.to�death�on�the�testimony�of�only�one�witness.to�death�on�the�testimony�of�only�one�witness.

CLARKE,�"Two�witnesses�CLARKE,�"Two�witnesses�CLARKE,�"Two�witnesses�CLARKE,�"Two�witnesses�---- One�might�be�deceived,�or�be�prejudiced�or�malicious;�

therefore�God�required�two�substantial�witnesses�for�the�support�of�the�charge.

GILL,�"At�the�mouth�of�two�witnesses,�or�three�witnesses,�shall�he�that�is�worthy�of�death�GILL,�"At�the�mouth�of�two�witnesses,�or�three�witnesses,�shall�he�that�is�worthy�of�death�GILL,�"At�the�mouth�of�two�witnesses,�or�three�witnesses,�shall�he�that�is�worthy�of�death�GILL,�"At�the�mouth�of�two�witnesses,�or�three�witnesses,�shall�he�that�is�worthy�of�death�

be�put�to�deathbe�put�to�deathbe�put�to�deathbe�put�to�death,....�The�idolater�found�guilty�was�to�be�stoned;�two�witnesses�were�sufficient�

to�prove�a�fact,�if�three�the�better,�but,�on�the�testimony�of�one,�sentence�might�not�be�

pronounced.�Aben�Ezra�observes,�that�some�say,�if�two�witnesses�contradict�two�other,�a�third�

turns�the�scale�and�determines�the�matter;�and�others�say,�that�two�who�are�wise�men�will�do,�

and�three�of�others;�and�because�it�is�said�"at�the�mouth"�of�these�witnesses,�it�is�concluded,�

that�a�testimony�should�be�verbal�and�not�written;�should�not�be�recorded,�neither�in�

pecuniary�cases�nor�in�capital�ones,�but�from�the�mouth�of�the�witnesses,�as�it�is�said�"at�the�

mouth",�&c.�at�their�mouth,�and�not�from�their�handwriting�(e):

butbutbutbut at�the�mouth�of�one�witness�he�shall�not�be�put�to�deathat�the�mouth�of�one�witness�he�shall�not�be�put�to�deathat�the�mouth�of�one�witness�he�shall�not�be�put�to�deathat�the�mouth�of�one�witness�he�shall�not�be�put�to�death;�so�careful�is�the�Lord�of�the�

lives�of�men,�that�none�should�be�taken�away�but�upon�full�and�sufficient�evidence,�even�in�

cases�in�which�his�own�glory�and�honour�is�so�much�concerned.

HENRY,�"HENRY,�"HENRY,�"HENRY,�"Evidence�must�be�given�in,�Deu_17:6.�How�heinous�and�dangerous�soever�the�

crime�is,�yet�they�must�not�punish�any�for�it,�unless�there�were�good�proof�against�them,�by�

22

two�witnesses�at�least.�They�must�not,�under�pretence�of�honouring�God,�wrong�an�innocent�

man.�This�law,�which�requires�two�witnesses�in�case�of�life,�we�had�before,�Num_35:30;�it�is�

quoted,�Mat_18:16.

3.�What�sentence�must�be�passed�and�executed.�So�great�a�punishment�as�death,�so�great�a�

death�as�stoning,�must�be�inflicted�on�the�idolater,�whether�man�or�woman,�for�the�infirmity�

of�the�weaker�sex�would�be�no�excuse,�Deu_17:5.�The�place�of�execution�must�be�the�gate�of�

the�city,�that�the�shame�might�be�the�greater�to�the�criminal�and�the�warning�the�more�public�

to�all�others.�The�hands�of�the�witnesses,�in�this�as�in�other�cases,�must�be�first�upon�him,�that�

is,�they�must�cast�the�first�stone�at�him,�thereby�avowing�their�testimony,�and�solemnly�

imprecating�the�guilt�of�his�blood�upon�themselves�if�their�evidence�were�false.�This�custom�

might�be�of�use�to�deter�men�from�false-witness�bearing.�The�witnesses�are�really,�and�

therefore�it�was�required�that�they�should�be�actually,�the�death�of�the�malefactor.�But�they�

must�be�followed,�and�the�execution�completed,�by�the�hands�of�all�the�people,�who�were�thus�

to�testify�their�detestation�of�the�crime�and�to�put�the�evil�away�from�among�them, as�before,�

Deu_13:9.

CALVIN,�"As�His�severity�in�exacting�punishment,�where�murder�has�been�unquestionably�CALVIN,�"As�His�severity�in�exacting�punishment,�where�murder�has�been�unquestionably�CALVIN,�"As�His�severity�in�exacting�punishment,�where�murder�has�been�unquestionably�CALVIN,�"As�His�severity�in�exacting�punishment,�where�murder�has�been�unquestionably�

committed,�shows�how�highly�God�rates�the�life�of�men,�so�the�qualification,�which�we�find�committed,�shows�how�highly�God�rates�the�life�of�men,�so�the�qualification,�which�we�find�committed,�shows�how�highly�God�rates�the�life�of�men,�so�the�qualification,�which�we�find�committed,�shows�how�highly�God�rates�the�life�of�men,�so�the�qualification,�which�we�find�

here,�declares,�that�he�takes�equal�care�for�the�preservation�of�innocent�blood.�For,�since�here,�declares,�that�he�takes�equal�care�for�the�preservation�of�innocent�blood.�For,�since�here,�declares,�that�he�takes�equal�care�for�the�preservation�of�innocent�blood.�For,�since�here,�declares,�that�he�takes�equal�care�for�the�preservation�of�innocent�blood.�For,�since�

too�great�credulity�would�often�impel�the�judges�to�condemn�the�guiltless,�He�here�applies�too�great�credulity�would�often�impel�the�judges�to�condemn�the�guiltless,�He�here�applies�too�great�credulity�would�often�impel�the�judges�to�condemn�the�guiltless,�He�here�applies�too�great�credulity�would�often�impel�the�judges�to�condemn�the�guiltless,�He�here�applies�

a�remedy�to�this�evil,�forbidding�that�the�crime�should�be�punished�unless�proved�by�sure�a�remedy�to�this�evil,�forbidding�that�the�crime�should�be�punished�unless�proved�by�sure�a�remedy�to�this�evil,�forbidding�that�the�crime�should�be�punished�unless�proved�by�sure�a�remedy�to�this�evil,�forbidding�that�the�crime�should�be�punished�unless�proved�by�sure�

testimony.�Although�He�has�naturally�inscribed�this�law�upon�every�heart,�yet�he�would�testimony.�Although�He�has�naturally�inscribed�this�law�upon�every�heart,�yet�he�would�testimony.�Although�He�has�naturally�inscribed�this�law�upon�every�heart,�yet�he�would�testimony.�Although�He�has�naturally�inscribed�this�law�upon�every�heart,�yet�he�would�

have�it�written�down,�that�its�observance�amongst�the�Israelites�might�be�more�sacred;�for�have�it�written�down,�that�its�observance�amongst�the�Israelites�might�be�more�sacred;�for�have�it�written�down,�that�its�observance�amongst�the�Israelites�might�be�more�sacred;�for�have�it�written�down,�that�its�observance�amongst�the�Israelites�might�be�more�sacred;�for�

nothing�is�more�dangerous�than�to�expose�mennothing�is�more�dangerous�than�to�expose�mennothing�is�more�dangerous�than�to�expose�mennothing�is�more�dangerous�than�to�expose�men’s�lives�to�the�tongue�of�a�single�individual;�s�lives�to�the�tongue�of�a�single�individual;�s�lives�to�the�tongue�of�a�single�individual;�s�lives�to�the�tongue�of�a�single�individual;�

but,�where�the�consent�of�two�or�three�is�carefully�weighed,�any�lurking�falsehood�is�for�the�but,�where�the�consent�of�two�or�three�is�carefully�weighed,�any�lurking�falsehood�is�for�the�but,�where�the�consent�of�two�or�three�is�carefully�weighed,�any�lurking�falsehood�is�for�the�but,�where�the�consent�of�two�or�three�is�carefully�weighed,�any�lurking�falsehood�is�for�the�

most�part�detected.most�part�detected.most�part�detected.most�part�detected.

Lest,�therefore,�any�one�should�be�rashly�condemned,�and�so�innocence�should�be�Lest,�therefore,�any�one�should�be�rashly�condemned,�and�so�innocence�should�be�Lest,�therefore,�any�one�should�be�rashly�condemned,�and�so�innocence�should�be�Lest,�therefore,�any�one�should�be�rashly�condemned,�and�so�innocence�should�be�

oppressed�by�any�light�conjectures,�or�insufficient�accusations,�or�unjust�prejudices,�God�oppressed�by�any�light�conjectures,�or�insufficient�accusations,�or�unjust�prejudices,�God�oppressed�by�any�light�conjectures,�or�insufficient�accusations,�or�unjust�prejudices,�God�oppressed�by�any�light�conjectures,�or�insufficient�accusations,�or�unjust�prejudices,�God�

here�interferes,�and�does�not�allow�any�to�be�harshly�dealt�with,�unless�duly�convicted.here�interferes,�and�does�not�allow�any�to�be�harshly�dealt�with,�unless�duly�convicted.here�interferes,�and�does�not�allow�any�to�be�harshly�dealt�with,�unless�duly�convicted.here�interferes,�and�does�not�allow�any�to�be�harshly�dealt�with,�unless�duly�convicted.

PETT,�"Deuteronomy�PETT,�"Deuteronomy�PETT,�"Deuteronomy�PETT,�"Deuteronomy�17:617:617:617:6----7777

‘At�the�mouth�of�two�witnesses,�or�three�witnesses,�shall�he�that�is�to�die�be�put�to�death.�At�the�mouth�of�two�witnesses,�or�three�witnesses,�shall�he�that�is�to�die�be�put�to�death.�At�the�mouth�of�two�witnesses,�or�three�witnesses,�shall�he�that�is�to�die�be�put�to�death.�At�the�mouth�of�two�witnesses,�or�three�witnesses,�shall�he�that�is�to�die�be�put�to�death.�

23

At�the�mouth�of�one�witness�he�shall�not�be�put�to�death.�The�hand�of�the�witnesses�shall�At�the�mouth�of�one�witness�he�shall�not�be�put�to�death.�The�hand�of�the�witnesses�shall�At�the�mouth�of�one�witness�he�shall�not�be�put�to�death.�The�hand�of�the�witnesses�shall�At�the�mouth�of�one�witness�he�shall�not�be�put�to�death.�The�hand�of�the�witnesses�shall�

be�first�on�him�to�put�him�to�death,�and�afterwards�the�hand�of�all�the�people.�So�you�will�be�first�on�him�to�put�him�to�death,�and�afterwards�the�hand�of�all�the�people.�So�you�will�be�first�on�him�to�put�him�to�death,�and�afterwards�the�hand�of�all�the�people.�So�you�will�be�first�on�him�to�put�him�to�death,�and�afterwards�the�hand�of�all�the�people.�So�you�will�

put�away�the�evil�from�the�midst�of�you.put�away�the�evil�from�the�midst�of�you.put�away�the�evil�from�the�midst�of�you.put�away�the�evil�from�the�midst�of�you.’

But�this�must�not�be�done�at�the�hand�of�only�one�witness�(compare�Numbers�But�this�must�not�be�done�at�the�hand�of�only�one�witness�(compare�Numbers�But�this�must�not�be�done�at�the�hand�of�only�one�witness�(compare�Numbers�But�this�must�not�be�done�at�the�hand�of�only�one�witness�(compare�Numbers�35:3035:3035:3035:30).�).�).�).�

There�must�be�at�least�two�or�three�witnesses.�Then�the�hand�of�the�witnesses�were�to�There�must�be�at�least�two�or�three�witnesses.�Then�the�hand�of�the�witnesses�were�to�There�must�be�at�least�two�or�three�witnesses.�Then�the�hand�of�the�witnesses�were�to�There�must�be�at�least�two�or�three�witnesses.�Then�the�hand�of�the�witnesses�were�to�

throw�the�first�stones,�something�which�if�they�had�spoken�truly�they�would�not�hesitate�to�throw�the�first�stones,�something�which�if�they�had�spoken�truly�they�would�not�hesitate�to�throw�the�first�stones,�something�which�if�they�had�spoken�truly�they�would�not�hesitate�to�throw�the�first�stones,�something�which�if�they�had�spoken�truly�they�would�not�hesitate�to�

do,�after�which�all�the�people�were�to�take�part.�As�all�would�have�been�affected�by�it�so�do,�after�which�all�the�people�were�to�take�part.�As�all�would�have�been�affected�by�it�so�do,�after�which�all�the�people�were�to�take�part.�As�all�would�have�been�affected�by�it�so�do,�after�which�all�the�people�were�to�take�part.�As�all�would�have�been�affected�by�it�so�

must�all�be�involved�in�the�punishment.�So�care�was�taken�against�false�accusations,�and�must�all�be�involved�in�the�punishment.�So�care�was�taken�against�false�accusations,�and�must�all�be�involved�in�the�punishment.�So�care�was�taken�against�false�accusations,�and�must�all�be�involved�in�the�punishment.�So�care�was�taken�against�false�accusations,�and�

against�mob�rule.�But�the�finally�important�thing�was�that�the�evil�would�be�put�away�from�against�mob�rule.�But�the�finally�important�thing�was�that�the�evil�would�be�put�away�from�against�mob�rule.�But�the�finally�important�thing�was�that�the�evil�would�be�put�away�from�against�mob�rule.�But�the�finally�important�thing�was�that�the�evil�would�be�put�away�from�

among�them.among�them.among�them.among�them.

7�7�7�7�The�hands�of�the�witnesses�must�be�the�first�in�The�hands�of�the�witnesses�must�be�the�first�in�The�hands�of�the�witnesses�must�be�the�first�in�The�hands�of�the�witnesses�must�be�the�first�in�

putting�that�person�to�death,�and�then�the�hands�putting�that�person�to�death,�and�then�the�hands�putting�that�person�to�death,�and�then�the�hands�putting�that�person�to�death,�and�then�the�hands�

of�all�the�people.�You�must�purge�the�evil�from�of�all�the�people.�You�must�purge�the�evil�from�of�all�the�people.�You�must�purge�the�evil�from�of�all�the�people.�You�must�purge�the�evil�from�

among�you.among�you.among�you.among�you.

GILL,�"The�hands�of�the�witnesses�shall�be�first�upon�him�to�put�him�to�deathGILL,�"The�hands�of�the�witnesses�shall�be�first�upon�him�to�put�him�to�deathGILL,�"The�hands�of�the�witnesses�shall�be�first�upon�him�to�put�him�to�deathGILL,�"The�hands�of�the�witnesses�shall�be�first�upon�him�to�put�him�to�death,....�Of�

everyone�of�them,�as�Aben�Ezra;�they�were�to�cast�the�first�stone�at�him,�which�would�be�a�

further�trial�and�confirmation�of�their�testimony;�for�if�they�readily�and�without�reluctance�

first�began�the�stoning�of�the�idolater,�it�would�not�only�show�their�zeal�for�the�honour�of�the�

divine�Being,�but�an�unconsciousness�of�guilt�in�their�testimony,�and�be�an�encouragement�to�

others�to�proceed�with�safety:

24

and�afterwards�the�hands�of�all�the�peopleand�afterwards�the�hands�of�all�the�peopleand�afterwards�the�hands�of�all�the�peopleand�afterwards�the�hands�of�all�the�people;�should�be�employed�in�taking�up�stones,�and�

casting�at�him�until�he�was�dead:

so�thou�shall�put�the�evil�away�from�among�youso�thou�shall�put�the�evil�away�from�among�youso�thou�shall�put�the�evil�away�from�among�youso�thou�shall�put�the�evil�away�from�among�you;�both�the�evil�man�and�the�evil�committed�by�

him,�which�by�this�means�would�be�prevented�from�spreading,�seeing�by�his�death�others�

would�be�deterred�from�following�his�example;�as�well�as�the�evil�of�punishment,�which�

otherwise�would�have�come�upon�the�nation,�had�they�connived�at�so�gross�an�iniquity.

CALVIN,�"CALVIN,�"CALVIN,�"CALVIN,�"7777.The�hands�of�the�witnesses�shall�be�first.�It�was�not�without�reason�that�God�.The�hands�of�the�witnesses�shall�be�first.�It�was�not�without�reason�that�God�.The�hands�of�the�witnesses�shall�be�first.�It�was�not�without�reason�that�God�.The�hands�of�the�witnesses�shall�be�first.�It�was�not�without�reason�that�God�

would�have�criminals�put�to�death�by�the�hand�of�those�by�whose�testimony�they�were�would�have�criminals�put�to�death�by�the�hand�of�those�by�whose�testimony�they�were�would�have�criminals�put�to�death�by�the�hand�of�those�by�whose�testimony�they�were�would�have�criminals�put�to�death�by�the�hand�of�those�by�whose�testimony�they�were�

condemned.�The�ancient�people�did�not�employ�public�executioners,�that�there�might�be�condemned.�The�ancient�people�did�not�employ�public�executioners,�that�there�might�be�condemned.�The�ancient�people�did�not�employ�public�executioners,�that�there�might�be�condemned.�The�ancient�people�did�not�employ�public�executioners,�that�there�might�be�

more�solemnity,�modesty,�and�reverence�in�the�infliction�of�punishments.�This�office�he�more�solemnity,�modesty,�and�reverence�in�the�infliction�of�punishments.�This�office�he�more�solemnity,�modesty,�and�reverence�in�the�infliction�of�punishments.�This�office�he�more�solemnity,�modesty,�and�reverence�in�the�infliction�of�punishments.�This�office�he�

peculiarly�enjoins�upon�the�witnesses,�because�the�tongue�of�many�is�too�hasty,�not�to�say�peculiarly�enjoins�upon�the�witnesses,�because�the�tongue�of�many�is�too�hasty,�not�to�say�peculiarly�enjoins�upon�the�witnesses,�because�the�tongue�of�many�is�too�hasty,�not�to�say�peculiarly�enjoins�upon�the�witnesses,�because�the�tongue�of�many�is�too�hasty,�not�to�say�

worse�of�it,�so�that�they�do�not�hesitate�to�stab�people�verbally,�when�they�would�not�dare�worse�of�it,�so�that�they�do�not�hesitate�to�stab�people�verbally,�when�they�would�not�dare�worse�of�it,�so�that�they�do�not�hesitate�to�stab�people�verbally,�when�they�would�not�dare�worse�of�it,�so�that�they�do�not�hesitate�to�stab�people�verbally,�when�they�would�not�dare�

to�lay�a�finger�upon�them.�This,�then,�was�an�excellent�remedy�for�the�repression�of�light�to�lay�a�finger�upon�them.�This,�then,�was�an�excellent�remedy�for�the�repression�of�light�to�lay�a�finger�upon�them.�This,�then,�was�an�excellent�remedy�for�the�repression�of�light�to�lay�a�finger�upon�them.�This,�then,�was�an�excellent�remedy�for�the�repression�of�light�

accusations,�not�to�admit�the�testimony�of�any,�whose�hand�was�not�prepared�to�execute�accusations,�not�to�admit�the�testimony�of�any,�whose�hand�was�not�prepared�to�execute�accusations,�not�to�admit�the�testimony�of�any,�whose�hand�was�not�prepared�to�execute�accusations,�not�to�admit�the�testimony�of�any,�whose�hand�was�not�prepared�to�execute�

the�sentence.�Stoning�was�indeed�a�sad�and�horrible�kind�of�punishment;�but�it�is�probable�the�sentence.�Stoning�was�indeed�a�sad�and�horrible�kind�of�punishment;�but�it�is�probable�the�sentence.�Stoning�was�indeed�a�sad�and�horrible�kind�of�punishment;�but�it�is�probable�the�sentence.�Stoning�was�indeed�a�sad�and�horrible�kind�of�punishment;�but�it�is�probable�

that�God�made�choice�of�it�because�it�required�the�application�of�many�hands.�If�hanging�that�God�made�choice�of�it�because�it�required�the�application�of�many�hands.�If�hanging�that�God�made�choice�of�it�because�it�required�the�application�of�many�hands.�If�hanging�that�God�made�choice�of�it�because�it�required�the�application�of�many�hands.�If�hanging�

had�not�been�in�use,�God�would�have�commanded�in�vain�that�the�corpse�of�a�man�who�had�had�not�been�in�use,�God�would�have�commanded�in�vain�that�the�corpse�of�a�man�who�had�had�not�been�in�use,�God�would�have�commanded�in�vain�that�the�corpse�of�a�man�who�had�had�not�been�in�use,�God�would�have�commanded�in�vain�that�the�corpse�of�a�man�who�had�

been�hanged�should�be�taken�down�from�the�tree�before�sunset.�(Deuteronomy�been�hanged�should�be�taken�down�from�the�tree�before�sunset.�(Deuteronomy�been�hanged�should�be�taken�down�from�the�tree�before�sunset.�(Deuteronomy�been�hanged�should�be�taken�down�from�the�tree�before�sunset.�(Deuteronomy�21:2321:2321:2321:23.)�.)�.)�.)�

There�were,�therefore,�other�kinds�of�capital�punishment;�but�when�the�land�was�to�be�There�were,�therefore,�other�kinds�of�capital�punishment;�but�when�the�land�was�to�be�There�were,�therefore,�other�kinds�of�capital�punishment;�but�when�the�land�was�to�be�There�were,�therefore,�other�kinds�of�capital�punishment;�but�when�the�land�was�to�be�

purged,�as�by�a�propitiation,�by�the�death�of�the�sinner,�he�was�to�be�stoned�by�the�hands�of�purged,�as�by�a�propitiation,�by�the�death�of�the�sinner,�he�was�to�be�stoned�by�the�hands�of�purged,�as�by�a�propitiation,�by�the�death�of�the�sinner,�he�was�to�be�stoned�by�the�hands�of�purged,�as�by�a�propitiation,�by�the�death�of�the�sinner,�he�was�to�be�stoned�by�the�hands�of�

the�whole�people,�since�it�would�have�been�cruel�for�him�to�be�slain�by�a�lingering�death,�the�whole�people,�since�it�would�have�been�cruel�for�him�to�be�slain�by�a�lingering�death,�the�whole�people,�since�it�would�have�been�cruel�for�him�to�be�slain�by�a�lingering�death,�the�whole�people,�since�it�would�have�been�cruel�for�him�to�be�slain�by�a�lingering�death,�

which�would�have�been�the�case�if�they�had�stoned�him�one�after�another.�The�reason�why�which�would�have�been�the�case�if�they�had�stoned�him�one�after�another.�The�reason�why�which�would�have�been�the�case�if�they�had�stoned�him�one�after�another.�The�reason�why�which�would�have�been�the�case�if�they�had�stoned�him�one�after�another.�The�reason�why�

the�people�were�commanded�to�cast�the�stones�with�one�consent�was,�that�they�might�give�the�people�were�commanded�to�cast�the�stones�with�one�consent�was,�that�they�might�give�the�people�were�commanded�to�cast�the�stones�with�one�consent�was,�that�they�might�give�the�people�were�commanded�to�cast�the�stones�with�one�consent�was,�that�they�might�give�

proof�of�their�zeal,�and�manifest�their�great�indignation�that�Godproof�of�their�zeal,�and�manifest�their�great�indignation�that�Godproof�of�their�zeal,�and�manifest�their�great�indignation�that�Godproof�of�their�zeal,�and�manifest�their�great�indignation�that�God’s�worship�had�been�s�worship�had�been�s�worship�had�been�s�worship�had�been�

violated.violated.violated.violated.

ELLICOTT,�"(ELLICOTT,�"(ELLICOTT,�"(ELLICOTT,�"(7777)�The�hands�of�the�witnesses�.�.�.�first.)�The�hands�of�the�witnesses�.�.�.�first.)�The�hands�of�the�witnesses�.�.�.�first.)�The�hands�of�the�witnesses�.�.�.�first.—A�great�safeguard�against�false�A�great�safeguard�against�false�A�great�safeguard�against�false�A�great�safeguard�against�false�

testimony.testimony.testimony.testimony.

Put�.�.�.�away.Put�.�.�.�away.Put�.�.�.�away.Put�.�.�.�away.—Literally,�consume.�The�primary�meaning�of�the�word�isLiterally,�consume.�The�primary�meaning�of�the�word�isLiterally,�consume.�The�primary�meaning�of�the�word�isLiterally,�consume.�The�primary�meaning�of�the�word�is “burn.burn.burn.burn.” Taberah,Taberah,Taberah,Taberah,

25

“burning,burning,burning,burning,” is�a�derivative.is�a�derivative.is�a�derivative.is�a�derivative.

The�evil.The�evil.The�evil.The�evil.—The�Greek�version�renders�thisThe�Greek�version�renders�thisThe�Greek�version�renders�thisThe�Greek�version�renders�this “the�wicked�man,the�wicked�man,the�wicked�man,the�wicked�man,” and�the�sentence�is�taken�up�and�the�sentence�is�taken�up�and�the�sentence�is�taken�up�and�the�sentence�is�taken�up�

in�this�form�in�in�this�form�in�in�this�form�in�in�this�form�in�1�1�1�1�Corinthians�Corinthians�Corinthians�Corinthians�5:135:135:135:13,,,, “and�ye�shall�put�away�from�among�you�that�wicked�and�ye�shall�put�away�from�among�you�that�wicked�and�ye�shall�put�away�from�among�you�that�wicked�and�ye�shall�put�away�from�among�you�that�wicked�

person.person.person.person.” The�phrase�is�of�frequent�occurrence�in�Deuteronomy,�and�if�we�are�to�The�phrase�is�of�frequent�occurrence�in�Deuteronomy,�and�if�we�are�to�The�phrase�is�of�frequent�occurrence�in�Deuteronomy,�and�if�we�are�to�The�phrase�is�of�frequent�occurrence�in�Deuteronomy,�and�if�we�are�to�

understand�that�in�all�places�where�it�occursunderstand�that�in�all�places�where�it�occursunderstand�that�in�all�places�where�it�occursunderstand�that�in�all�places�where�it�occurs “the�evilthe�evilthe�evilthe�evil” is�to�be�under.�stood�of�an�is�to�be�under.�stood�of�an�is�to�be�under.�stood�of�an�is�to�be�under.�stood�of�an�

individual,�and�to�be�taken�in�the�masculine�gender,�the�fact�seems�to�deserve�notice�in�individual,�and�to�be�taken�in�the�masculine�gender,�the�fact�seems�to�deserve�notice�in�individual,�and�to�be�taken�in�the�masculine�gender,�the�fact�seems�to�deserve�notice�in�individual,�and�to�be�taken�in�the�masculine�gender,�the�fact�seems�to�deserve�notice�in�

considering�the�phraseconsidering�the�phraseconsidering�the�phraseconsidering�the�phrase “deliver�us�from�evildeliver�us�from�evildeliver�us�from�evildeliver�us�from�evil” in�the�Lordin�the�Lordin�the�Lordin�the�Lord’s�Prayer.�There�is�really�no�such�s�Prayer.�There�is�really�no�such�s�Prayer.�There�is�really�no�such�s�Prayer.�There�is�really�no�such�

thing�as�wickedness�in�the�world�apart�from�some�wicked�being�or�person.�We�are�also�thing�as�wickedness�in�the�world�apart�from�some�wicked�being�or�person.�We�are�also�thing�as�wickedness�in�the�world�apart�from�some�wicked�being�or�person.�We�are�also�thing�as�wickedness�in�the�world�apart�from�some�wicked�being�or�person.�We�are�also�

reminded�of�the�famous�argument�of�St.�Augustine,�that�evil�has�no�existence�except�as�a�reminded�of�the�famous�argument�of�St.�Augustine,�that�evil�has�no�existence�except�as�a�reminded�of�the�famous�argument�of�St.�Augustine,�that�evil�has�no�existence�except�as�a�reminded�of�the�famous�argument�of�St.�Augustine,�that�evil�has�no�existence�except�as�a�

corruption�of�good,�or�a�creaturecorruption�of�good,�or�a�creaturecorruption�of�good,�or�a�creaturecorruption�of�good,�or�a�creature’s�perverted�will.s�perverted�will.s�perverted�will.s�perverted�will.

Law�CourtsLaw�CourtsLaw�CourtsLaw�Courts

8�8�8�8�If�cases�come�before�your�courts�that�are�too�If�cases�come�before�your�courts�that�are�too�If�cases�come�before�your�courts�that�are�too�If�cases�come�before�your�courts�that�are�too�

difficult�for�you�to�judgedifficult�for�you�to�judgedifficult�for�you�to�judgedifficult�for�you�to�judge—whether�bloodshed,�whether�bloodshed,�whether�bloodshed,�whether�bloodshed,�

lawsuits�or�assaultslawsuits�or�assaultslawsuits�or�assaultslawsuits�or�assaults—take�them�to�the�place�the�take�them�to�the�place�the�take�them�to�the�place�the�take�them�to�the�place�the�

Lord�your�God�will�choose.Lord�your�God�will�choose.Lord�your�God�will�choose.Lord�your�God�will�choose.

BARNES�BARNES�BARNES�BARNES�8888----13131313,�",�",�",�"The�cases�in�question�are�such�as�the�inferior�judges�did�not�feel�able�to�

decide�satisfactorily,�and�which�accordingly�they�remitted�to�their�superiors�(compare�Exo_

18:23-27).

26

The�Supreme�court�Deu_17:9 is�referred�to�in�very�general�terms�as�sitting�at�the�sanctuary�

Deu_17:8. “The�judge” would�no�doubt�usually�be�a�layman,�and�thus�the�court�would�contain�

both�an�ecclesiastical�and�a�civil�element.�Jehoshaphat�2Ch_19:4-11 organized�his�judicial�

system�very�closely�upon�the�lines�here�laid�down.

CLARKE,�"If�there�arise�a�matter�too�hard�for�thee�CLARKE,�"If�there�arise�a�matter�too�hard�for�thee�CLARKE,�"If�there�arise�a�matter�too�hard�for�thee�CLARKE,�"If�there�arise�a�matter�too�hard�for�thee�---- These�directions�are�given�to�the�

common�magistrates,�who�might�not�be�able�to�judge�of�or�apply�the�law�in�all�cases�that�

might�be�brought�before�them.�The�priests�and�Levites,�who�were�lawyers�by�birth�and�

continual�practice,�were�reasonably�considered�as�the�best�qualified�to�decide�on�difficult�

points.

GILL,�"If�there�arise�a�matter�too�hard�for�thee�in�judgmentGILL,�"If�there�arise�a�matter�too�hard�for�thee�in�judgmentGILL,�"If�there�arise�a�matter�too�hard�for�thee�in�judgmentGILL,�"If�there�arise�a�matter�too�hard�for�thee�in�judgment,....�This�is�spoken�to�inferior�

judges�in�cities�in�the�country,�who�sometimes�might�have�cases�too�wonderful�and�

mysterious,�as�the�word�signifies,�or�secret�and�hidden,�such�as�were�out�of�their�reach�and�

beyond�their�capacity,�and�so�be�very�difficult�for�them�to�determine�what�should�be�done:

between�blood�and�bloodbetween�blood�and�bloodbetween�blood�and�bloodbetween�blood�and�blood;�that�is,�whether�a�man�is�guilty�of�shedding�innocent�blood�or�not;�

when�such�a�case�is�depending�between�a�person�charged�with�it�and�the�relatives�of�the�

deceased,�or�between�a�man�slayer�and�the�avenger�of�blood,�and�the�question�is,�whether�he�

may�have�the�benefit�of�a�city�of�refuge�or�not,�and�there�are�some�circumstances�attending�it�

which�make�it�difficult�how�to�determine:

between�plea�and�pleabetween�plea�and�pleabetween�plea�and�pleabetween�plea�and�plea;�of�the�plaintiff�on�one�side�and�of�the�defendant�on�the�other,�and�

both�have�so�much�to�say�in�their�own�cause,�that�it�is�hard�to�decide�which�is�in�the�right�and�

which�is�in�the�wrong,�whether�in�capital�or�pecuniary�cases;�it�chiefly�if�not�solely�respects�

civil�things�in�controversy:

and�between�stroke�and�strokeand�between�stroke�and�strokeand�between�stroke�and�strokeand�between�stroke�and�stroke;�blow�or�wound�which�one�man�received�from�another,�and�

for�which�he�commences�a�suit�of�law�upon�it,�Exo_21:18 or�for�assault�and�battery;�and�so�

Aben�Ezra�interprets�it�of�blows�and�bruises;�but�the�Jewish�writers�generally�interpret�it�of�

the�plague,�or�stroke�of�leprosy;�so�the�Targums�of�Jonathan�and�Jerusalem;�but�the�

examination�of�such�a�case�did�not�belong�to�the�civil�magistrate,�but�to�a�priest;�nor�was�such�

a�person�had�up�to�Jerusalem�to�be�searched,�but�was�shut�up�in�a�house�until�further�

evidence�could�be�got;�and,�besides,�the�signs�of�the�leprosy�are�so�distinctly�given,�that�at�

waiting�a�proper�time,�there�was�seldom�or�ever�any�difficulty�about�determining�it:

27

beingbeingbeingbeing matter�of�controversy�within�thy�gatesmatter�of�controversy�within�thy�gatesmatter�of�controversy�within�thy�gatesmatter�of�controversy�within�thy�gates;�or�what�are�matters�of�controversy�about�

anything�else;�for�the�phrase�is�general,�as�Aben�Ezra�observes,�and�takes�in�everything�in�

which�anything�difficult�might�occur;�so�Jarchi�interprets�it�of�things�which�the�wise�men�of�a�

city�are�divided�about;�one�pronounces�a�person�or�thing�unclean,�another�clean,�one�

condemning�and�another�justifying,�and�so�far�rightly;�for�this�respects�not�controversies�

between�men,�that�may�be�brought�into�courts�of�judicature,�but�controversies�or�divisions�

arising�in�these�courts�upon�them,�between�the�judges�themselves,�they�not�agreeing�in�their�

opinions:

then�shalt�thou�arise�and�get�thee�up�into�the�place�which�the�Lord�thy�God�shall�choosethen�shalt�thou�arise�and�get�thee�up�into�the�place�which�the�Lord�thy�God�shall�choosethen�shalt�thou�arise�and�get�thee�up�into�the�place�which�the�Lord�thy�God�shall�choosethen�shalt�thou�arise�and�get�thee�up�into�the�place�which�the�Lord�thy�God�shall�choose;�to�

Jerusalem,�to�the�great�sanhedrim�or�court�of�judicature,�to�which�the�inferior�judges�were�to�

apply�themselves,�in�matters�of�moment�and�difficulty,�for�instruction,�information,�and�

direction;�it�being�supposed�that�in�such�a�court�such�like�cases�may�have�been�brought�before�

them,�and�they�were�expert�and�understanding�in�them.

HEBRY�HEBRY�HEBRY�HEBRY�8888----9999,�",�",�",�"Courts�of�judgment�were�ordered�to�be�erected�in�every�city�(Deu_16:18),�and�

they�were�empowered�to�hear�and�determine�causes�according�to�law,�both�those�which�we�

call�pleas�of�the�crown�and�those�between�party�and�party;�and�we�may�suppose�that�

ordinarily�they�ended�the�matters�that�were�brought�before�them,�and�their�sentence�was�

definitive;�but,�1.�It�is�here�taken�for�granted�that�sometimes�a�case�might�come�into�their�

court�too�difficult�for�those�inferior�judges�to�determine,�who�could�not�be�thought�to�be�so�

learned�in�the�laws�as�those�that�presided�in�the�higher�courts;�so�that�(to�speak�in�the�

language�of�our�law)�they�must�find�a�special�verdict,�and�take�time�to�advise�before�the�

giving�of�judgment�(Deu_17:8):�If�there�arise�a�matter�too�hard�for�thee�in�judgment, which�it�

would�be�no�dishonour�to�the�judges�to�own�the�difficulty�of,�- suppose�it�between�blood�and�

blood, the�blood�of�a�person�which�cried�and�the�blood�of�him�that�was�charged�with�the�

murder�which�was�demanded,�when�it�was�doubtful�upon�the�evidence�whether�it�was�wilful�

or�casual,�- or�between�plea�and�plea, the�plea�(that�is,�the�bill�or�declaration)�of�the�plaintiff�

and�the�plea�of�the�defendant,�- or�between�stroke�and�stroke, in�actions�of�assault�and�

battery;�in�these�and�similar�cases,�thought�the�evidence�were�plain,�yet�doubts�might�arise�

about�the�sense�and�meaning�of�the�law�and�the�application�of�it�to�the�particular�case.�2.�

These�difficult�cases,�which�hitherto�had�been�brought�to�Moses,�according�to�Jethro's�advice,�

28

were,�after�his�death,�to�be�brought�to�the�supreme�power,�wherever�it�was�lodged,�whether�in�

a�judge�(when�there�was�such�an�extraordinary�person�raised�up�and�qualified�for�that�great�

service,�as�Othniel,�Deborah,�Gideon,�etc.)�or�in�the�high-priest�(when�he�was�by�the�

eminency�of�his�gifts�called�of�God�to�preside�in�public�affairs,�as�Eli),�or,�if�no�single�person�

were�marked�by�heaven�for�this�honour,�then�in�the�priests�and�Levites�(or�in�the�priests,�who�

were�Levites�of�course),�who�not�only�attended�the�sanctuary,�but�met�in�council�to�receive�

appeals�from�the�inferior�courts,�who�might�reasonably�be�supposed,�not�only�to�be�best�

qualified�by�their�learning�and�experience,�but�to�have�the�best�assistance�of�the�divine�Spirit�

for�the�deciding�of�doubts,�Deu_17:9,�Deu_17:11,�Deu_17:12.�They�are�not�appointed�to�

consult�the�urim�and�thummim,�for�it�is�supposed�that�these�were�to�be�consulted�only�in�

cases�relating�to�the�public,�either�the�body�of�the�people�or�the�prince;�but�in�ordinary�cases�

the�wisdom�and�integrity�of�those�that�sat�at�the�stern�must�be�relied�on,�their�judgment�had�

not�the�divine�authority�of�an�oracle,�yet�besides�the�moral�certainty�it�had,�as�the�judgment�

of�knowing,�prudent,�and�experienced�men,�it�had�the�advantage�of�a�divine�promise,�implied�

in�those�words�(Deu_17:9),�They�shall�show�thee�the�sentence�of�judgment; it�had�also�the�

support�of�a�divine�institution,�by�which�they�were�made�the�supreme�judicature�of�the�

nation.

JAMISON,�"JAMISON,�"JAMISON,�"JAMISON,�"Deu_17:8-13.�The�priests�and�judges�to�determine�controversies.

If�there�arise�a�matter�too�hard�for�thee�in�judgmentIf�there�arise�a�matter�too�hard�for�thee�in�judgmentIf�there�arise�a�matter�too�hard�for�thee�in�judgmentIf�there�arise�a�matter�too�hard�for�thee�in�judgment — In�all�civil�or�criminal�cases,�where�

there�was�any�doubt�or�difficulty�in�giving�a�decision,�the�local�magistrates�were�to�submit�

them�by�reference�to�the�tribunal�of�the�Sanhedrim�- the�supreme�council,�which�was�

composed�partly�of�civil�and�partly�of�ecclesiastical�persons. “The�priests�and�Levites,” should�

rather�be “the�priests�- the�Levites”;�that�is,�the�Levitical�priests,�including�the�high�priest,�

who�were�members�of�the�legislative�assembly;�and�who,�as�forming�one�body,�are�called “the�

judge.” Their�sittings�were�held�in�the�neighborhood�of�the�sanctuary�because�in�great�

emergencies�the�high�priest�had�to�consult�God�by�Urim�(Num_27:21).�From�their�judgment�

there�was�no�appeal;�and�if�a�person�were�so�perverse�and�refractory�as�to�refuse�obedience�to�

their�sentences,�his�conduct,�as�inconsistent�with�the�maintenance�of�order�and�good�

government,�was�then�to�be�regarded�and�punished�as�a�capital�crime.

CALVIN,�"CALVIN,�"CALVIN,�"CALVIN,�"8888If�there�arise�a�matter�too�hard�for�thee.�The�principal�office�of�the�priests�is�If�there�arise�a�matter�too�hard�for�thee.�The�principal�office�of�the�priests�is�If�there�arise�a�matter�too�hard�for�thee.�The�principal�office�of�the�priests�is�If�there�arise�a�matter�too�hard�for�thee.�The�principal�office�of�the�priests�is�

here�described�under�a�single�head,�viz.,�that�they�should�declare�what�was�right�in�doubtful�here�described�under�a�single�head,�viz.,�that�they�should�declare�what�was�right�in�doubtful�here�described�under�a�single�head,�viz.,�that�they�should�declare�what�was�right�in�doubtful�here�described�under�a�single�head,�viz.,�that�they�should�declare�what�was�right�in�doubtful�

29

and�obscure�matters�out�of�the�Law�of�God;�for�although�God�seems�only�to�refer�to�civil�and�obscure�matters�out�of�the�Law�of�God;�for�although�God�seems�only�to�refer�to�civil�and�obscure�matters�out�of�the�Law�of�God;�for�although�God�seems�only�to�refer�to�civil�and�obscure�matters�out�of�the�Law�of�God;�for�although�God�seems�only�to�refer�to�civil�

controversies,�yet�there�is�no�doubt�but�that�by�synecdoche�He�appoints�them�to�be�controversies,�yet�there�is�no�doubt�but�that�by�synecdoche�He�appoints�them�to�be�controversies,�yet�there�is�no�doubt�but�that�by�synecdoche�He�appoints�them�to�be�controversies,�yet�there�is�no�doubt�but�that�by�synecdoche�He�appoints�them�to�be�

interpreters�of�the�doctrine�of�the�Law.�That�their�authority�might�be�more�reverenced�in�interpreters�of�the�doctrine�of�the�Law.�That�their�authority�might�be�more�reverenced�in�interpreters�of�the�doctrine�of�the�Law.�That�their�authority�might�be�more�reverenced�in�interpreters�of�the�doctrine�of�the�Law.�That�their�authority�might�be�more�reverenced�in�

general,�He�commands�the�people�to�acquiesce�in�their�judgment�even�on�the�most�general,�He�commands�the�people�to�acquiesce�in�their�judgment�even�on�the�most�general,�He�commands�the�people�to�acquiesce�in�their�judgment�even�on�the�most�general,�He�commands�the�people�to�acquiesce�in�their�judgment�even�on�the�most�

disagreeable�points:�for�if�their�sentence�is�to�be�submitted�to�where�a�mandisagreeable�points:�for�if�their�sentence�is�to�be�submitted�to�where�a�mandisagreeable�points:�for�if�their�sentence�is�to�be�submitted�to�where�a�mandisagreeable�points:�for�if�their�sentence�is�to�be�submitted�to�where�a�man’s�life�is�in�s�life�is�in�s�life�is�in�s�life�is�in�

question,�or�when�any�disputes�are�to�be�settled,�much�more�is�all�exception�taken�away�question,�or�when�any�disputes�are�to�be�settled,�much�more�is�all�exception�taken�away�question,�or�when�any�disputes�are�to�be�settled,�much�more�is�all�exception�taken�away�question,�or�when�any�disputes�are�to�be�settled,�much�more�is�all�exception�taken�away�

with�respect�to�Godwith�respect�to�Godwith�respect�to�Godwith�respect�to�God’s�worship�and�spiritual�doctrine.�I�confess�that�the�priests�are�not�the�s�worship�and�spiritual�doctrine.�I�confess�that�the�priests�are�not�the�s�worship�and�spiritual�doctrine.�I�confess�that�the�priests�are�not�the�s�worship�and�spiritual�doctrine.�I�confess�that�the�priests�are�not�the�

sole�judges�here�appointed,�but�that�others�of�the�people�are�associated�with�them�as�sole�judges�here�appointed,�but�that�others�of�the�people�are�associated�with�them�as�sole�judges�here�appointed,�but�that�others�of�the�people�are�associated�with�them�as�sole�judges�here�appointed,�but�that�others�of�the�people�are�associated�with�them�as�

colleagues,�yet�the�dignity�of�the�priesthood�is�especially�exalted.�The�opinion�which�some�colleagues,�yet�the�dignity�of�the�priesthood�is�especially�exalted.�The�opinion�which�some�colleagues,�yet�the�dignity�of�the�priesthood�is�especially�exalted.�The�opinion�which�some�colleagues,�yet�the�dignity�of�the�priesthood�is�especially�exalted.�The�opinion�which�some�

hold,�that�the�high�priest�alone�is�intended�by�the�word�judge,�is�easily�refuted;�because�hold,�that�the�high�priest�alone�is�intended�by�the�word�judge,�is�easily�refuted;�because�hold,�that�the�high�priest�alone�is�intended�by�the�word�judge,�is�easily�refuted;�because�hold,�that�the�high�priest�alone�is�intended�by�the�word�judge,�is�easily�refuted;�because�

Moses�distinctly�enumerates�the�priests,�the�Levites,�and�the�judge.�But�it�is�probable�that�Moses�distinctly�enumerates�the�priests,�the�Levites,�and�the�judge.�But�it�is�probable�that�Moses�distinctly�enumerates�the�priests,�the�Levites,�and�the�judge.�But�it�is�probable�that�Moses�distinctly�enumerates�the�priests,�the�Levites,�and�the�judge.�But�it�is�probable�that�

there�is�by�enallage�a�change�of�number�in�it;�for�it�appears�from�the�sacred�history�that�there�is�by�enallage�a�change�of�number�in�it;�for�it�appears�from�the�sacred�history�that�there�is�by�enallage�a�change�of�number�in�it;�for�it�appears�from�the�sacred�history�that�there�is�by�enallage�a�change�of�number�in�it;�for�it�appears�from�the�sacred�history�that�

several�were�appointed,�where�Jehoshaphat�is�related�to�have�chosenseveral�were�appointed,�where�Jehoshaphat�is�related�to�have�chosenseveral�were�appointed,�where�Jehoshaphat�is�related�to�have�chosenseveral�were�appointed,�where�Jehoshaphat�is�related�to�have�chosen “of�the�Levites,�and�of�the�Levites,�and�of�the�Levites,�and�of�the�Levites,�and�

of�the�priests,�and�of�the�chief�of�the�fathers�of�Israelof�the�priests,�and�of�the�chief�of�the�fathers�of�Israelof�the�priests,�and�of�the�chief�of�the�fathers�of�Israelof�the�priests,�and�of�the�chief�of�the�fathers�of�Israel” to�preside�at�Jerusalem�in�judgment.�to�preside�at�Jerusalem�in�judgment.�to�preside�at�Jerusalem�in�judgment.�to�preside�at�Jerusalem�in�judgment.�

((((2�2�2�2�Chronicles�Chronicles�Chronicles�Chronicles�19:819:819:819:8.)�Assuredly�the�pious�king�would�have�been�unwilling�to�depart�in�the�.)�Assuredly�the�pious�king�would�have�been�unwilling�to�depart�in�the�.)�Assuredly�the�pious�king�would�have�been�unwilling�to�depart�in�the�.)�Assuredly�the�pious�king�would�have�been�unwilling�to�depart�in�the�

very�least�degree�from�the�rule�of�the�Law,�and�his�zeal�is�praised�by�the�Holy�Spirit�very�least�degree�from�the�rule�of�the�Law,�and�his�zeal�is�praised�by�the�Holy�Spirit�very�least�degree�from�the�rule�of�the�Law,�and�his�zeal�is�praised�by�the�Holy�Spirit�very�least�degree�from�the�rule�of�the�Law,�and�his�zeal�is�praised�by�the�Holy�Spirit�

Himself:�but�this�was�the�arrangement�made,�as�appears�a�little�further�on,�that�the�high�Himself:�but�this�was�the�arrangement�made,�as�appears�a�little�further�on,�that�the�high�Himself:�but�this�was�the�arrangement�made,�as�appears�a�little�further�on,�that�the�high�Himself:�but�this�was�the�arrangement�made,�as�appears�a�little�further�on,�that�the�high�

priest�held�the�primacypriest�held�the�primacypriest�held�the�primacypriest�held�the�primacy “in�matters�of�the�Lord,in�matters�of�the�Lord,in�matters�of�the�Lord,in�matters�of�the�Lord,” and�the�kingand�the�kingand�the�kingand�the�king’s�governor�attended�to�civil�s�governor�attended�to�civil�s�governor�attended�to�civil�s�governor�attended�to�civil�

causes�and�earthly�affairs.�And�thus�again�is�confirmed�what�I�have�lately�adverted�to,�i.e.,�causes�and�earthly�affairs.�And�thus�again�is�confirmed�what�I�have�lately�adverted�to,�i.e.,�causes�and�earthly�affairs.�And�thus�again�is�confirmed�what�I�have�lately�adverted�to,�i.e.,�causes�and�earthly�affairs.�And�thus�again�is�confirmed�what�I�have�lately�adverted�to,�i.e.,�

that�the�office�of�teaching�was�entrusted�to�the�priests,�that�they�might�solve�any�difficult�that�the�office�of�teaching�was�entrusted�to�the�priests,�that�they�might�solve�any�difficult�that�the�office�of�teaching�was�entrusted�to�the�priests,�that�they�might�solve�any�difficult�that�the�office�of�teaching�was�entrusted�to�the�priests,�that�they�might�solve�any�difficult�

questions,�which�is�also�supported�by�the�words�of�Jehoshaphat,�when�he�says,questions,�which�is�also�supported�by�the�words�of�Jehoshaphat,�when�he�says,questions,�which�is�also�supported�by�the�words�of�Jehoshaphat,�when�he�says,questions,�which�is�also�supported�by�the�words�of�Jehoshaphat,�when�he�says, “And�what�And�what�And�what�And�what�

cause�soever�shall�come�to�you�of�your�brethrencause�soever�shall�come�to�you�of�your�brethrencause�soever�shall�come�to�you�of�your�brethrencause�soever�shall�come�to�you�of�your�brethren — between�blood�and�blood,�between�law�between�blood�and�blood,�between�law�between�blood�and�blood,�between�law�between�blood�and�blood,�between�law�

and�commandment,�statutes�and�judgments,�ye�shall�even�warn�them�that�they�trespass�not�and�commandment,�statutes�and�judgments,�ye�shall�even�warn�them�that�they�trespass�not�and�commandment,�statutes�and�judgments,�ye�shall�even�warn�them�that�they�trespass�not�and�commandment,�statutes�and�judgments,�ye�shall�even�warn�them�that�they�trespass�not�

against�the�Lord.against�the�Lord.against�the�Lord.against�the�Lord.” ((((2�2�2�2�Chronicles�Chronicles�Chronicles�Chronicles�19:1019:1019:1019:10.).).).)

Certainly,�as�the�cognisance�of�capital�crimes�properly�belonged�to�judges�of�the�other�Certainly,�as�the�cognisance�of�capital�crimes�properly�belonged�to�judges�of�the�other�Certainly,�as�the�cognisance�of�capital�crimes�properly�belonged�to�judges�of�the�other�Certainly,�as�the�cognisance�of�capital�crimes�properly�belonged�to�judges�of�the�other�

tribes,�so�determinations�as�to�precepts�and�statutes,�and�the�interpretation�of�the�whole�tribes,�so�determinations�as�to�precepts�and�statutes,�and�the�interpretation�of�the�whole�tribes,�so�determinations�as�to�precepts�and�statutes,�and�the�interpretation�of�the�whole�tribes,�so�determinations�as�to�precepts�and�statutes,�and�the�interpretation�of�the�whole�

Law,�was�the�peculiar�province�of�the�priests;�nor�can�we�doubt�but�that�the�words�of�Law,�was�the�peculiar�province�of�the�priests;�nor�can�we�doubt�but�that�the�words�of�Law,�was�the�peculiar�province�of�the�priests;�nor�can�we�doubt�but�that�the�words�of�Law,�was�the�peculiar�province�of�the�priests;�nor�can�we�doubt�but�that�the�words�of�

Malachi,�(Malachi�Malachi,�(Malachi�Malachi,�(Malachi�Malachi,�(Malachi�2:72:72:72:7,),),),) “the�prieststhe�prieststhe�prieststhe�priests’ lips�should�keep�knowledge,�and�they�should�seek�the�lips�should�keep�knowledge,�and�they�should�seek�the�lips�should�keep�knowledge,�and�they�should�seek�the�lips�should�keep�knowledge,�and�they�should�seek�the�

law�at�his�mouth:�for�he�is�the�messenger�of�the�Lord�of�hosts,law�at�his�mouth:�for�he�is�the�messenger�of�the�Lord�of�hosts,law�at�his�mouth:�for�he�is�the�messenger�of�the�Lord�of�hosts,law�at�his�mouth:�for�he�is�the�messenger�of�the�Lord�of�hosts,” were�taken�from�this�were�taken�from�this�were�taken�from�this�were�taken�from�this�

passage.�Now,�to�come�to�the�sum�of�this,�God�appoints�the�seat�of�judgment�to�be�at�the�passage.�Now,�to�come�to�the�sum�of�this,�God�appoints�the�seat�of�judgment�to�be�at�the�passage.�Now,�to�come�to�the�sum�of�this,�God�appoints�the�seat�of�judgment�to�be�at�the�passage.�Now,�to�come�to�the�sum�of�this,�God�appoints�the�seat�of�judgment�to�be�at�the�

30

sanctuary;�for,�although�in�the�first�verse�He�seems�to�nominate�the�priests�and�judges�sanctuary;�for,�although�in�the�first�verse�He�seems�to�nominate�the�priests�and�judges�sanctuary;�for,�although�in�the�first�verse�He�seems�to�nominate�the�priests�and�judges�sanctuary;�for,�although�in�the�first�verse�He�seems�to�nominate�the�priests�and�judges�

indiscriminately�to�the�decision�of�earthly�quarrels,�yet�in�the�fourth�verse�from�this�He�indiscriminately�to�the�decision�of�earthly�quarrels,�yet�in�the�fourth�verse�from�this�He�indiscriminately�to�the�decision�of�earthly�quarrels,�yet�in�the�fourth�verse�from�this�He�indiscriminately�to�the�decision�of�earthly�quarrels,�yet�in�the�fourth�verse�from�this�He�

sufficiently�shews�that�another�province�is�committed�to�the�priests,�i.e.,�to�keep�the�people�sufficiently�shews�that�another�province�is�committed�to�the�priests,�i.e.,�to�keep�the�people�sufficiently�shews�that�another�province�is�committed�to�the�priests,�i.e.,�to�keep�the�people�sufficiently�shews�that�another�province�is�committed�to�the�priests,�i.e.,�to�keep�the�people�

in�sound�and�pure�doctrine,�and�to�expound�what�is�rightin�sound�and�pure�doctrine,�and�to�expound�what�is�rightin�sound�and�pure�doctrine,�and�to�expound�what�is�rightin�sound�and�pure�doctrine,�and�to�expound�what�is�right — in�a�word,�to�be�the�teachers�of�in�a�word,�to�be�the�teachers�of�in�a�word,�to�be�the�teachers�of�in�a�word,�to�be�the�teachers�of�

the�Church.�But,�although�the�people�were�to�assent�to�whatever�they�should�decide,�so�the�Church.�But,�although�the�people�were�to�assent�to�whatever�they�should�decide,�so�the�Church.�But,�although�the�people�were�to�assent�to�whatever�they�should�decide,�so�the�Church.�But,�although�the�people�were�to�assent�to�whatever�they�should�decide,�so�

that�it�would�be�sinful�for�them�to�decline�from�it�to�the�right�hand�or�the�left,�yet�a�that�it�would�be�sinful�for�them�to�decline�from�it�to�the�right�hand�or�the�left,�yet�a�that�it�would�be�sinful�for�them�to�decline�from�it�to�the�right�hand�or�the�left,�yet�a�that�it�would�be�sinful�for�them�to�decline�from�it�to�the�right�hand�or�the�left,�yet�a�

tyrannical�power�was�not�thus�put�into�their�hands,�as�if,�when�they�had�arbitrarily�changed�tyrannical�power�was�not�thus�put�into�their�hands,�as�if,�when�they�had�arbitrarily�changed�tyrannical�power�was�not�thus�put�into�their�hands,�as�if,�when�they�had�arbitrarily�changed�tyrannical�power�was�not�thus�put�into�their�hands,�as�if,�when�they�had�arbitrarily�changed�

light�into�darkness,�their�perverted�decisions�were�to�be�deemed�oracular.�Their�light�into�darkness,�their�perverted�decisions�were�to�be�deemed�oracular.�Their�light�into�darkness,�their�perverted�decisions�were�to�be�deemed�oracular.�Their�light�into�darkness,�their�perverted�decisions�were�to�be�deemed�oracular.�Their�

interpretation�was�to�be�received�without�appeal;�yet,�on�the�other�hand,�this�rule�was�interpretation�was�to�be�received�without�appeal;�yet,�on�the�other�hand,�this�rule�was�interpretation�was�to�be�received�without�appeal;�yet,�on�the�other�hand,�this�rule�was�interpretation�was�to�be�received�without�appeal;�yet,�on�the�other�hand,�this�rule�was�

prescribed�to�them,�that�they�should�speak�as�from�the�mouth�of�God.�It�is�true�that�the�prescribed�to�them,�that�they�should�speak�as�from�the�mouth�of�God.�It�is�true�that�the�prescribed�to�them,�that�they�should�speak�as�from�the�mouth�of�God.�It�is�true�that�the�prescribed�to�them,�that�they�should�speak�as�from�the�mouth�of�God.�It�is�true�that�the�

word�here�used�is,�word�here�used�is,�word�here�used�is,�word�here�used�is,(206) ,תורה� thorah; which, although it means teaching, yet

undoubtedly signifies that teaching which is comprised in the Law, nay, it is equivalent

to the word law. And of this Jehoshaphat is a faithful interpreter, when he enumerates

the divisions, of which Scripture everywhere shews the Law of Moses to consist.

Although פי, phi, taken metaphorically, is equivalent in Hebrew to discourse, yet it here

emphatically expresses the sentence which shall be taken from the pure teaching of the

Law. The children of Israel, therefore, are commanded to do what the priests shall have

taught them; but how? according to the sentence taken from the Law. Nor can it be

doubted but that God at the same time furnished those, whom He desired to exalt to

such a high dignity, with the spirit of understanding and rectitude, that they might not

deliver any improper sentence. And this also is conveyed by the promise, “They�shall�They�shall�They�shall�They�shall�

shew�thee�the�sentence�of�judgment:shew�thee�the�sentence�of�judgment:shew�thee�the�sentence�of�judgment:shew�thee�the�sentence�of�judgment:” since�it�would�have�been�absurd�that�the�people�since�it�would�have�been�absurd�that�the�people�since�it�would�have�been�absurd�that�the�people�since�it�would�have�been�absurd�that�the�people�

should�have�obeyed�God�in�vain,�and�to�their�own�destruction.�Since�now�one�sole�Priest,�should�have�obeyed�God�in�vain,�and�to�their�own�destruction.�Since�now�one�sole�Priest,�should�have�obeyed�God�in�vain,�and�to�their�own�destruction.�Since�now�one�sole�Priest,�should�have�obeyed�God�in�vain,�and�to�their�own�destruction.�Since�now�one�sole�Priest,�

who�is�also�our�Master,�even�Christ,�is�set�over�us,�wo�be�unto�us�if�we�do�not�simply�submit�who�is�also�our�Master,�even�Christ,�is�set�over�us,�wo�be�unto�us�if�we�do�not�simply�submit�who�is�also�our�Master,�even�Christ,�is�set�over�us,�wo�be�unto�us�if�we�do�not�simply�submit�who�is�also�our�Master,�even�Christ,�is�set�over�us,�wo�be�unto�us�if�we�do�not�simply�submit�

ourselves�to�His�word,�and�are�not�ready�to�obey�Him,�with�all�the�modesty�and�ourselves�to�His�word,�and�are�not�ready�to�obey�Him,�with�all�the�modesty�and�ourselves�to�His�word,�and�are�not�ready�to�obey�Him,�with�all�the�modesty�and�ourselves�to�His�word,�and�are�not�ready�to�obey�Him,�with�all�the�modesty�and�

teachableness�that�becomes�us.teachableness�that�becomes�us.teachableness�that�becomes�us.teachableness�that�becomes�us.

COFFMAN, "The instructions here amounted to the appointment of a Supreme

Court in Israel. It was not exclusively a priestly court, for there is no evidence

that "the judge" mentioned here was in any sense a priest. Yet the mention of the

Levites indicates that all decisions were to be made in the light of God's revealed

law through Moses. Note also, that persons refusing to abide by the decisions of

this court were also to be executed. Dummelow defined this court as consisting of

the chief magistrate and the priests, whose decisions were final.[6] "The

decisions they gave, of course, were considered to be the decisions of

Jehovah."[7]

The principal function of these verses was to authorize and prescribe the setting

31

up of such a supreme court after Israel was settled in Canaan. It should be

especially noticed that the instructions here contain no details whatever, and, in

a sense, are even vague and indefinite, and Keil pointed out that:

"The simple fact, that this judicial court at the place of the national sanctuary is

described in such general terms furnishes a convincing proof that we have here

the words of Moses himself, and not those of some later writer who copied the

superior court in Jerusalem in the times of the monarchy."

ELLICOTT, "(8) If there arise a matter too hard for thee.—Literally,�too�Literally,�too�Literally,�too�Literally,�too�

wonderful.wonderful.wonderful.wonderful.

Between blood and blood, between plea and plea, and between stroke and

stroke.—TheTheTheThe “bloodbloodbloodblood” and�theand�theand�theand�the “pleapleapleaplea” seem�to�indicate�criminal�and�civil�cases.�The�seem�to�indicate�criminal�and�civil�cases.�The�seem�to�indicate�criminal�and�civil�cases.�The�seem�to�indicate�criminal�and�civil�cases.�The�

wordwordwordword “strokestrokestrokestroke” is�the�common�word�foris�the�common�word�foris�the�common�word�foris�the�common�word�for “plagueplagueplagueplague” in�the�Pentateuch�and�elsewhere.�in�the�Pentateuch�and�elsewhere.�in�the�Pentateuch�and�elsewhere.�in�the�Pentateuch�and�elsewhere.�

It�may�possibly�refer�to�cases�of�ceremonial�purity�or�impurity,�especially�in�It�may�possibly�refer�to�cases�of�ceremonial�purity�or�impurity,�especially�in�It�may�possibly�refer�to�cases�of�ceremonial�purity�or�impurity,�especially�in�It�may�possibly�refer�to�cases�of�ceremonial�purity�or�impurity,�especially�in�

reference�to�disease.�There�is�an�evident�allusion�to�this�law�in�the�history�of�King�reference�to�disease.�There�is�an�evident�allusion�to�this�law�in�the�history�of�King�reference�to�disease.�There�is�an�evident�allusion�to�this�law�in�the�history�of�King�reference�to�disease.�There�is�an�evident�allusion�to�this�law�in�the�history�of�King�

Jehoshaphat�(Jehoshaphat�(Jehoshaphat�(Jehoshaphat�(2�2�2�2�Chronicles�Chronicles�Chronicles�Chronicles�19:819:819:819:8----10101010).�There�the�words�are).�There�the�words�are).�There�the�words�are).�There�the�words�are “between�blood�and�between�blood�and�between�blood�and�between�blood�and�

blood,�between�law�and�commandment,�statutes�and�judgments.blood,�between�law�and�commandment,�statutes�and�judgments.blood,�between�law�and�commandment,�statutes�and�judgments.blood,�between�law�and�commandment,�statutes�and�judgments.” The�questions�are�The�questions�are�The�questions�are�The�questions�are�

((((1111)�between�two�contending�parties;�()�between�two�contending�parties;�()�between�two�contending�parties;�()�between�two�contending�parties;�(2222)�between�the�law�as�a�general�rule�and�its�)�between�the�law�as�a�general�rule�and�its�)�between�the�law�as�a�general�rule�and�its�)�between�the�law�as�a�general�rule�and�its�

application�to�particular�duties,�institutions�and�requirements.�Other�passages�in�application�to�particular�duties,�institutions�and�requirements.�Other�passages�in�application�to�particular�duties,�institutions�and�requirements.�Other�passages�in�application�to�particular�duties,�institutions�and�requirements.�Other�passages�in�

the�same�chapter�recall�Deuteronomy�the�same�chapter�recall�Deuteronomy�the�same�chapter�recall�Deuteronomy�the�same�chapter�recall�Deuteronomy�16:1816:1816:1816:18----20202020....

Matters of controversy within thy gates—i.e.,�in�the�local�courts�of�their�several�i.e.,�in�the�local�courts�of�their�several�i.e.,�in�the�local�courts�of�their�several�i.e.,�in�the�local�courts�of�their�several�

cities.�Thecities.�Thecities.�Thecities.�The “gategategategate” was�the�place�of�judgment.�In�was�the�place�of�judgment.�In�was�the�place�of�judgment.�In�was�the�place�of�judgment.�In�2�2�2�2�Chronicles�Chronicles�Chronicles�Chronicles�19:1019:1019:1019:10,�the�phrase�is�,�the�phrase�is�,�the�phrase�is�,�the�phrase�is�

more�clearly�expressed,�thus,more�clearly�expressed,�thus,more�clearly�expressed,�thus,more�clearly�expressed,�thus, “what�cause�soever�shall�come�unto�you�of�your�what�cause�soever�shall�come�unto�you�of�your�what�cause�soever�shall�come�unto�you�of�your�what�cause�soever�shall�come�unto�you�of�your�

brethren�that�dwell�in�their�cities.brethren�that�dwell�in�their�cities.brethren�that�dwell�in�their�cities.brethren�that�dwell�in�their�cities.”

Into the place which the Lord thy God shall choose.—This�implies�what�was�This�implies�what�was�This�implies�what�was�This�implies�what�was�

afterwards�ordered�before�Mosesafterwards�ordered�before�Mosesafterwards�ordered�before�Mosesafterwards�ordered�before�Moses’ death,�that�the�standard�copy�of�the�Law�would�death,�that�the�standard�copy�of�the�Law�would�death,�that�the�standard�copy�of�the�Law�would�death,�that�the�standard�copy�of�the�Law�would�

be�kept�beside�the�Ark�of�the�Covenant,�in�the�sacred�place�(Deuteronomy�be�kept�beside�the�Ark�of�the�Covenant,�in�the�sacred�place�(Deuteronomy�be�kept�beside�the�Ark�of�the�Covenant,�in�the�sacred�place�(Deuteronomy�be�kept�beside�the�Ark�of�the�Covenant,�in�the�sacred�place�(Deuteronomy�31:2631:2631:2631:26).).).).

K&D, "Verses 8-13

The Higher Judicial Court at the Place of the Sanctuary. - Just as the judges

appointed at Sinai were to bring to Moses whatever cases were too difficult for

32

them to decide, that he might judge them according to the decision of God

(Exodus 18:26 and Exodus 18:19); so in the future the judges of the different

towns were to bring all difficult cases, which they were unable to decide, before

the Levitical priests and judges at the place of the sanctuary, that a final decision

might be given there.

PETT, "The Place Of Final Appeal (Deuteronomy 17:8-15).

But if a case was brought which was too hard for the local justices to decide,

there was to be a final place of appeal made up of the levitical priests and the

chief judge of the day (Deuteronomy 17:9). Their decision would be final. We can

compare this with how Moses was the final court of appeal while he was still over

the people (Deuteronomy 1:17 b).

Analysis in the words of Moses:

a If there arise a matter too hard for you in judgment, between blood and

blood, between plea and plea, and between stroke and stroke, being matters of

controversy within your gates (Deuteronomy 17:8 a).

b Then shall you arise, and get yourself up to the place which Yahweh your

God shall choose (Deuteronomy 17:8 b).

c And you shall come to the priests the Levites, and to the judge that shall

be in those days, and you shall enquire, and they will show you the sentence of

judgment, and you shall do according to the tenor of the sentence which they

shall show you from that place which Yahweh shall choose (Deuteronomy

17:9-10 a).

c And you shall observe to do according to all that they shall teach you,

according to the tenor of the law which they shall teach you, and according to the

judgment which they shall tell you, you shall do. You shall not turn aside from

the sentence which they shall show you, to the right hand, nor to the left

(Deuteronomy 17:10-11).

b And the man who does presumptuously, in not listening to the priest who

stands to minister there before Yahweh your God, or to the judge (Deuteronomy

17:12 a).

a Even that man shall die, and you shall put away the evil from Israel, and

all the people shall hear, and fear, and no more act presumptuously

(Deuteronomy 17:12-13).

This is more progressive than chiasmus. But in ‘aaaa’ the�method�of�judgment�for�the�method�of�judgment�for�the�method�of�judgment�for�the�method�of�judgment�for�

difficult�cases�is�laid�out,�and�in�the�parallel�the�warning�given�that�not�to�accept�the�difficult�cases�is�laid�out,�and�in�the�parallel�the�warning�given�that�not�to�accept�the�difficult�cases�is�laid�out,�and�in�the�parallel�the�warning�given�that�not�to�accept�the�difficult�cases�is�laid�out,�and�in�the�parallel�the�warning�given�that�not�to�accept�the�

33

verdict�of�that�court�(the�court�being�seen�to�be�fair)�will�mean�being�put�to�death�verdict�of�that�court�(the�court�being�seen�to�be�fair)�will�mean�being�put�to�death�verdict�of�that�court�(the�court�being�seen�to�be�fair)�will�mean�being�put�to�death�verdict�of�that�court�(the�court�being�seen�to�be�fair)�will�mean�being�put�to�death�

so�that�all�may�fear�and�give�due�respect�to�the�court�which�meets�before�Yahweh.�so�that�all�may�fear�and�give�due�respect�to�the�court�which�meets�before�Yahweh.�so�that�all�may�fear�and�give�due�respect�to�the�court�which�meets�before�Yahweh.�so�that�all�may�fear�and�give�due�respect�to�the�court�which�meets�before�Yahweh.�

For�to�dispute�the�sacred�court�is�doing�evil�in�Israel�by�encouraging�anarchy.�InFor�to�dispute�the�sacred�court�is�doing�evil�in�Israel�by�encouraging�anarchy.�InFor�to�dispute�the�sacred�court�is�doing�evil�in�Israel�by�encouraging�anarchy.�InFor�to�dispute�the�sacred�court�is�doing�evil�in�Israel�by�encouraging�anarchy.�In ‘bbbb’

they�arise�and�go�to�the�place�which�Yahweh�their�God�chooses�and�in�the�parallel�they�arise�and�go�to�the�place�which�Yahweh�their�God�chooses�and�in�the�parallel�they�arise�and�go�to�the�place�which�Yahweh�their�God�chooses�and�in�the�parallel�they�arise�and�go�to�the�place�which�Yahweh�their�God�chooses�and�in�the�parallel�

they�are�to�heed�the�ones�who�minister�there�before�Yahweh�their�God.�Inthey�are�to�heed�the�ones�who�minister�there�before�Yahweh�their�God.�Inthey�are�to�heed�the�ones�who�minister�there�before�Yahweh�their�God.�Inthey�are�to�heed�the�ones�who�minister�there�before�Yahweh�their�God.�In ‘cccc’ they�they�they�they�

enquire�and�receive�the�verdict�and�are�to�do�according�to�the�tenor�of�the�enquire�and�receive�the�verdict�and�are�to�do�according�to�the�tenor�of�the�enquire�and�receive�the�verdict�and�are�to�do�according�to�the�tenor�of�the�enquire�and�receive�the�verdict�and�are�to�do�according�to�the�tenor�of�the�

sentence,�and�in�the�parallel�they�must�receive�the�sentence�which�has�been�sentence,�and�in�the�parallel�they�must�receive�the�sentence�which�has�been�sentence,�and�in�the�parallel�they�must�receive�the�sentence�which�has�been�sentence,�and�in�the�parallel�they�must�receive�the�sentence�which�has�been�

according�to�the�tenor�of�Yahwehaccording�to�the�tenor�of�Yahwehaccording�to�the�tenor�of�Yahwehaccording�to�the�tenor�of�Yahweh’s�Instruction�and�not�divert�from�it.s�Instruction�and�not�divert�from�it.s�Instruction�and�not�divert�from�it.s�Instruction�and�not�divert�from�it.

Deuteronomy 17:8-11

‘If there arise a matter too hard for you in judgment, between blood and blood,

between plea and plea, and between stroke and stroke, being matters of

controversy within your gates, then shall you arise, and get yourself up to the

place which Yahweh your God shall choose, and you shall come to the priests the

Levites, and to the judge that shall be in those days, and you shall enquire, and

they will show you the sentence of judgment, and you shall do according to the

tenor of the sentence which they shall show you from that place which Yahweh

shall choose, and you shall observe to do according to all that they shall teach

you, according to the tenor of the law which they shall teach you, and according

to the judgment which they shall tell you, you shall do. You shall not turn aside

from the sentence which they shall show you, to the right hand, nor to the left.’

If�any�case�proved�too�hard�for�the�local�elders�to�judge,�whether�it�be�a�question�of�If�any�case�proved�too�hard�for�the�local�elders�to�judge,�whether�it�be�a�question�of�If�any�case�proved�too�hard�for�the�local�elders�to�judge,�whether�it�be�a�question�of�If�any�case�proved�too�hard�for�the�local�elders�to�judge,�whether�it�be�a�question�of�

differentiation�between�murder�and�other�forms�of�manslaughter,�or�between�the�differentiation�between�murder�and�other�forms�of�manslaughter,�or�between�the�differentiation�between�murder�and�other�forms�of�manslaughter,�or�between�the�differentiation�between�murder�and�other�forms�of�manslaughter,�or�between�the�

approach�to�be�taken�on�one�type�of�plea�as�against�another,�or�between�grievous�approach�to�be�taken�on�one�type�of�plea�as�against�another,�or�between�grievous�approach�to�be�taken�on�one�type�of�plea�as�against�another,�or�between�grievous�approach�to�be�taken�on�one�type�of�plea�as�against�another,�or�between�grievous�

bodily�harm�and�lesser�violence,�with�the�case�producing�differing�views�among�the�bodily�harm�and�lesser�violence,�with�the�case�producing�differing�views�among�the�bodily�harm�and�lesser�violence,�with�the�case�producing�differing�views�among�the�bodily�harm�and�lesser�violence,�with�the�case�producing�differing�views�among�the�

elders�as�they�judged�the�matter�within�the�gate.�Then�they�must�rise�up�and�take�elders�as�they�judged�the�matter�within�the�gate.�Then�they�must�rise�up�and�take�elders�as�they�judged�the�matter�within�the�gate.�Then�they�must�rise�up�and�take�elders�as�they�judged�the�matter�within�the�gate.�Then�they�must�rise�up�and�take�

the�details�of�the�case�to�the�Central�Sanctuary,�to�the�place�where�Yahweh�was�the�details�of�the�case�to�the�Central�Sanctuary,�to�the�place�where�Yahweh�was�the�details�of�the�case�to�the�Central�Sanctuary,�to�the�place�where�Yahweh�was�the�details�of�the�case�to�the�Central�Sanctuary,�to�the�place�where�Yahweh�was�

pleased�to�dwell.�They�must�come�to�the�levitical�priests�and�the�judge�of�that�day,�pleased�to�dwell.�They�must�come�to�the�levitical�priests�and�the�judge�of�that�day,�pleased�to�dwell.�They�must�come�to�the�levitical�priests�and�the�judge�of�that�day,�pleased�to�dwell.�They�must�come�to�the�levitical�priests�and�the�judge�of�that�day,�

and�enquire�there�as�to�what�to�do.and�enquire�there�as�to�what�to�do.and�enquire�there�as�to�what�to�do.and�enquire�there�as�to�what�to�do.

This is the first mention in Deuteronomy of the levitical priests (‘the�priests�the�the�priests�the�the�priests�the�the�priests�the�

LevitesLevitesLevitesLevites’)�under�that�title.�The�phrase�is�found�regularly�in�Deuteronomy�)�under�that�title.�The�phrase�is�found�regularly�in�Deuteronomy�)�under�that�title.�The�phrase�is�found�regularly�in�Deuteronomy�)�under�that�title.�The�phrase�is�found�regularly�in�Deuteronomy�

(Deuteronomy�(Deuteronomy�(Deuteronomy�(Deuteronomy�17:917:917:917:9;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�17:1817:1817:1817:18;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�18:118:118:118:1;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�24:824:824:824:8;�;�;�;�

34

Deuteronomy�Deuteronomy�Deuteronomy�Deuteronomy�27:927:927:927:9)�in�contrast�with)�in�contrast�with)�in�contrast�with)�in�contrast�with ‘the�Levite(s)the�Levite(s)the�Levite(s)the�Levite(s)’ (Deuteronomy�(Deuteronomy�(Deuteronomy�(Deuteronomy�12:1212:1212:1212:12;�;�;�;�

Deuteronomy�Deuteronomy�Deuteronomy�Deuteronomy�12:1812:1812:1812:18----19191919;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�14:2714:2714:2714:27;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�14:2914:2914:2914:29;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�

16:1116:1116:1116:11;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�16:1416:1416:1416:14;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�18:718:718:718:7;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�26:1126:1126:1126:11----13131313;�;�;�;�

Deuteronomy�Deuteronomy�Deuteronomy�Deuteronomy�27:1427:1427:1427:14;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�31:2531:2531:2531:25)�and�is�used�regularly�by�others�who�)�and�is�used�regularly�by�others�who�)�and�is�used�regularly�by�others�who�)�and�is�used�regularly�by�others�who�

certainly�separate�between�priests�and�Levites�(certainly�separate�between�priests�and�Levites�(certainly�separate�between�priests�and�Levites�(certainly�separate�between�priests�and�Levites�(2�2�2�2�Chronicles�Chronicles�Chronicles�Chronicles�23:1823:1823:1823:18;�;�;�;�2�2�2�2�Chronicles�Chronicles�Chronicles�Chronicles�

30:2730:2730:2730:27;�Ezekiel�;�Ezekiel�;�Ezekiel�;�Ezekiel�43:1943:1943:1943:19;�Ezekiel�;�Ezekiel�;�Ezekiel�;�Ezekiel�44:1544:1544:1544:15;�Ezekiel�;�Ezekiel�;�Ezekiel�;�Ezekiel�48:1348:1348:1348:13).�It�is�also�found�in�Jeremiah�).�It�is�also�found�in�Jeremiah�).�It�is�also�found�in�Jeremiah�).�It�is�also�found�in�Jeremiah�

33:1833:1833:1833:18;�Joshua�;�Joshua�;�Joshua�;�Joshua�3:33:33:33:3;�Joshua�;�Joshua�;�Joshua�;�Joshua�8:338:338:338:33.�For�further�consideration�see�discussion�at�.�For�further�consideration�see�discussion�at�.�For�further�consideration�see�discussion�at�.�For�further�consideration�see�discussion�at�

Deuteronomy�Deuteronomy�Deuteronomy�Deuteronomy�18:118:118:118:1----6666....

“The judge that shall be in those days.” This�would�suggest�that�Israel�might�have�This�would�suggest�that�Israel�might�have�This�would�suggest�that�Israel�might�have�This�would�suggest�that�Israel�might�have�

someone�who�could�act�as�supreme�judge,�a�recognised�individual�of�unique�status,�someone�who�could�act�as�supreme�judge,�a�recognised�individual�of�unique�status,�someone�who�could�act�as�supreme�judge,�a�recognised�individual�of�unique�status,�someone�who�could�act�as�supreme�judge,�a�recognised�individual�of�unique�status,�

to�have�a�say�in�such�cases,�or�possibly�a�small�group�of�such�recognised�judges�to�have�a�say�in�such�cases,�or�possibly�a�small�group�of�such�recognised�judges�to�have�a�say�in�such�cases,�or�possibly�a�small�group�of�such�recognised�judges�to�have�a�say�in�such�cases,�or�possibly�a�small�group�of�such�recognised�judges�

acting�in�turn.�He/they�possibly�also�had�general�jurisdiction�over�the�people.�Moses�acting�in�turn.�He/they�possibly�also�had�general�jurisdiction�over�the�people.�Moses�acting�in�turn.�He/they�possibly�also�had�general�jurisdiction�over�the�people.�Moses�acting�in�turn.�He/they�possibly�also�had�general�jurisdiction�over�the�people.�Moses�

may�have�been�thinking�of�the�one�who�would�replace�him,�and�the�ones�who�would�may�have�been�thinking�of�the�one�who�would�replace�him,�and�the�ones�who�would�may�have�been�thinking�of�the�one�who�would�replace�him,�and�the�ones�who�would�may�have�been�thinking�of�the�one�who�would�replace�him,�and�the�ones�who�would�

follow�after,�for�as�the�recognised�head�of�Israel�he�had�been�responsible�for�follow�after,�for�as�the�recognised�head�of�Israel�he�had�been�responsible�for�follow�after,�for�as�the�recognised�head�of�Israel�he�had�been�responsible�for�follow�after,�for�as�the�recognised�head�of�Israel�he�had�been�responsible�for�

judging�(Exodus�judging�(Exodus�judging�(Exodus�judging�(Exodus�18:1318:1318:1318:13)�as�well�as�exercising�authority�over�the�people.�We�can�)�as�well�as�exercising�authority�over�the�people.�We�can�)�as�well�as�exercising�authority�over�the�people.�We�can�)�as�well�as�exercising�authority�over�the�people.�We�can�

compare�here�the�termcompare�here�the�termcompare�here�the�termcompare�here�the�term ‘judgejudgejudgejudge’,�as�used�in�the�book�of�Judges,�of�people�who�ruled�,�as�used�in�the�book�of�Judges,�of�people�who�ruled�,�as�used�in�the�book�of�Judges,�of�people�who�ruled�,�as�used�in�the�book�of�Judges,�of�people�who�ruled�

overoveroverover ‘IsraelIsraelIsraelIsrael’.

“And you shall do according to the tenor of the sentence which they shall show

you from that place which Yahweh shall choose, and you shall observe to do

according to all that they shall teach you, according to the tenor of the law which

they shall teach you, and according to the judgment which they shall tell you,

you shall do. You shall not turn aside from the sentence which they shall show

you, to the right hand, nor to the left.” Whatever�decision�or�sentence�was�passed�Whatever�decision�or�sentence�was�passed�Whatever�decision�or�sentence�was�passed�Whatever�decision�or�sentence�was�passed�

by�this�body�at�the�place�where�Yahweh�had�chosen�to�dwell�they�must�observe�to�by�this�body�at�the�place�where�Yahweh�had�chosen�to�dwell�they�must�observe�to�by�this�body�at�the�place�where�Yahweh�had�chosen�to�dwell�they�must�observe�to�by�this�body�at�the�place�where�Yahweh�had�chosen�to�dwell�they�must�observe�to�

do.�This�would�be�the�place�of�final�appeal.�This�would�apply�whether�the�matter�do.�This�would�be�the�place�of�final�appeal.�This�would�apply�whether�the�matter�do.�This�would�be�the�place�of�final�appeal.�This�would�apply�whether�the�matter�do.�This�would�be�the�place�of�final�appeal.�This�would�apply�whether�the�matter�

was�one�of�interpreting�teaching�or�of�passing�judgment.�Once�decided�there�was�to�was�one�of�interpreting�teaching�or�of�passing�judgment.�Once�decided�there�was�to�was�one�of�interpreting�teaching�or�of�passing�judgment.�Once�decided�there�was�to�was�one�of�interpreting�teaching�or�of�passing�judgment.�Once�decided�there�was�to�

be�no�avoiding�it,�and�no�seeking�to�give�it�different�meanings.�It�was�in�fact�be�no�avoiding�it,�and�no�seeking�to�give�it�different�meanings.�It�was�in�fact�be�no�avoiding�it,�and�no�seeking�to�give�it�different�meanings.�It�was�in�fact�be�no�avoiding�it,�and�no�seeking�to�give�it�different�meanings.�It�was�in�fact�

important�that�once�a�final�decision�had�been�reached�the�matter�was�seen�as�important�that�once�a�final�decision�had�been�reached�the�matter�was�seen�as�important�that�once�a�final�decision�had�been�reached�the�matter�was�seen�as�important�that�once�a�final�decision�had�been�reached�the�matter�was�seen�as�

closed.closed.closed.closed.

35

This was, of course, on the basis that they were revealing themselves to be

reliable judges by following Moses’ requirements�for�them.�They�were�required�to�requirements�for�them.�They�were�required�to�requirements�for�them.�They�were�required�to�requirements�for�them.�They�were�required�to�

demonstrate�how�their�decision�was�in�accordance�with�Goddemonstrate�how�their�decision�was�in�accordance�with�Goddemonstrate�how�their�decision�was�in�accordance�with�Goddemonstrate�how�their�decision�was�in�accordance�with�God’s�Instruction�(Torah).�s�Instruction�(Torah).�s�Instruction�(Torah).�s�Instruction�(Torah).�

Once�they�became�patently�dishonest�the�prophets�attacked�them�openly.�But�the�Once�they�became�patently�dishonest�the�prophets�attacked�them�openly.�But�the�Once�they�became�patently�dishonest�the�prophets�attacked�them�openly.�But�the�Once�they�became�patently�dishonest�the�prophets�attacked�them�openly.�But�the�

people�were�still�required�to�carry�out�their�decisions�(compare�Jesus�verdict�on�the�people�were�still�required�to�carry�out�their�decisions�(compare�Jesus�verdict�on�the�people�were�still�required�to�carry�out�their�decisions�(compare�Jesus�verdict�on�the�people�were�still�required�to�carry�out�their�decisions�(compare�Jesus�verdict�on�the�

Pharisees�Pharisees�Pharisees�Pharisees�---- Matthew�Matthew�Matthew�Matthew�23:323:323:323:3).).).).

Comparing this and Deuteronomy 16:18-20 with the reign of Jehoshaphat

(‘Yahweh�has�judgedYahweh�has�judgedYahweh�has�judgedYahweh�has�judged’)�it�seems�that�Jehoshaphat�followed�the�pattern�laid�down�)�it�seems�that�Jehoshaphat�followed�the�pattern�laid�down�)�it�seems�that�Jehoshaphat�followed�the�pattern�laid�down�)�it�seems�that�Jehoshaphat�followed�the�pattern�laid�down�

here�(here�(here�(here�(2�2�2�2�Chronicles�Chronicles�Chronicles�Chronicles�19191919).�Jehoshaphat�appointed�judges�up�and�down�the�land,�and�).�Jehoshaphat�appointed�judges�up�and�down�the�land,�and�).�Jehoshaphat�appointed�judges�up�and�down�the�land,�and�).�Jehoshaphat�appointed�judges�up�and�down�the�land,�and�

established�a�supreme�court�in�Jerusalem�headed�byestablished�a�supreme�court�in�Jerusalem�headed�byestablished�a�supreme�court�in�Jerusalem�headed�byestablished�a�supreme�court�in�Jerusalem�headed�by ‘Levites,�priests�and�the�heads�Levites,�priests�and�the�heads�Levites,�priests�and�the�heads�Levites,�priests�and�the�heads�

of�the�families�of�Israel�for�the�judgment�of�Yahweh�and�for�controversiesof�the�families�of�Israel�for�the�judgment�of�Yahweh�and�for�controversiesof�the�families�of�Israel�for�the�judgment�of�Yahweh�and�for�controversiesof�the�families�of�Israel�for�the�judgment�of�Yahweh�and�for�controversies’ ((((2�2�2�2�

Chronicles�Chronicles�Chronicles�Chronicles�19:819:819:819:8).).).).

HAWKER, "Verses 8-13

The apostle Paul from the case of the presumptuous man here noticed, takes

occasion to draw a very striking inference in his Epistle to the Hebrews, in those

who tread underfoot the SON of GOD, and count the blood of the covenant an

unholy thing, and are guilty of doing despite to the SPIRIT of grace. When the

law is thus spiritualized and explained by the gospel, and the apostle's authority

in this instance certainly justifies its being done, it is very sweet and delightful.

See Hebrews 10:28-29.

BENSON. "Deuteronomy 17:8. If there arise a matter too hard for thee — These�These�These�These�

words�are�to�be�considered�as�addressed�to�the�ordinary�judges,�or�inferior�words�are�to�be�considered�as�addressed�to�the�ordinary�judges,�or�inferior�words�are�to�be�considered�as�addressed�to�the�ordinary�judges,�or�inferior�words�are�to�be�considered�as�addressed�to�the�ordinary�judges,�or�inferior�

magistrates,�who�were�appointed�in�every�city.�Between�blood�and�bloodmagistrates,�who�were�appointed�in�every�city.�Between�blood�and�bloodmagistrates,�who�were�appointed�in�every�city.�Between�blood�and�bloodmagistrates,�who�were�appointed�in�every�city.�Between�blood�and�blood — That�is,�That�is,�That�is,�That�is,�

in�capital�causes,�whether�a�man�hath�committed�wilful�or�casual�murder.�Between�in�capital�causes,�whether�a�man�hath�committed�wilful�or�casual�murder.�Between�in�capital�causes,�whether�a�man�hath�committed�wilful�or�casual�murder.�Between�in�capital�causes,�whether�a�man�hath�committed�wilful�or�casual�murder.�Between�

plea�and�pleaplea�and�pleaplea�and�pleaplea�and�plea — In�civil�causes,�about�words�or�estates,�when�the�question�is,�whose�In�civil�causes,�about�words�or�estates,�when�the�question�is,�whose�In�civil�causes,�about�words�or�estates,�when�the�question�is,�whose�In�civil�causes,�about�words�or�estates,�when�the�question�is,�whose�

cause�or�plea�is�the�better?�Between�stroke�and�strokecause�or�plea�is�the�better?�Between�stroke�and�strokecause�or�plea�is�the�better?�Between�stroke�and�strokecause�or�plea�is�the�better?�Between�stroke�and�stroke — In�criminal�causes;�in�the�In�criminal�causes;�in�the�In�criminal�causes;�in�the�In�criminal�causes;�in�the�

case�of�wounds�or�blows�inflicted�by�one�man�upon�another,�of�which�see�Exodus�case�of�wounds�or�blows�inflicted�by�one�man�upon�another,�of�which�see�Exodus�case�of�wounds�or�blows�inflicted�by�one�man�upon�another,�of�which�see�Exodus�case�of�wounds�or�blows�inflicted�by�one�man�upon�another,�of�which�see�Exodus�

21:2021:2021:2021:20.�Being�matters�of�controversy.�Being�matters�of�controversy.�Being�matters�of�controversy.�Being�matters�of�controversy — That�is,�such�things�being�doubtful,�and�the�That�is,�such�things�being�doubtful,�and�the�That�is,�such�things�being�doubtful,�and�the�That�is,�such�things�being�doubtful,�and�the�

magistrates�being�divided�in�their�opinions�about�them.�Thou�shalt�get�thee�unto�magistrates�being�divided�in�their�opinions�about�them.�Thou�shalt�get�thee�unto�magistrates�being�divided�in�their�opinions�about�them.�Thou�shalt�get�thee�unto�magistrates�being�divided�in�their�opinions�about�them.�Thou�shalt�get�thee�unto�

the�place�which�the�Lord�shall�choosethe�place�which�the�Lord�shall�choosethe�place�which�the�Lord�shall�choosethe�place�which�the�Lord�shall�choose — Namely,�to�set�up�his�tabernacle�or�temple�Namely,�to�set�up�his�tabernacle�or�temple�Namely,�to�set�up�his�tabernacle�or�temple�Namely,�to�set�up�his�tabernacle�or�temple�

36

there;�because�there�was�the�abode,�both�of�their�sanhedrim,�which�was�constituted�there;�because�there�was�the�abode,�both�of�their�sanhedrim,�which�was�constituted�there;�because�there�was�the�abode,�both�of�their�sanhedrim,�which�was�constituted�there;�because�there�was�the�abode,�both�of�their�sanhedrim,�which�was�constituted�

of�priests�and�civil�magistrates,�and�of�the�highof�priests�and�civil�magistrates,�and�of�the�highof�priests�and�civil�magistrates,�and�of�the�highof�priests�and�civil�magistrates,�and�of�the�high----priests,�who�were�to�consult�God,�by�priests,�who�were�to�consult�God,�by�priests,�who�were�to�consult�God,�by�priests,�who�were�to�consult�God,�by�

Urim,�in�matters�which�could�not�be�decided�otherwise.Urim,�in�matters�which�could�not�be�decided�otherwise.Urim,�in�matters�which�could�not�be�decided�otherwise.Urim,�in�matters�which�could�not�be�decided�otherwise.

WHEDON, "8. If there arise a matter too hard for thee — The�meaning�evidently�The�meaning�evidently�The�meaning�evidently�The�meaning�evidently�

is�this:�In�cases�where�it�is�difficult�to�decide,�as�to�a�fatal�blow�or�in�disputes�about�is�this:�In�cases�where�it�is�difficult�to�decide,�as�to�a�fatal�blow�or�in�disputes�about�is�this:�In�cases�where�it�is�difficult�to�decide,�as�to�a�fatal�blow�or�in�disputes�about�is�this:�In�cases�where�it�is�difficult�to�decide,�as�to�a�fatal�blow�or�in�disputes�about�

civil�matters,�or�in�cases�of�bodily�injury,�the�subject�must�be�referred�for�civil�matters,�or�in�cases�of�bodily�injury,�the�subject�must�be�referred�for�civil�matters,�or�in�cases�of�bodily�injury,�the�subject�must�be�referred�for�civil�matters,�or�in�cases�of�bodily�injury,�the�subject�must�be�referred�for�

adjudication�to�this�high�judicial�court.�The�judges�appointed�at�Sinai�were�to�bring�adjudication�to�this�high�judicial�court.�The�judges�appointed�at�Sinai�were�to�bring�adjudication�to�this�high�judicial�court.�The�judges�appointed�at�Sinai�were�to�bring�adjudication�to�this�high�judicial�court.�The�judges�appointed�at�Sinai�were�to�bring�

to�Moses�such�cases�as�they�found�it�impossible�to�decide.to�Moses�such�cases�as�they�found�it�impossible�to�decide.to�Moses�such�cases�as�they�found�it�impossible�to�decide.to�Moses�such�cases�as�they�found�it�impossible�to�decide.

So after the people became settled in the land there was to be a place for the final

adjudication of difficult cases. This was not an appeal from the parties involved,

but a referring of the matter by the local judges.

K&D 8-9, "The Higher Judicial Court at the Place of the Sanctuary. - Just as the judges appointed at Sinai were to bring to Moses whatever cases were too difficult for them to decide, that he might judge them according to the decision of God (Exo_18:26 and Exo_18:19); so in the future the judges of the different towns were to bring all difficult cases, which they were unable to decide, before the Levitical priests and judges at the place of the sanctuary, that a final decision might be given there.

Deu_17:8-9

“If there is to thee a matter too marvellous for judgment נפלא) withמן�, too

wonderful, incomprehensible, or beyond carrying out, Gen_18:14, i.e., too difficult to give a judicial decision upon), between blood and blood, plea and plea, stroke and stroke (i.e., too hard for you to decide according to what legal provisions a fatal blow, or dispute on some civil matter, or a bodily injury, is to be settled), disputes in thy gates (a loosely arranged apposition in this sense, dispute of different kinds, such as shall arise in thy towns); arise, and get thee to the place which Jehovah thy God shall choose; and go to the Levitical priest and the judge that shall be in those days, and inquire.” Israel is addressed here as a nation, but the words are not to be supposed to be directed “first of all to the local courts (Deu_16:18), and lastly to the contending parties” (Knobel), nor “directly to the parties to the suit” (Schultz), but simply to the persons whose duty it was to administer justice in the nation, i.e., to the regular judges in the different towns and districts of the land. This is evident from the general fact, that the Mosaic law never recognises any appeal to higher courts by the different parties to a lawsuit, and that in this case also it is not assumed, since all that is enjoined is, that if the matter should be too difficult for the local judges to decide, they themselves were to carry it to the superior court. As Oehler has quite correctly observed in Herzog's Cyclopaedia, “this superior court was not a court of appeal; for it did not adjudicate after the local court had already given a verdict, but in cases in which the latter would not trust itself to give a verdict at all.” And this is more especially evident from what is stated in Deu_17:10, with regard to the decisions of the superior court, namely, that they were to do whatever the superior judges taught, without deviating to the right hand or to the left. This is unquestionably far more applicable to the judges of the different towns, who were to

37

carry out exactly the sentence of the higher tribunal, than to the parties to the suit, inasmuch as the latter, at all events those who were condemned for blood (i.e., for murder), could not possibly be in a position to alter the decision of the court at pleasure, since it did not rest with them, but with the authorities of their town, to carry out the sentence.

Moses did not directly institute a superior tribunal at the place of the sanctuary on this occasion, but rather assumed its existence; not however its existence at that time (as Riehm and other modern critics suppose), but its establishment and existence in the future. Just as he gives no minute directions concerning the organization of the different local courts, but leaves this to the natural development of the judicial institutions already in existence, so he also restricts himself, so far as the higher court is concerned, to general allusions, which might serve as a guide to the national rulers of a future day, to organize it according to the existing models. He had no disorganized mob before him, but a well-ordered nation, already in possession of civil institutions, with fruitful germs for further expansion and organization. In addition to its civil classification into tribes, families, fathers' houses, and family groups, which possessed at once their rulers in their own heads, the nation had received in the priesthood, with the high priest at the head, and the Levites as their assistants, a spiritual class, which mediated between the congregation and the Lord, and not only kept up the knowledge of right in the people as the guardian of the law, but by virtue of the high priest's office was able to lay the rights of the people before God, and in difficult cases could ask for His decision. Moreover, a leader had already been appointed for the nation, for the time immediately succeeding Moses' death; and in this nomination of Joshua, a pledge had been given that the Lord would never leave it without a supreme ruler of its civil affairs, but, along with the high priest, would also appoint a judge at the place of the central sanctuary, who would administer justice in the highest court in association with the priests. On the ground of these facts, sit was enough for the future to mention the Levitical priests and the judge who would be at the place of the sanctuary, as constituting the court by which the difficult questions were to be decided.

(Note: The simple fact, that the judicial court at the place of the national sanctuary is described in such general terms, furnishes a convincing proof that we have here the words of Moses, and not those of some later prophetic writer who had copied the superior court at Jerusalem of the times of the kings, as Riehm and the critics assume.)

For instance, the words themselves show distinctly enough, that by “the judge” we are not to understand the high priest, but the temporal judge or president of the superior court; and it is evident from the singular, “the priest that standeth to minister there before the Lord” (Deu_17:12), that the high priest is included among the priests. The expression “the priests the Levites” (Levitical priests), which also occurs in Deu_17:18; Deu_18:1; Deu_21:5; Deu_24:8; Deu_27:9; Deu_31:9, instead of “sons of Aaron,” which we find in the middle books, is quite in harmony with the time and character of the book before us. As long as Aaron was living with his sons, the priesthood consisted only of himself and his sons, that is to say, of one family. Hence all the instructions in the middle books are addressed to them, and for the most part to Aaron personally (vid., Ex 28 and 29; Lev 8-10; Num_18:1, etc.). This as all changed when Aaron died; henceforth the priesthood consisted simply of the descendants of Aaron and his sons, who were no longer one family, but formed a distinct class in the nation, the legitimacy of which arose from its connection with the tribe of Levi, to which Aaron himself had belonged. It was evidently more appropriate, therefore, to describe them as sons of Levi than as sons of Aaron, which had been the title formerly given to the priests, with the exception of the high priest, viz., Aaron himself. - In connection with the superior court, however, the priests are

38

introduced rather as knowing and teaching the law (Lev_10:11), than as actual judges. For this reason appeal was to be made not only to them, but also to the judge, whose duty it was in any case to make the judicial inquiry and pronounce the sentence. - The object of the verb “inquire” (Deu_17:9) follows after “they shall show thee,” viz., “the word of right,” the judicial sentence which is sought (2Ch_19:6).

9 Go to the Levitical priests and to the judge

who is in office at that time. Inquire of them and

they will give you the verdict.

GILL, "Thou shalt come unto the priests, the Levites,.... The priests that are of the tribe of Levi, as the Targum of Jonathan, and so Jarchi; for Aben Ezra says there are priests that are not of the genealogy of Levi; such there were indeed in Jeroboam's time, 1Ki_12:31. Maimonides (f) observes, that it is ordered that there should be in the great sanhedrim priests and Levites, as it is said: "and thou shalt come unto the priests, and the judge that shall be in those days, and inquire"; judge is here put for judges, of which the great court consisted, being priests, Levites, and Israelites; See Gill on Deu_16:18, though others think that only a single person is meant, such as Othniel, Ehud, Gideon, Samson, &c. but then as there was not always such an one in being, I should rather think that the judge here, if a single person, is the president or prince of the great sanhedrim, who succeeded Moses, and sat in his place; and of him and his court, the priests, and Levites and Israelites that composed it, inquiry was to be made:

and they shall show thee the sentence of judgment; give their judgment in the difficult case proposed, and declare what is right to be done, and what sentence is to be pronounced.

ELLICOTT, "(9) Thou shalt come unto the priests the Levites—i.e.,i.e.,i.e.,i.e., “the�priests�that�the�priests�that�the�priests�that�the�priests�that�

come�of�the�tribe�of�Levicome�of�the�tribe�of�Levicome�of�the�tribe�of�Levicome�of�the�tribe�of�Levi” (Rashi).�Some�modern�critics�say�the�writer�of�Deuteronomy�(Rashi).�Some�modern�critics�say�the�writer�of�Deuteronomy�(Rashi).�Some�modern�critics�say�the�writer�of�Deuteronomy�(Rashi).�Some�modern�critics�say�the�writer�of�Deuteronomy�

knew�no�distinction�between�priests�and�Levites;�but�see�above�on�Deuteronomy�knew�no�distinction�between�priests�and�Levites;�but�see�above�on�Deuteronomy�knew�no�distinction�between�priests�and�Levites;�but�see�above�on�Deuteronomy�knew�no�distinction�between�priests�and�Levites;�but�see�above�on�Deuteronomy�11:611:611:611:6,�and�,�and�,�and�,�and�

also�the�notes�on�Deuteronomy�also�the�notes�on�Deuteronomy�also�the�notes�on�Deuteronomy�also�the�notes�on�Deuteronomy�31:931:931:931:9;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�31:2531:2531:2531:25....

The priests, the Levites, and . . . the judge.—The�order�agrees�exactly�with�the�The�order�agrees�exactly�with�the�The�order�agrees�exactly�with�the�The�order�agrees�exactly�with�the�

constitution�which�Moses�left�behind�him�at�his�death.�This�has�been�already�indicated�in�constitution�which�Moses�left�behind�him�at�his�death.�This�has�been�already�indicated�in�constitution�which�Moses�left�behind�him�at�his�death.�This�has�been�already�indicated�in�constitution�which�Moses�left�behind�him�at�his�death.�This�has�been�already�indicated�in�

Numbers�Numbers�Numbers�Numbers�27:1527:1527:1527:15----21212121.�Joshua�was�to.�Joshua�was�to.�Joshua�was�to.�Joshua�was�to “stand�before�Eleazar.stand�before�Eleazar.stand�before�Eleazar.stand�before�Eleazar.” Eleazar�was�to�ask�counsel�from�Eleazar�was�to�ask�counsel�from�Eleazar�was�to�ask�counsel�from�Eleazar�was�to�ask�counsel�from�

Jehovah,�and�at�his�word�Joshua�and�all�the�people�were�to�go�in�and�out.�The�order,�when�Jehovah,�and�at�his�word�Joshua�and�all�the�people�were�to�go�in�and�out.�The�order,�when�Jehovah,�and�at�his�word�Joshua�and�all�the�people�were�to�go�in�and�out.�The�order,�when�Jehovah,�and�at�his�word�Joshua�and�all�the�people�were�to�go�in�and�out.�The�order,�when�

39

the�two�are�mentioned�together�in�the�Book�of�Joshua,�is�invariablythe�two�are�mentioned�together�in�the�Book�of�Joshua,�is�invariablythe�two�are�mentioned�together�in�the�Book�of�Joshua,�is�invariablythe�two�are�mentioned�together�in�the�Book�of�Joshua,�is�invariably “Eleazar�the�priest�and�Eleazar�the�priest�and�Eleazar�the�priest�and�Eleazar�the�priest�and�

Joshua�the�son�of�Nun,Joshua�the�son�of�Nun,Joshua�the�son�of�Nun,Joshua�the�son�of�Nun,” not�vice�versnot�vice�versnot�vice�versnot�vice�versג. The priests are the custodians of the Law; the

judge or chief magistrate is the executor of it. (Comp. Malachi 2:7-8.) The principle is

not altered by the substitution of a king for the judge, or by the addition of a prophet.

That shall be in those days.—Rashi�and�the�New�Testament�are�curiously�agreed�in�the�Rashi�and�the�New�Testament�are�curiously�agreed�in�the�Rashi�and�the�New�Testament�are�curiously�agreed�in�the�Rashi�and�the�New�Testament�are�curiously�agreed�in�the�

application�of�this�part�of�the�commandment.�Our�Lord,�in�Matthew�application�of�this�part�of�the�commandment.�Our�Lord,�in�Matthew�application�of�this�part�of�the�commandment.�Our�Lord,�in�Matthew�application�of�this�part�of�the�commandment.�Our�Lord,�in�Matthew�23:223:223:223:2----3333,�says�of�the�,�says�of�the�,�says�of�the�,�says�of�the�

Scribes�and�Pharisees�(the�judges�of�His�day)�that�theyScribes�and�Pharisees�(the�judges�of�His�day)�that�theyScribes�and�Pharisees�(the�judges�of�His�day)�that�theyScribes�and�Pharisees�(the�judges�of�His�day)�that�they “sit�in�Mosessit�in�Mosessit�in�Mosessit�in�Moses’ seat:�All�therefore�seat:�All�therefore�seat:�All�therefore�seat:�All�therefore�

whatsoever�they�bid�you�observe,�that�observe�and�do.whatsoever�they�bid�you�observe,�that�observe�and�do.whatsoever�they�bid�you�observe,�that�observe�and�do.whatsoever�they�bid�you�observe,�that�observe�and�do.” Rashi�says�here,Rashi�says�here,Rashi�says�here,Rashi�says�here, “Although�he�is�Although�he�is�Although�he�is�Although�he�is�

not�like�the�rest�of�the�judges�that�were�before�him,�thou�must�hearken�to�him.�There�is�no�not�like�the�rest�of�the�judges�that�were�before�him,�thou�must�hearken�to�him.�There�is�no�not�like�the�rest�of�the�judges�that�were�before�him,�thou�must�hearken�to�him.�There�is�no�not�like�the�rest�of�the�judges�that�were�before�him,�thou�must�hearken�to�him.�There�is�no�

judge�for�thee�except�the�judge�that�is�in�thy�days.judge�for�thee�except�the�judge�that�is�in�thy�days.judge�for�thee�except�the�judge�that�is�in�thy�days.judge�for�thee�except�the�judge�that�is�in�thy�days.”

K&D,�"Deuteronomy�K&D,�"Deuteronomy�K&D,�"Deuteronomy�K&D,�"Deuteronomy�17:817:817:817:8----9999

“If there is to thee a matter too marvellous for judgment (נפלאמן, too wonderful,

incomprehensible, or beyond carrying out, Genesis 18:14, i.e., too difficult to give

a judicial decision upon), between blood and blood, plea and plea, stroke and

stroke (i.e., too hard for you to decide according to what legal provisions a fatal

blow, or dispute on some civil matter, or a bodily injury, is to be settled),

disputes in thy gates (a loosely arranged apposition in this sense, dispute of

different kinds, such as shall arise in thy towns); arise, and get thee to the place

which Jehovah thy God shall choose; and go to the Levitical priest and the judge

that shall be in those days, and inquire.” Israel�is�addressed�here�as�a�nation,�but�Israel�is�addressed�here�as�a�nation,�but�Israel�is�addressed�here�as�a�nation,�but�Israel�is�addressed�here�as�a�nation,�but�

the�words�are�not�to�be�supposed�to�be�directedthe�words�are�not�to�be�supposed�to�be�directedthe�words�are�not�to�be�supposed�to�be�directedthe�words�are�not�to�be�supposed�to�be�directed “first�of�all�to�the�local�courts�first�of�all�to�the�local�courts�first�of�all�to�the�local�courts�first�of�all�to�the�local�courts�

(Deuteronomy�(Deuteronomy�(Deuteronomy�(Deuteronomy�16:1816:1816:1816:18),�and�lastly�to�the�contending�parties),�and�lastly�to�the�contending�parties),�and�lastly�to�the�contending�parties),�and�lastly�to�the�contending�parties” (Knobel),�nor(Knobel),�nor(Knobel),�nor(Knobel),�nor “directly�directly�directly�directly�

to�the�parties�to�the�suitto�the�parties�to�the�suitto�the�parties�to�the�suitto�the�parties�to�the�suit” (Schultz),�but�simply�to�the�persons�whose�duty�it�was�to�(Schultz),�but�simply�to�the�persons�whose�duty�it�was�to�(Schultz),�but�simply�to�the�persons�whose�duty�it�was�to�(Schultz),�but�simply�to�the�persons�whose�duty�it�was�to�

administer�justice�in�the�nation,�i.e.,�to�the�regular�judges�in�the�different�towns�and�administer�justice�in�the�nation,�i.e.,�to�the�regular�judges�in�the�different�towns�and�administer�justice�in�the�nation,�i.e.,�to�the�regular�judges�in�the�different�towns�and�administer�justice�in�the�nation,�i.e.,�to�the�regular�judges�in�the�different�towns�and�

districts�of�the�land.�This�is�evident�from�the�general�fact,�that�the�Mosaic�law�never�districts�of�the�land.�This�is�evident�from�the�general�fact,�that�the�Mosaic�law�never�districts�of�the�land.�This�is�evident�from�the�general�fact,�that�the�Mosaic�law�never�districts�of�the�land.�This�is�evident�from�the�general�fact,�that�the�Mosaic�law�never�

recognises�any�appeal�to�higher�courts�by�the�different�parties�to�a�lawsuit,�and�that�recognises�any�appeal�to�higher�courts�by�the�different�parties�to�a�lawsuit,�and�that�recognises�any�appeal�to�higher�courts�by�the�different�parties�to�a�lawsuit,�and�that�recognises�any�appeal�to�higher�courts�by�the�different�parties�to�a�lawsuit,�and�that�

in�this�case�also�it�is�not�assumed,�since�all�that�is�enjoined�is,�that�if�the�matter�in�this�case�also�it�is�not�assumed,�since�all�that�is�enjoined�is,�that�if�the�matter�in�this�case�also�it�is�not�assumed,�since�all�that�is�enjoined�is,�that�if�the�matter�in�this�case�also�it�is�not�assumed,�since�all�that�is�enjoined�is,�that�if�the�matter�

should�be�too�difficult�for�the�local�judges�to�decide,�they�themselves�were�to�carry�should�be�too�difficult�for�the�local�judges�to�decide,�they�themselves�were�to�carry�should�be�too�difficult�for�the�local�judges�to�decide,�they�themselves�were�to�carry�should�be�too�difficult�for�the�local�judges�to�decide,�they�themselves�were�to�carry�

it�to�the�superior�court.�As�Oehler�has�quite�correctly�observed�in�Herzog's�it�to�the�superior�court.�As�Oehler�has�quite�correctly�observed�in�Herzog's�it�to�the�superior�court.�As�Oehler�has�quite�correctly�observed�in�Herzog's�it�to�the�superior�court.�As�Oehler�has�quite�correctly�observed�in�Herzog's�

Cyclopaedia,Cyclopaedia,Cyclopaedia,Cyclopaedia, “this�superior�court�was�not�a�court�of�appeal;�for�it�did�not�adjudicate�this�superior�court�was�not�a�court�of�appeal;�for�it�did�not�adjudicate�this�superior�court�was�not�a�court�of�appeal;�for�it�did�not�adjudicate�this�superior�court�was�not�a�court�of�appeal;�for�it�did�not�adjudicate�

after�the�local�court�had�already�given�a�verdict,�but�in�cases�in�which�the�latter�after�the�local�court�had�already�given�a�verdict,�but�in�cases�in�which�the�latter�after�the�local�court�had�already�given�a�verdict,�but�in�cases�in�which�the�latter�after�the�local�court�had�already�given�a�verdict,�but�in�cases�in�which�the�latter�

40

would�not�trust�itself�to�give�a�verdict�at�all.would�not�trust�itself�to�give�a�verdict�at�all.would�not�trust�itself�to�give�a�verdict�at�all.would�not�trust�itself�to�give�a�verdict�at�all.” And�this�is�more�especially�evident�And�this�is�more�especially�evident�And�this�is�more�especially�evident�And�this�is�more�especially�evident�

from�what�is�stated�in�Deuteronomy�from�what�is�stated�in�Deuteronomy�from�what�is�stated�in�Deuteronomy�from�what�is�stated�in�Deuteronomy�17:1017:1017:1017:10,�with�regard�to�the�decisions�of�the�,�with�regard�to�the�decisions�of�the�,�with�regard�to�the�decisions�of�the�,�with�regard�to�the�decisions�of�the�

superior�court,�namely,�that�they�were�to�do�whatever�the�superior�judges�taught,�superior�court,�namely,�that�they�were�to�do�whatever�the�superior�judges�taught,�superior�court,�namely,�that�they�were�to�do�whatever�the�superior�judges�taught,�superior�court,�namely,�that�they�were�to�do�whatever�the�superior�judges�taught,�

without�deviating�to�the�right�hand�or�to�the�left.�This�is�unquestionably�far�more�without�deviating�to�the�right�hand�or�to�the�left.�This�is�unquestionably�far�more�without�deviating�to�the�right�hand�or�to�the�left.�This�is�unquestionably�far�more�without�deviating�to�the�right�hand�or�to�the�left.�This�is�unquestionably�far�more�

applicable�to�the�judges�of�the�different�towns,�who�were�to�carry�out�exactly�the�applicable�to�the�judges�of�the�different�towns,�who�were�to�carry�out�exactly�the�applicable�to�the�judges�of�the�different�towns,�who�were�to�carry�out�exactly�the�applicable�to�the�judges�of�the�different�towns,�who�were�to�carry�out�exactly�the�

sentence�of�the�higher�tribunal,�than�to�the�parties�to�the�suit,�inasmuch�as�the�sentence�of�the�higher�tribunal,�than�to�the�parties�to�the�suit,�inasmuch�as�the�sentence�of�the�higher�tribunal,�than�to�the�parties�to�the�suit,�inasmuch�as�the�sentence�of�the�higher�tribunal,�than�to�the�parties�to�the�suit,�inasmuch�as�the�

latter,�at�all�events�those�who�were�condemned�for�blood�(i.e.,�for�murder),�could�latter,�at�all�events�those�who�were�condemned�for�blood�(i.e.,�for�murder),�could�latter,�at�all�events�those�who�were�condemned�for�blood�(i.e.,�for�murder),�could�latter,�at�all�events�those�who�were�condemned�for�blood�(i.e.,�for�murder),�could�

not�possibly�be�in�a�position�to�alter�the�decision�of�the�court�at�pleasure,�since�it�not�possibly�be�in�a�position�to�alter�the�decision�of�the�court�at�pleasure,�since�it�not�possibly�be�in�a�position�to�alter�the�decision�of�the�court�at�pleasure,�since�it�not�possibly�be�in�a�position�to�alter�the�decision�of�the�court�at�pleasure,�since�it�

did�not�rest�with�them,�but�with�the�authorities�of�their�town,�to�carry�out�the�did�not�rest�with�them,�but�with�the�authorities�of�their�town,�to�carry�out�the�did�not�rest�with�them,�but�with�the�authorities�of�their�town,�to�carry�out�the�did�not�rest�with�them,�but�with�the�authorities�of�their�town,�to�carry�out�the�

sentence.sentence.sentence.sentence.

Moses�did�not�directly�institute�a�superior�tribunal�at�the�place�of�the�sanctuary�on�Moses�did�not�directly�institute�a�superior�tribunal�at�the�place�of�the�sanctuary�on�Moses�did�not�directly�institute�a�superior�tribunal�at�the�place�of�the�sanctuary�on�Moses�did�not�directly�institute�a�superior�tribunal�at�the�place�of�the�sanctuary�on�

this�occasion,�but�rather�assumed�its�existence;�not�however�its�existence�at�that�this�occasion,�but�rather�assumed�its�existence;�not�however�its�existence�at�that�this�occasion,�but�rather�assumed�its�existence;�not�however�its�existence�at�that�this�occasion,�but�rather�assumed�its�existence;�not�however�its�existence�at�that�

time�(as�Riehm�and�other�modern�critics�suppose),�but�its�establishment�and�time�(as�Riehm�and�other�modern�critics�suppose),�but�its�establishment�and�time�(as�Riehm�and�other�modern�critics�suppose),�but�its�establishment�and�time�(as�Riehm�and�other�modern�critics�suppose),�but�its�establishment�and�

existence�in�the�future.�Just�as�he�gives�no�minute�directions�concerning�the�existence�in�the�future.�Just�as�he�gives�no�minute�directions�concerning�the�existence�in�the�future.�Just�as�he�gives�no�minute�directions�concerning�the�existence�in�the�future.�Just�as�he�gives�no�minute�directions�concerning�the�

organization�of�the�different�local�courts,�but�leaves�this�to�the�natural�development�organization�of�the�different�local�courts,�but�leaves�this�to�the�natural�development�organization�of�the�different�local�courts,�but�leaves�this�to�the�natural�development�organization�of�the�different�local�courts,�but�leaves�this�to�the�natural�development�

of�the�judicial�institutions�already�in�existence,�so�he�also�restricts�himself,�so�far�as�of�the�judicial�institutions�already�in�existence,�so�he�also�restricts�himself,�so�far�as�of�the�judicial�institutions�already�in�existence,�so�he�also�restricts�himself,�so�far�as�of�the�judicial�institutions�already�in�existence,�so�he�also�restricts�himself,�so�far�as�

the�higher�court�is�concerned,�to�general�allusions,�which�might�serve�as�a�guide�to�the�higher�court�is�concerned,�to�general�allusions,�which�might�serve�as�a�guide�to�the�higher�court�is�concerned,�to�general�allusions,�which�might�serve�as�a�guide�to�the�higher�court�is�concerned,�to�general�allusions,�which�might�serve�as�a�guide�to�

the�national�rulers�of�a�future�day,�to�organize�it�according�to�the�existing�models.�the�national�rulers�of�a�future�day,�to�organize�it�according�to�the�existing�models.�the�national�rulers�of�a�future�day,�to�organize�it�according�to�the�existing�models.�the�national�rulers�of�a�future�day,�to�organize�it�according�to�the�existing�models.�

He�had�no�disorganized�mob�before�him,�but�a�wellHe�had�no�disorganized�mob�before�him,�but�a�wellHe�had�no�disorganized�mob�before�him,�but�a�wellHe�had�no�disorganized�mob�before�him,�but�a�well----ordered�nation,�already�in�ordered�nation,�already�in�ordered�nation,�already�in�ordered�nation,�already�in�

possession�of�civil�institutions,�with�fruitful�germs�for�further�expansion�and�possession�of�civil�institutions,�with�fruitful�germs�for�further�expansion�and�possession�of�civil�institutions,�with�fruitful�germs�for�further�expansion�and�possession�of�civil�institutions,�with�fruitful�germs�for�further�expansion�and�

organization.�In�addition�to�its�civil�classification�into�tribes,�families,�fathers'�organization.�In�addition�to�its�civil�classification�into�tribes,�families,�fathers'�organization.�In�addition�to�its�civil�classification�into�tribes,�families,�fathers'�organization.�In�addition�to�its�civil�classification�into�tribes,�families,�fathers'�

houses,�and�family�groups,�which�possessed�at�once�their�rulers�in�their�own�heads,�houses,�and�family�groups,�which�possessed�at�once�their�rulers�in�their�own�heads,�houses,�and�family�groups,�which�possessed�at�once�their�rulers�in�their�own�heads,�houses,�and�family�groups,�which�possessed�at�once�their�rulers�in�their�own�heads,�

the�nation�had�received�in�the�priesthood,�with�the�high�priest�at�the�head,�and�the�the�nation�had�received�in�the�priesthood,�with�the�high�priest�at�the�head,�and�the�the�nation�had�received�in�the�priesthood,�with�the�high�priest�at�the�head,�and�the�the�nation�had�received�in�the�priesthood,�with�the�high�priest�at�the�head,�and�the�

Levites�as�their�assistants,�a�spiritual�class,�which�mediated�between�the�Levites�as�their�assistants,�a�spiritual�class,�which�mediated�between�the�Levites�as�their�assistants,�a�spiritual�class,�which�mediated�between�the�Levites�as�their�assistants,�a�spiritual�class,�which�mediated�between�the�

congregation�and�the�Lord,�and�not�only�kept�up�the�knowledge�of�right�in�the�congregation�and�the�Lord,�and�not�only�kept�up�the�knowledge�of�right�in�the�congregation�and�the�Lord,�and�not�only�kept�up�the�knowledge�of�right�in�the�congregation�and�the�Lord,�and�not�only�kept�up�the�knowledge�of�right�in�the�

people�as�the�guardian�of�the�law,�but�by�virtue�of�the�high�priest's�office�was�able�to�people�as�the�guardian�of�the�law,�but�by�virtue�of�the�high�priest's�office�was�able�to�people�as�the�guardian�of�the�law,�but�by�virtue�of�the�high�priest's�office�was�able�to�people�as�the�guardian�of�the�law,�but�by�virtue�of�the�high�priest's�office�was�able�to�

lay�the�rights�of�the�people�before�God,�and�in�difficult�cases�could�ask�for�His�lay�the�rights�of�the�people�before�God,�and�in�difficult�cases�could�ask�for�His�lay�the�rights�of�the�people�before�God,�and�in�difficult�cases�could�ask�for�His�lay�the�rights�of�the�people�before�God,�and�in�difficult�cases�could�ask�for�His�

decision.�Moreover,�a�leader�had�already�been�appointed�for�the�nation,�for�the�decision.�Moreover,�a�leader�had�already�been�appointed�for�the�nation,�for�the�decision.�Moreover,�a�leader�had�already�been�appointed�for�the�nation,�for�the�decision.�Moreover,�a�leader�had�already�been�appointed�for�the�nation,�for�the�

41

time�immediately�succeeding�Moses'�death;�and�in�this�nomination�of�Joshua,�a�time�immediately�succeeding�Moses'�death;�and�in�this�nomination�of�Joshua,�a�time�immediately�succeeding�Moses'�death;�and�in�this�nomination�of�Joshua,�a�time�immediately�succeeding�Moses'�death;�and�in�this�nomination�of�Joshua,�a�

pledge�had�been�given�that�the�Lord�would�never�leave�it�without�a�supreme�ruler�pledge�had�been�given�that�the�Lord�would�never�leave�it�without�a�supreme�ruler�pledge�had�been�given�that�the�Lord�would�never�leave�it�without�a�supreme�ruler�pledge�had�been�given�that�the�Lord�would�never�leave�it�without�a�supreme�ruler�

of�its�civil�affairs,�but,�along�with�the�high�priest,�would�also�appoint�a�judge�at�the�of�its�civil�affairs,�but,�along�with�the�high�priest,�would�also�appoint�a�judge�at�the�of�its�civil�affairs,�but,�along�with�the�high�priest,�would�also�appoint�a�judge�at�the�of�its�civil�affairs,�but,�along�with�the�high�priest,�would�also�appoint�a�judge�at�the�

place�of�the�central�sanctuary,�who�would�administer�justice�in�the�highest�court�in�place�of�the�central�sanctuary,�who�would�administer�justice�in�the�highest�court�in�place�of�the�central�sanctuary,�who�would�administer�justice�in�the�highest�court�in�place�of�the�central�sanctuary,�who�would�administer�justice�in�the�highest�court�in�

association�with�the�priests.�On�the�ground�of�these�facts,�sit�was�enough�for�the�association�with�the�priests.�On�the�ground�of�these�facts,�sit�was�enough�for�the�association�with�the�priests.�On�the�ground�of�these�facts,�sit�was�enough�for�the�association�with�the�priests.�On�the�ground�of�these�facts,�sit�was�enough�for�the�

future�to�mention�the�Levitical�priests�and�the�judge�who�would�be�at�the�place�of�future�to�mention�the�Levitical�priests�and�the�judge�who�would�be�at�the�place�of�future�to�mention�the�Levitical�priests�and�the�judge�who�would�be�at�the�place�of�future�to�mention�the�Levitical�priests�and�the�judge�who�would�be�at�the�place�of�

the�sanctuary,�as�constituting�the�court�by�wthe�sanctuary,�as�constituting�the�court�by�wthe�sanctuary,�as�constituting�the�court�by�wthe�sanctuary,�as�constituting�the�court�by�which�the�difficult�questions�were�to�be�hich�the�difficult�questions�were�to�be�hich�the�difficult�questions�were�to�be�hich�the�difficult�questions�were�to�be�

decided.decided.decided.decided.

(Note:�The�simple�fact,�that�the�judicial�court�at�the�place�of�the�national�sanctuary�(Note:�The�simple�fact,�that�the�judicial�court�at�the�place�of�the�national�sanctuary�(Note:�The�simple�fact,�that�the�judicial�court�at�the�place�of�the�national�sanctuary�(Note:�The�simple�fact,�that�the�judicial�court�at�the�place�of�the�national�sanctuary�

is�described�in�such�general�terms,�furnishes�a�convincing�proof�that�we�have�here�is�described�in�such�general�terms,�furnishes�a�convincing�proof�that�we�have�here�is�described�in�such�general�terms,�furnishes�a�convincing�proof�that�we�have�here�is�described�in�such�general�terms,�furnishes�a�convincing�proof�that�we�have�here�

the�words�of�Moses,�and�not�those�of�some�later�prophetic�writer�who�had�copied�the�words�of�Moses,�and�not�those�of�some�later�prophetic�writer�who�had�copied�the�words�of�Moses,�and�not�those�of�some�later�prophetic�writer�who�had�copied�the�words�of�Moses,�and�not�those�of�some�later�prophetic�writer�who�had�copied�

the�superior�court�at�Jerusalem�of�the�times�of�the�kings,�as�Riehm�and�the�critics�the�superior�court�at�Jerusalem�of�the�times�of�the�kings,�as�Riehm�and�the�critics�the�superior�court�at�Jerusalem�of�the�times�of�the�kings,�as�Riehm�and�the�critics�the�superior�court�at�Jerusalem�of�the�times�of�the�kings,�as�Riehm�and�the�critics�

assume.)assume.)assume.)assume.)

For�instance,�the�words�themselves�show�distinctly�enough,�that�byFor�instance,�the�words�themselves�show�distinctly�enough,�that�byFor�instance,�the�words�themselves�show�distinctly�enough,�that�byFor�instance,�the�words�themselves�show�distinctly�enough,�that�by “the�judgethe�judgethe�judgethe�judge” we�we�we�we�

are�not�to�understand�the�high�priest,�but�the�temporal�judge�or�president�of�the�are�not�to�understand�the�high�priest,�but�the�temporal�judge�or�president�of�the�are�not�to�understand�the�high�priest,�but�the�temporal�judge�or�president�of�the�are�not�to�understand�the�high�priest,�but�the�temporal�judge�or�president�of�the�

superior�court;�and�it�is�evident�from�the�singular,superior�court;�and�it�is�evident�from�the�singular,superior�court;�and�it�is�evident�from�the�singular,superior�court;�and�it�is�evident�from�the�singular, “the�priest�that�standeth�to�the�priest�that�standeth�to�the�priest�that�standeth�to�the�priest�that�standeth�to�

minister�there�before�the�Lordminister�there�before�the�Lordminister�there�before�the�Lordminister�there�before�the�Lord” (Deuteronomy�(Deuteronomy�(Deuteronomy�(Deuteronomy�17:1217:1217:1217:12),�that�the�high�priest�is�),�that�the�high�priest�is�),�that�the�high�priest�is�),�that�the�high�priest�is�

included�among�the�priests.�The�expressionincluded�among�the�priests.�The�expressionincluded�among�the�priests.�The�expressionincluded�among�the�priests.�The�expression “the�priests�the�Levitesthe�priests�the�Levitesthe�priests�the�Levitesthe�priests�the�Levites” (Levitical�(Levitical�(Levitical�(Levitical�

priests),�which�also�occurs�in�Deuteronomy�priests),�which�also�occurs�in�Deuteronomy�priests),�which�also�occurs�in�Deuteronomy�priests),�which�also�occurs�in�Deuteronomy�17:1817:1817:1817:18;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�;�Deuteronomy�18:1;

Deuteronomy 21:5; Deuteronomy 24:8; Deuteronomy 27:9; Deuteronomy 31:9,

instead of “sons�of�Aaron,sons�of�Aaron,sons�of�Aaron,sons�of�Aaron,” which�we�find�in�the�middle�books,�is�quite�in�harmony�which�we�find�in�the�middle�books,�is�quite�in�harmony�which�we�find�in�the�middle�books,�is�quite�in�harmony�which�we�find�in�the�middle�books,�is�quite�in�harmony�

with�the�time�and�character�of�the�book�before�us.�As�long�as�Aaron�was�living�with�with�the�time�and�character�of�the�book�before�us.�As�long�as�Aaron�was�living�with�with�the�time�and�character�of�the�book�before�us.�As�long�as�Aaron�was�living�with�with�the�time�and�character�of�the�book�before�us.�As�long�as�Aaron�was�living�with�

his�sons,�the�priesthood�consisted�only�of�himself�and�his�sons,�that�is�to�say,�of�one�his�sons,�the�priesthood�consisted�only�of�himself�and�his�sons,�that�is�to�say,�of�one�his�sons,�the�priesthood�consisted�only�of�himself�and�his�sons,�that�is�to�say,�of�one�his�sons,�the�priesthood�consisted�only�of�himself�and�his�sons,�that�is�to�say,�of�one�

family.�Hence�all�the�instructions�in�the�middle�books�are�addressed�to�them,�and�family.�Hence�all�the�instructions�in�the�middle�books�are�addressed�to�them,�and�family.�Hence�all�the�instructions�in�the�middle�books�are�addressed�to�them,�and�family.�Hence�all�the�instructions�in�the�middle�books�are�addressed�to�them,�and�

for�the�most�part�to�Aaron�personally�(vid.,�Ex�for�the�most�part�to�Aaron�personally�(vid.,�Ex�for�the�most�part�to�Aaron�personally�(vid.,�Ex�for�the�most�part�to�Aaron�personally�(vid.,�Ex�28�28�28�28�and�and�and�and�29; Lev 10-8 ; Numbers 18:1,

etc.). This as all changed when Aaron died; henceforth the priesthood consisted

simply of the descendants of Aaron and his sons, who were no longer one family,

but formed a distinct class in the nation, the legitimacy of which arose from its

connection with the tribe of Levi, to which Aaron himself had belonged. It was

42

evidently more appropriate, therefore, to describe them as sons of Levi than as

sons of Aaron, which had been the title formerly given to the priests, with the

exception of the high priest, viz., Aaron himself. - In connection with the superior

court, however, the priests are introduced rather as knowing and teaching the

law (Leviticus 10:11), than as actual judges. For this reason appeal was to be

made not only to them, but also to the judge, whose duty it was in any case to

make the judicial inquiry and pronounce the sentence. - The object of the verb

“inquireinquireinquireinquire” (Deuteronomy�(Deuteronomy�(Deuteronomy�(Deuteronomy�17:917:917:917:9)�follows�after)�follows�after)�follows�after)�follows�after “they�shall�show�thee,they�shall�show�thee,they�shall�show�thee,they�shall�show�thee,” viz.,viz.,viz.,viz., “the�word�the�word�the�word�the�word�

of�right,of�right,of�right,of�right,” the�judicial�sentence�which�is�sought�(the�judicial�sentence�which�is�sought�(the�judicial�sentence�which�is�sought�(the�judicial�sentence�which�is�sought�(2�2�2�2�Chronicles�Chronicles�Chronicles�Chronicles�19:6).

BENSON, "Deuteronomy 17:9. Unto the priests — That is, unto the great

council, which consisted chiefly of the priests and Levites, as being the best

expositors of the laws of God, by which all those controversies were to be

decided. And the high-priest was commonly one of that number, comprehended

here under the priests, whereof he was the chief. By judges, here, seems to be

meant those supreme judges of the nation, whom God raised up when the

Israelites were oppressed by their enemies, such as Gideon, Jephthah, Samson,

Samuel, &c. Such judges were, by their office, invested with the highest

authority, civil as well as military; for to judge Israel was to administer justice,

as well as to command armies. Moses seems to intimate, that the Hebrew

commonwealth was to retain, after his death, the same form as it had now when

he was alive; for he himself was the supreme judge, or administrator of justice,

to whom the more difficult causes were to be referred, Deuteronomy 1:17. So

Joshua was judge after him, and many other.

BI 9-14, "Thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations.

Heathen abominations avoided

One reason to shun the practices of idolatry springs from the nature of the evils themselves.

1. They are cruel. Children “pass through the fire.” “Cruelty is one of the highest scandals to piety,” says Seeker. “The dark places of the earth are full of the habitations of cruelty—homesteads of violence” (Psa_74:20).

2. They are enticing. Divination, enchanter, and witch have their spells. Idolatry, “a shameful creed of craft and cruelty,” delights in what fills the sensuous imagination. “Who hath bewitched (fascinated) you, that ye should not obey the truths.” (Gal_3:1.)

3. They are defiling “abominations.” Paintings and sculptures, laws and legends, reveal the awful corruptions of the heathen world.

4. They are destructive. “Because of these abominations the Lord doth drive them out.” Sin drives away from God here and from heaven hereafter. The fruit of idolatry and superstitions is death (Lev_20:23). (J. Wolfendale.)

43

That useth divination.

Magical arts and divination

1. Different names are here assigned to persons dealing in the arts of magic. “One that useth divination”; professing to gain power and knowledge more than human. “One that practiseth augury” or covert arts. “An enchanter”: the original suggesting the serpent, and implying the practice of charming serpent, yet always connected with the arts of divination. “A sorcerer”: the Hebrew word signifying one who mutters incantations, but only in the bad sense of seeking help from others than God. “A charmer”: a word which suggests binding as with the spell of enchantment. “A consulter with a familiar spirit”: the English phrase signifies spirits who stand in such a relation to the performer that they come at his call. Of course it is pretended that these spirits are other and greater than human. The original Hebrew (Ob) comes down to us in the African “Obe-man,” who still follows the same profession, by means of similar arts. “A wizard” is one who claims superhuman wisdom, the old English accurately translating the Hebrew; the distinctively wise one. The word is restricted in usage to superior wisdom gained by the arts of magic. “A necromancer”: precisely the spiritist of modern times, or rather of all time, who claims to have communion with the spirits of dead men.

2. This analysis of the original words may aid toward some just conception of the associated ideas which cluster round the magic arts of the Hebrew age. Their name and their arts are legion. Think of so many classes—professions—of men and women naturally shrewd, sharp, cunning; practising upon the superstitions and fears of the million; working upon their imagination, haunting them with the dread of unknown powers, bringing up to them ghosts from the invisible world, claiming to give auguries of the future, playing in every way upon their fears and hopes, to extort their money or to make sport of their fears or to gratify their own or others’ malice. A system so near akin in spirit and influence to idolatry, which so thoroughly displaces God from the hopes and fears of men, and which seeks so successfully to install these horrible superstitions in His place—a system, which perverts the powers of the world to come to subserve ungodliness, and which practically rules out the blessed God from the sphere of men’s homage, fears, and hopes—this system has always been worked by wicked and never by good men, has always subserved all, iniquity, but piety and morality never—this has been a master-stroke of Satan’s policy, and one of the most palpable fields of his triumph through all the ages. (H. Cowles, D. D.)

The Lord thy God hath not suffered thee so to do.—

The deterring power of Divine grace

It is recognised as a principle amongst legislators and magistrates, that the great end of punishment is the prevention of crime. And there is no doubt that, up to a certain point, this object is gained. The public execution will strike terror into many, though numbers, again, more hardened in wickedness, will depart from the spectacle, and perhaps commit the very crime for which they have just seen a fellow creature die. It is not, however, that they actually set at nought the punishment; it is rather that there are always so many chances of escape, the men transgress in the hope that they shall elude detection, The fearfulness of a threatening, even though combined with the certainty of execution, will not always, nor even commonly, deter men from violating the commandments of God. There is no need for having recourse to imagination for the destruction of a people on account of their wickedness, and their

44

inheritance passing into the possession of others. This is only what actually occurred in the instance of the land of Canaan, whose inhabitants were exterminated because of their crimes, and it was then handed over to a new population. There was here what might strictly be called a public execution. There was no giving a secret commission to the angel of death to move through the doomed ranks, and lay them low; which might perhaps have left it doubtful whether or not there had been any judicial interference; but the Israelites were put visibly into the place of public executioners, being charged with the terrible commission—“Thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor show mercy unto them.” They were sent expressly to punish a guilty and condemned population. And the first memorable thing, if you examine the Scriptural record, is that God Himself placed no dependence on the influence and effect of the public execution; for His Word is full of warning to the Israelites, that they would fall under the like condemnation if they imitated the practices of those whom they destroyed. So far from its being reckoned on as an insupposable or even an improbable thing, that they who had been commissioned to slay multitudes on account of their sin would themselves practise the sin so fearfully and openly visited, there is the frequent repetition of energetic denunciations of that sin; and Moses is directed to urge the Israelites, with all earnestness and affection, to take heed that they provoke not the Lord by following the example of their predecessors in the land. You must be further aware, that so far from having been unnecessary, the warning actually failed in deterring the Israelites from the accursed practices; so that it was not against improbable danger that Moses directed his parting admonitions. For when the Israelites had destroyed the Canaanites, and taken possession of their land, they quickly gave in to the very abominations which had been visited with all the fearfulness of a public execution. You read of them in the earliest period of their settlement—“They forsook the Lord, and served Baal and Ashtaroth.” And their whole history, up to the time when God was provoked to let loose against them the power of the Assyrian, is a record of rebellion under those special and flagrant forms which had marked the guilty career of the tribes which had perished by their sword. Where, then, was the supposed influence of a public execution? What ground is there for the imagination, that even were the Almighty visibly to interfere, and in His character of moral Governor of the universe to anticipate in certain cases those judgments which shall hereafter be poured out on the impenitent, there would be wrought any permanent effect on the great mass of men?—as though the thing wanted in order to repress the actings of unrighteousness were only a more open and express demonstration that punishment is to follow upon sin. And now you may be disposed to ask with what view we have endeavoured to show, that even what might be called a public execution, the present visible descent of the vengeance of God on the perpetrators of certain sins, would probably be ineffectual in deterring others from the practice of those sins—ineffectual even in regard of such persons as had the best means of knowing that the infliction was the direct and judicial consequence of the crime. We have but one object; not that of merely presenting a severe and repulsive picture of the depravity of our nature, but that of shutting you up to the conviction of the necessity, the indispensableness of the Divine grace, in order to your being withheld from the commission of sin. We would withdraw you, if we could, from all reliance on anything but the immediate workings of the Spirit of God, when the matter in question is the being able to resist this or that temptation, or to keep oneself undefiled by this or that wickedness. We would teach you, however harsh the teaching may sound, that there is no wickedness of which you are not capable, and that if you think yourselves secure against a sin just because the sin may be held in abhorrence, or because you may be thoroughly aware of God’s purpose of visiting it with extraordinary vengeance, you display a confidence in your own

45

resolution and strength which, as savouring of pride, can only be expected to issue in defeat. This is virtually the doctrine of our text. For you will perceive that God ascribes it wholly to Himself that the Israelites were preserved from the abominations of the heathen. “These nations hearkened unto observers of times, and unto diviners; but as for thee, the Lord thy God hath not suffered thee so to do.” They would have been just as bad had they been left to themselves; but God had not suffered them to fall into such flagrant transgression. He had so acted upon them by His grace as to preserve them from sins, of which they had the seeds in their hearts, just as much as others, in whom those seeds were allowed to bring forth their fruits. And though the text speaks only of the past, making mention of preventing grace as having hitherto wrought upon the Israelites, it is clearly implied in the fact of a remonstrance against any future imitation of the heathen, that there would be no security for them except in their being still withheld by the influences of God’s Spirit. (H. Melvill, B. D.)

10 You must act according to the decisions they

give you at the place the Lord will choose. Be

careful to do everything they instruct you to do.

GILL, "And thou shalt do according to the sentence which they of that place which the Lord shall choose shall show thee,.... The judges of the inferior courts were to return and proceed on the difficult case according to the judgment of the great court at Jerusalem, and follow the directions and instructions they should give them:

and thou shalt observe to do according to all that they inform thee; not only observe and take notice of what they say, but put it in practice, and not in some things and some circumstances only, but in all and everything they should give them information about relating to the case in question.

HENRY 10-13, " The definitive sentence given by the judge, priest, or great council, must be obeyed by the parties concerned, upon pain of death: Thou shalt do according to their sentence (Deu_17:10); thou shalt observe to do it, thou shalt not decline from it (Deu_17:11), to the right hand nor to the left. Note, It is for the honour of God and the welfare of a people that the authority of the higher power be supported and the due order of government observed, that those be obeyed who are appointed to rule, and that every soul be subject to them in all those things that fall within their commission. Though the party thought himself injured by the sentence (as every man is apt to be partial in is own cause), yet he must needs be subject, must stand to the award, how unpleasing soever, and bear, or lose, or pay, according to it, not only for wrath, but also for conscience' sake. But if an inferior judge contradict the sentence of the higher court and will not execute the orders of it, or a private person refuse to conform to their sentence, the contumacy must be punished with

46

death, though the matter were ever so small in which the opposition was made: That man shall die, and all the people shall hear and fear, Deu_17:12, Deu_17:13. See here, (1.) The evil of disobedience. Rebellion and stubbornness, from a spirit of contradiction and opposition of God, or those in authority under him, from a principle of contempt and self-willedness, are as witchcraft and idolatry. To differ in opinion from weakness and infirmity may be excused and must be borne with; but to do so presumptuously, in pride and wickedness (as the ancient translations explain it), this is to take up arms against the government, and is an affront to him by whom the powers that be are ordained. (2.) The design of punishment: that others may hear and fear, and not do the like. Some would be so considerate as to infer the heinousness of the offence from the grievousness of the penalty, and therefore would detest it; and others would so far consult their own safety as to cross their humours by conforming to the sentence rather than to sin against their own heads, and forfeit their lives by going contrary to it. From this law the apostle infers the greatness of the punishment of which those will be thought worthy that trample on the authority of the Son of God, Heb_10:28, Heb_10:29.

K&D, "Deuteronomy 17:10-11

They shall do “according to the sound of the word which they utter” (follow their

decision exactly), and that “according to the sound of the law which they teach,” and

“according to the right which they shall speak.” The sentence was to be founded upon

the Thorah, upon the law which the priests had to teach.

BENSON, "Deuteronomy 17:10-12. Thou shalt do according to the sentence — He

speaks, 1st, To the inferior magistrates, who, in the suits here referred to between man

and man, were to give sentence in their lower courts, according to the decision of the

great council, or of the supreme judge, and were to take care that that sentence should

be carried into execution; and, 2d, To private persons, who, in such cases, are required

to acquiesce in the judgment of those whom God had made the supreme interpreters of

his law, and to conform themselves to the sentence passed. The man that will do

presumptuously — If an inferior judge should presume to contradict the sentence of the

higher court, given according to God’s law, and would not execute the orders of it; or if

a private person should refuse to conform himself to their sentence, that contumacy was

to be punished with death, though the matter were ever so small in which the opposition

was made. For unless the parties concerned had been strongly bound to obey the

definitive sentence of the judge, priest, or great council, in such matters, there would

have been no end of strife. And thou shalt put away the evil —

The evil thing, that scandal, that pernicious example.

11 Act according to whatever they teach you

47

and the decisions they give you. Do not turn

aside from what they tell you, to the right or to

the left.

GILL, "According to the sentence of the law which they shall teach thee,.... For they were not to make any new law, but to teach the law of God, and so far as their sense and opinion of things agreed with that law they were to be regarded:

and according to the judgment which they shall tell thee, thou shalt do; what were law and justice, what were fit and right to be done, according to the will of God, which they should declare unto them, that was carefully to be done by them:

thou shalt not decline from the sentence they shall show thee, to the right hand nor to the left; by setting up after, all their own judgments against theirs to whom they had applied for information and direction, which to have done would have been very insolent and affronting; they were not to depart from the determination they made of the case, on pretence of knowing better, nor even in any minute circumstance to deviate from it, but strictly and closely to keep unto it; though not to follow them so implicitly as to receive from them and embrace things the most absurd and unreasonable, as Jarchi suggests; who says, that their sense was to be abided by, even if they should say that the right hand is the left, and the left hand the right.

12 Anyone who shows contempt for the judge or

for the priest who stands ministering there to

the Lord your God is to be put to death. You

must purge the evil from Israel.

CLARKE, "The man that will do presumptuously - The man who refused to abide by this final determination forfeited his life, as being then in a state of rebellion against the highest authority, and consequently the public could have no pledge for his conduct.

48

GILL, "The judge of the country court that makes his application to that at Jerusalem for information and direction; if, after all, he is conceited in his own opinion, and rejects theirs, and is obstinate, and will not be guided and directed, but will take his own way, and pursue his own sense of things, and act according to that:

and will not hearken to the priest that standeth to minister there before the Lord thy God; the priests of the tribe of Levi, of whom the court generally consisted, Deu_17:9, priest for priests; though some think the high priest is meant, to whom the character very well agrees; but he was not always at the head of the sanhedrim, nor indeed a member of it, unless he had the proper qualifications; see Deu_18:18.

or unto the judge; or judges; See Gill on Deu_17:9. L'Empereur (g) thinks, that the supreme senate, or grand sanhedrim, was twofold, according to the diversity of ecclesiastic and political matters; since where it treats of the supreme senators, or chief persons in the court, the priest is manifestly distinguished from the judge (i.e. priests or judges); now the man that has asked advice of them, and will not be directed by it, but takes his own way, this being so great a contempt of, and insult upon, the great senate of the nation:

even that man shall die; and this was by strangling, for so the rebellious older, as such an one is called, was to die according to the Misnah (h); and it is said (i), that the death spoken of in the law absolutely (without specifying what kind of death) is strangling:

and thou shall put away the evil from Israel; the evil man that is rebellious against the supreme legislature of the nation, and the evil of contumacy he is guilty of, deterring others from it by his death.

CALVIN, "He pronounces a similar punishment on those who shall have

contumaciously rejected the judgment of the priests. We have already seen that

the prophetical office was united with the priesthood; since, according to

Malachi 2:4, the covenant of God was with Levi, that his descendants might be

the guardians of His knowledge, and the interpreters of His law: yet God often

punished the laxity of the priests, by setting other teachers over his people. At

any rate, both were ambassadors for Him. Since, therefore, the authority of the

prophets had been sanctioned above, the same rights are now conferred upon the

priests; nor is this surprising, for it was no trifling crime to despise God, the

appointer of this order. Yet we must remember what I have elsewhere stated,

that the priests were not armed with tyrannical authority, so that it was sinful to

reject whatever they might have decreed according to their own fancy. For

neither did God dethrone Himself when He appointed them, nor did He bind

men’s consciences to obey their ordinances without distinction, but only would

put reins on the audacity of those who have no scruple in undervaluing the

government of the Church. For this must be considered, that foul and horrible

would be the disorder, if men were promiscuously permitted to reject whatever

the rulers of the Church may have appointed; and it would be ridiculous that

persons should be called to govern, to whom no dignity should be accorded; and,

49

therefore, natural reason itself shews and dictates, that the reverence, which is

here demanded, is due to all lawful commands. God was the author of the

priesthood: He, too, ordained judges. What could be more absurd than that they

should be despised and laughed at with impunity, who presided in the name and

by the command of God? But He has never exalted a mortal man so high as to

abdicate His own rights; nay, it was often necessary boldly to reject what the

priests had commanded. Urijah the priest built a profane altar in the fashion of

that at Damascus, which Ahaz had sent, and offered a sacrifice thereon, (55) (2

Kings 16:12,) was it necessary that Isaiah should acquiesce in this? Nay,

detestable was the adulation of all who assented to the decree of a wicked and

perfidious priest. Moreover, we see that the prophets were very often so far from

agreeing with the priests, that they waged open war with them. But the whole of

this matter is decided by the words of Moses, for he does not unreservedly

condemn all who should not obey, but restricts his law by the addition of a

special mark, viz., if the contempt should arise from presumption or arrogance.

Therefore it was not else a capital crime to disobey the priest or the judge, unless

any one should insolently and proudly oppose himself to the ordinance

established by God. Otherwise this exception would have been interposed

without reason. In fine, the priests of old were to be obeyed, as far as it

concerned the public peace that the pastors ordained by God should be

reverently honored; yet so as that there should be no departure from God

Himself, the one Head and Prince of all pastors. We have elsewhere seen how

foolishly the Papists take this to themselves (56)

ELLICOTT, "(12) And the man that will do presumptuously . . . shall die.—This

word “presumptuously” occurs for the first time in this place. (See also

Deuteronomy 18:22.) It is connected with “pride,” and denotes a proud self-

assertion against the law. The penalty of death arises necessarily out of the

theocracy. If God is the king of the nation, rebellion against His law is treason,

and if it be proud and wilful rebellion, the penalty of death is only what we

should expect to see inflicted. As soon as the law of Jehovah is in any way

separated from the law of the land, this state of things may be altered. It is

remarkable that in Ezra’s commission from Artaxerxes we find permission to

identify the law of Jehovah with the law of the Persian empire to the full extent

of this precept, “Whosoever will not do the law of thy God, and the law of the

king, let judgment be executed speedily upon him, whether it be unto death,

banishment, confiscation of goods, or imprisonment” (Ezra 7:25-26.) But such

penalties, except in a theocratic government, are obviously out of place in

matters connected with religion.

K&D, "Deuteronomy 17:12-13

No one was to resist in pride, to refuse to listen to the priest or to the judge.

Resistance to the priest took place when any one was dissatisfied with his

50

interpretation of the law; to the judge, when any one was discontented with the

sentence that was passed on the basis of the law. Such refractory conduct was to

be punished with death, as rebellion against God, in whose name the right had

been spoken (Deuteronomy 1:17). (On Deuteronomy 17:13, see Deuteronomy

13:12.)

PETT, "Deuteronomy 17:12

‘And the man who does presumptuously, in not listening to the priest who stands

to minister there before Yahweh your God, or to the judge, even that man shall

die, and you shall put away the evil from Israel.’

Anyone who openly rejected the final verdict of the court pronounced by the

Judge and ‘the Priest’, the court having consisted of ‘the judge’ and the priests,

whether it be the accused or the justices, was to be put to death, for it would be

to attack the very authority on which justice was based. It would be to act evilly

against the highest religious and civil authorities acting together. For the point

was that ‘the Priest’ ministered before Yahweh, and was therefore appointed to

act in His name, while the Judge was appointed over the people. But there would

be no distinction between cases. All would be seen as covenant law.

13 All the people will hear and be afraid, and

will not be contemptuous again.

GILL, "And all the people shall hear, and fear,.... All the people of Israel in their own cities, and particularly the judges in those cities; they shall hear of what is done to the obstinate and disobedient elder, and shall be afraid to commit the like offence, lest they should come into the same punishment:

and do no more presumptuously; after his example; hence, Jarchi says, they wait till the feast comes, and then put him to death; and so it is said (k), they bring him up to the great sanhedrim which is at Jerusalem, and there keep him until the feast (the next feast), and put him to death at the feast, as it is said:

all the people shall hear, and fear.

HENRY, " The design of punishment: that others may hear and fear, and not do the like. Some would be so considerate as to infer the heinousness of the offence from the grievousness of the penalty, and therefore would detest it; and others would so

51

far consult their own safety as to cross their humours by conforming to the sentence rather than to sin against their own heads, and forfeit their lives by going contrary to it. From this law the apostle infers the greatness of the punishment of which those will be thought worthy that trample on the authority of the Son of God, Heb_10:28, Heb_10:29.

CALVIN, "13.And all the people. He shews from the object of the enactment why the

proud despisers (of the priests) were not to be spared; for punishments have reference

to common example, whilst, on the other hand, impunity is a bait to sin, and the nurse

of unbridled licentiousness. And, assuredly, when He commands that the whole people

should be inspired with terror, it is a hint that, unless presumption should be corrected,

and the bold and wicked should be restrained by severe discipline, the door would be

opened to them to destroy the Church.

PETT, "Deuteronomy 17:13

‘And all the people shall hear, and fear, and no more act presumptuously.’

The result of the death sentence on anyone who openly attacked the decision of the final

court of appeal, whether the accused or the justices, would be that all Israel would hear

about it, and fear, and not act presumptuously in the same way.

The purpose of the death sentence was, of course, to dissuade anyone from taking up

such a position, thus establishing the final authority of the court. The hope was that it

would never need to be carried out.

We learn from all this the importance of the establishment of true justice, and that in

the end that must be found in conformity to His word and to His Law.

The King

14 When you enter the land the Lord your God

is giving you and have taken possession of it and

settled in it, and you say, “Let us set a king over

us like all the nations around us,”

BARNES, "No encouragement is given to the desire, natural in an Oriental people, for monarchical government; but neither is such desire blamed, as appears from the

52

fact that conditions are immediately laid down upon which it may be satisfied. Compare the marginal references.

GILL, "When thou art come unto the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee,.... The land of Canaan:

and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein; be entirely in the possession of it, and settled in it; it seems to denote some time of continuance in it, as it was, before they thought of setting a king over them, about which are the following instructions:

and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the nations that are round about me; which was what would and did lead them to such a thought and resolution; observing that the neighbouring nations had kings over them, they were desirous of being like them as to the form of their civil government, and have a king as they had.

HEBRY 14-15, "After the laws which concerned subjects fitly followed the laws which concern kings; for those that rule others must themselves remember that they are under command. Here are laws given,

I. To the electors of the empire, what rules they must go by in making their choice, Deu_17:14, Deu_17:15. 1. It is here supposed that the people would, in process of time, be desirous of a king, whose royal pomp and power would be thought to make their nation look great among their neighbours. Their having a king is neither promised as a mercy nor commanded as a duty (nothing could be better for them than the divine regimen they were under), but it is permitted them if they desired it. If they would but take care to have the ends of government answered, and God's laws duly observed and put in execution, they should not be tied to any one form of government, but should be welcome to have a king. Though something irregular is supposed to be the principle of the desire, that they might be like the nations (whereas God in many ways distinguished them from the nations), yet God would indulge them in it, because he intended to serve his own purposes by it, in making the regal government typical of the kingdom of the Messiah. 2. They are directed in their choice. If they will have a king over them, as God foresaw they would (though it does not appear that ever the motion was made till almost 400 years after), then they must, (1.) Ask counsel at God's mouth, and make him king whom God shall choose; and happy it was for them that they had an oracle to consult in so weighty an affair, and a God to choose for them who knows infallibly what every man is and will be. Kings are God's viceregents, and therefore it is fit that he should have the choosing of them: God had himself been in a particular manner Israel's King, and if they set another over them, under him, it was necessary that he should nominate the person. Accordingly, when the people desired a king, they applied to Samuel a prophet of the Lord; and afterwards David, Solomon, Jeroboam, Jehu, and others, were chosen by the prophets; and the people are reproved for not observing this law, Hos_8:4 : They have set up kings but not by me. In all cases God's choice, if we can but know it, should direct, determine, and overrule ours. (2.) They must not choose a foreigner under pretence of strengthening their alliances, or of the extraordinary fitness of the person, lest a strange king should introduce strange customs of usages, contrary to those that were established by the divine law; but he must be one from among thy brethren, that he may be a type of Christ, who is bone of our bone, Heb_2:14.

53

JAMISON, "Deu_17:14-20. The election and duty of a king.

When thou ... shalt say, I will set a king over me — In the following passage Moses prophetically announces a revolution which should occur at a later period in the national history of Israel. No sanction or recommendation was indicated; on the contrary, when the popular clamor had effected that constitutional change on the theocracy by the appointment of a king, the divine disapproval was expressed in the most unequivocal terms (1Sa_8:7). Permission at length was granted, God reserving to Himself the nomination of the family and the person who should be elevated to the regal dignity (1Sa_9:15; 1Sa_10:24; 1Sa_16:12; 1Ch_28:4). In short, Moses foreseeing that his ignorant and fickle countrymen, insensible to their advantages as a peculiar people, would soon wish to change their constitution and be like other nations, provides to a certain extent for such an emergency and lays down the principles on which a king in Israel must act. He was to possess certain indispensable requisites. He was to be an Israelite, of the same race and religion, to preserve the purity of the established worship, as well as be a type of Christ, a spiritual king, one of their brethren.

CALVIN, "14.When thou art come unto the land. In this passage God sets forth the

merits of that sacerdotal kingdom, of which mention is made elsewhere; for, since the

splendor of the royal name might dazzle their eyes, so that they should forget that God

retained the sovereignty over them, they are thus early admonished how unjust it would

be if the majesty of God should be diminished by the rule of a mortal man. In sum, the

power of kings is here put beneath that of God; and kings themselves are consecrated

unto obedience to Him, lest the people should ever turn to ungodliness, whatever change

of government might take place. But although under the judges religion was often

subverted, yet it was not without a cause that a special law was enacted with respect to

kings, because nothing is more likely than that earthly pomps should draw men away

from piety. Now we understand the design of God in this matter, let us proceed to

examine its several parts. He passes over (as I have said) all the intermediate time until

the beginning of the kingdom, because this new state of things brought with it an

increase of danger: for as long as the judges were in power, their different form of

government separated the Jews from heathen nations. All the surrounding neighbors

were subject to kings; and God always retained the preeminence, whilst He raised up

judges from amongst the people; but when they began to choose kings for themselves,

they were so mixed up with the Gentiles, that it was easy for them to fall into other

corruptions. For the very similarity (of their governments) united them more closely;

wherefore, it is expressly said, When thou shalt set a king over thee “like as all the

nations that are about” thee. For God signifies that the example of the nations would be

an evil snare to them, that they should desire to have a king, and thus their condition

would in future be identical, though by divine decree it had been distinct. In short, their

rebellion is here indirectly condemned, when God foretells that they would wantonly

shake off their yoke; as indeed actually took place, when they rejected Samuel, and

tumultuously required a king. On which point God elsewhere complains that He was

despised. But the question arises, how these two things can be reconciled, that kings

should reign over them from the lust or foolish desire of the people, and yet that the

kingdom was the chief glory of the people, a special pledge of God’s favor, and

consequently of their welfare and full felicity. The prophecy of Jacob is well known,

54

"The scepter shall not depart from Judah, — until Shiloh come.” (Genesis 49:10.)

Whence it appears that a king was promised to the children of Abraham as an

inestimable blessing. Why, then, does not God declare Himself its author? I reply that,

although it was God’s design from the beginning to set up David as a type of Christ, yet,

because their unseemly haste disturbed the order of things, the commencement of the

kingdom is ascribed to the people’s fault, when they were impelled by their perverse

emulation to wish to be like the Gentiles. God appears then to have designedly censured

their wilfulness, as if He had said, “Although by appointing a king, you approach more

nearly to the Gentiles, beware lest your perverse desire should altogether turn you away

from true religion.

COFFMAN. "First, it should be noted here that no commandment was given for Israel

to elect a king. God's permission for Israel to have a king is indicated here, and Moses

words amount to a prophecy that, in time, Israel would indeed request a king in order

"to be like the nations around them." This prophecy was most circumstantially fulfilled

in the days of Samuel. "The monarchy must be viewed as permitted only, not ordained,

by God."[9] We reject as absolutely irresponsible, the assertion, "That these verses

were written in criticism of a known monarch. He would multiply horses, wives, or

money (Deuteronomy 17:16-17). This is a reference to Solomon's activity."[10] The very

text itself in this passage contradicts and nullifies such comments. "He shall not cause

the people to return to Egypt" (Deuteronomy 17:16). Could anyone acquainted with

Solomon and criticizing him have said a thing like that? Certainly not, As Keil

expressed it:

"The notion of modern critics, that there is an allusion in these verses to the

constitution and kingdom of Solomon, is so far from having any foundation, that the

reason assigned - namely, the fear lest the king should lead back the people to Egypt

from his love of horses, "to the end that he should multiply horses," - precludes the

times of Solomon. In the days of Solomon, the time had long gone by when any thought

could have been entertained of leading the people back to the land of Egypt."[11]

Harrison also pointed out that there is no necessity whatever to suppose that this

passage was written retrospectively with reference to the kingdom of Solomon. The

kind of debaucheries that marked Solomon's reign "were familiar to any intelligent

observer in the 2millennium B.C."[12] What is plainly obvious here is that Moses in this

passage prophesied what any king would be likely to do in that era of the world's

history. It is this prophecy that runs the critics in all directions trying to find some way

to deny it. Jamieson perfectly understood the prophetic nature of this passage:

"In this passage, Moses prophetically announced a revolution which should occur at a

later period in Israel's history. No sanction or recommendation is indicated. On the

contrary, when the popular clamor had effected such a constitutional change in the

theocracy by the appointment of a king, the Divine disapproval was expressed in the

most unequivocal terms (1 Samuel 8:7)."[13]

The rationalistic critics object to this on the basis that, "Although the monarchy was

contemplated and provided for in the Law, God afterward expressed strong

disapproval of it."[14] The answer to such an objection is clear enough. There is neither

55

a commandment to appoint a king, nor an approval of one when he was appointed

anywhere to be found here. As Dummelow said, "The people were not commanded to

appoint a king, but their desire for one was anticipated by Moses."[15] All of the rules,

therefore, that Moses laid down here, were for the purpose of trying to PROTECT the

people (in a degree) from the colossal error that Moses knew they would make in

demanding a king. The rules Moses prescribed as somewhat of an easement of the

blunder into which Israel would fall were given as follows by Unger:

(1) He was to be God's choice.

(2) He was to be an Israelite, a covenant person, not a foreigner.

(3) He was to be God's servant and representative.

(4) He was not to multiply horses, which in that era was equivalent to relying upon

military power.

(5) He was not to multiply wives unto himself (this was customary for Oriental

monarchs throughout the world at that time).

(6) He was not to amass silver and gold.

(7) He was to take a copy of God's law for himself and always walk in the light of it.[16]

If we may paraphrase Moses' instructions here, we might read: "All right, I know that

in ages to come you Israelites will want a king like the nations around you, but when

you thus decide, here are the rules you must follow."

ELLICOTT, "(14) When thou art come unto the land.—These are not the words of a

legislator who is already in the land. Those who say that this law dates from later times

must be prepared to assert that this clause is expressly framed to suit the lips of Moses,

and is thus far a deliberate forgery.

And shalt possess it, and dwell therein—i.e., shalt complete the conquest and settle. It is

not contemplated that the king would be desired immediately after the conquest.

I will set a king over me, like as all the nations.—There is an evident allusion to this

phrase in 1 Samuel 8:20, “That we also may be like all the nations.” It is noticeable that

Moses in this place says nothing in disapproval of the design. In fact his words might

easily have been cited by the people in support of their proposal. Moses said we should

need a king; why should we not ask for on? Looked at this way, the citation of the

words of Deuteronomy in Samuel is perfectly natural. The people confirm their request

by presenting it in the very words of Moses. But if we suppose (with some modern

writers) that the passage in Deuteronomy was constructed from that in Samuel, there

are several difficulties—(1) Why is there no disapproval here of the plan, which Samuel

so strongly disapproved? (2) How does the writer in Deuteronomy contrive to be so

wholly unconscious either of the royal tribe, or of the royal family? Precisely the same

unconsciousness of the locality of the place which Jehovah should choose in Palestine

appears in every reference to it in this book. In Moses this is perfectly natural. But that

any later writer should be so totally regardless of the claims of Judah, David, and

56

Jerusalem, and say nothing either for or against them, is inconceivable. Samuel could

hardly have written about the king without betraying disapproval of Israel’s desire for

him. No later writer could have avoided some allusion to the choice of David’s family,

and the promises to David’s son.

K&D, "Verses 14-17

Choice and Right of the King. - Deuteronomy 17:14, Deuteronomy 17:15. If Israel,

when dwelling in the land which was given it by the Lord for a possession, should wish

to appoint a king, like all the nations round about, it was to appoint the man whom

Jehovah its God should choose, and that from among its brethren, i.e., from its own

people, not a foreigner or non-Israelite. The earthly kingdom in Israel was not opposed

to the theocracy, i.e., to the rule of Jehovah as king over the people of His possession,

provided no one was made king but the person whom Jehovah should choose. The

appointment of a king is not commanded, like the institution of judges (Deuteronomy

16:18), because Israel could exist under the government of Jehovah, even without an

earthly king; it is simply permitted, in case the need should arise for a regal

government. There was no necessity to describe more minutely the course to be

adopted, as the people possessed the natural provision for the administration of their

national affairs in their well-organized tribes, by whom this point could be decided.

Moses also omits to state more particularly in what way Jehovah would make known

the choice of the king to be appointed. The congregation, no doubt, possessed one means

of asking the will of the Lord in the Urim and Thummim of the high priest, provided

the Lord did not reveal His will in a different manner, namely through a prophet, as He

did in the election of Saul and David (1 Sam 8-9, and 16). The commandment not to

choose a foreigner, acknowledged the right of the nation to choose. Consequently the

choice on the part of the Lord may have consisted simply in His pointing out to the

people, in a very evident manner, the person they were to elect, or in His confirming the

choice by word and act, as in accordance with His will.

Three rules are laid down for the king himself in Deuteronomy 17:16-20. In the first

place, he was not to keep many horses, or lead back the people to Egypt, to multiply

horses, because Jehovah had forbidden the people to return thither by that way. The

notion of modern critics, that there is an allusion in this prohibition to the constitution

of the kingdom under Solomon, is so far from having any foundation, that the reason

assigned - namely, the fear lest the king should lead back the people to Egypt from his

love of horses,“to the end that he should multiply horses” - really precludes the time of

Solomon, inasmuch as the time had then long gone by when any thought could have

been entertained of leading back the people to Egypt. But such a reason would be quite

in its place in Moses' time, and only then, “when it would not seem impossible to reunite

the broken band, and when the people were ready to express their longing, and even

their intention, to return to Egypt on the very slightest occasion; whereas the reason

assigned for the prohibition might have furnished Solomon with an excuse for

regarding the prohibition itself as merely a temporary one, which was no longer

binding” (Oehler in Herzog's Cyclopaedia: vid., Hengstenberg'sDissertations).

(Note: When Riehm objects to this, that if such a prohibition had been unnecessary in a

future age, in which the people had reached the full consciousness of its national

57

independence, and every thought of the possibility of a reunion with the Egyptians had

disappeared, Moses would never have issued it, since he must have foreseen the national

independence of the people; the force of this objection rests simply upon his

confounding foreseeing with assuming, and upon a thoroughly mistaken view of the

prophet's vision of the future. Even if Moses, as “a great prophet,” did foresee the

future national independence of Israel, he had also had such experience of the fickle

character of the people, that he could not regard the thought of returning to Egypt as

absolutely an impossible one, even after the conquest of Canaan, or reject it as

inconceivable. Moreover, the prophetic foresight of Moses was not, as Riehm imagines

it, a foreknowledge of all the separate points in the historical development of the nation,

much less a foreknowledge of the thoughts and desires of the heart, which might arise

in the course of time amidst the changes that would take place in the nation. A foresight

of the development of Israel into national independence, so far as we may attribute it to

Moses as a prophet, was founded not upon the character of the people, but upon the

divine choice and destination of Israel, which by no means precluded the possibility of

their desiring to return to Egypt, even at some future time, since God Himself had

threatened the people with dispersion among the heathen as the punishment for

continued transgression of His covenant, and yet, notwithstanding this dispersion, had

predicted the ultimate realization of His covenant of grace. And when Riehm still

further observes, that the taste for horses, which lay at the foundation of this fear,

evidently points to a later time, when the old repugnance to cavalry which existed in the

nation in the days of the judges, and even under David, had disappeared; this supposed

repugnance to cavalry is a fiction of the critic himself, without any historical

foundation. For nothing more is related in the history, than that before the time of

Solomon the Israelites had not cultivated the rearing of horses, and that David only

kept 100 of the war-horses taken from the Syrians for himself, and had the others put to

death (2 Samuel 8:4). And so long as horses were neither reared nor possessed by the

Israelites, there can be no ground for speaking of the old repugnance to cavalry. On the

other hand, the impossibility of tracing this prohibition to the historical circumstances

of the time of Solomon, or even a later age, is manifest in the desperate subterfuge to

which Riehm has recourse, when he connects this passage with the threat in

Deuteronomy 28:68, that if all the punishments suspended over them should be

ineffectual, God would carry them back in ships to Egypt, and that they should there be

sold to their enemies as men-servants and maid-servants, and then discovers a proof in

this, that the Egyptian king Psammetichus, who sought out foreign soldiers and

employed them, had left king Manasseh some horses, solely on the condition that he

sent him some Israelitish infantry, and placed them at his disposal. But this is not

expounding Scripture; it is putting hypotheses into it. As Oehler has already observed,

this hypothesis has no foundation whatever in the Old Testament, nor (we may add) in

the accounts of Herodotus and Diodorus Siculus concerning Psammetichus. According

to Diod. (i. 66), Psammetichus hired soldiers from Arabia, Caria, and Ionia; and

according to Herodotus (i. 152), he hired Ionians and Carians armed with brass, that he

might conquer his rival kings with their assistance. But neither of these historians says

anything at all about Israelitish infantry. And even if it were conceivable that any king

of Israel or Judah could carry on such traffic in men, as to sell his own subjects to the

Egyptians for horses, it is very certain that the prophets, who condemned every alliance

with foreign kings, and were not silent with regard to Manasseh's idolatry, would not

58

have passed over such an abomination as this without remark or without reproof.)

The second admonition also, that the king was not to take to himself many wives, and

turn away his heart (sc., from the Lord), nor greatly multiply to himself silver and gold,

can be explained without the hypothesis that there is an allusion to Solomon's reign,

although this king did transgress both commands (1 Kings 10:14. Deuteronomy 11:1.).

A richly furnished harem, and the accumulation of silver and gold, were inseparably

connected with the luxury of Oriental monarchs generally; so that the fear was a very

natural one, that the future king of Israel might follow the general customs of the

heathen in these respects.

PETT, "Requirements For Any Future King (Deuteronomy 17:14-20).

Having been speaking of ‘the Judge’ who would have authority over Israel took,

and being very much aware of the people’s weaknesses and willingness to follow

anyone who offered them what they wanted (to look after them and fight their

battles for them) Moses’ thoughts turned back to the promises of Genesis. There

God had said that one day kings would be established who would be descended

from Abraham (Genesis 17:6; Genesis 17:16; Genesis 36:31; Genesis 35:11;

compare also Exodus 19:6 where a kingdom of priests is mentioned which

requires a king), so that he recognised that one day it was inevitable.

He also knew of Jacob’s prophecy concerning such a royal personage who would

arise from Judah (Genesis 49:10), the coming of ‘Shiloh’, and he would have

recently been further informed of the words of Balaam in Numbers 24:17 about

‘the sceptre that shall arise out of Israel’. None of this would have escaped his

notice as he sought to prepare for the huge event that was about to come. He

would have been negligent if it had. And we can understand why he was fearful

that such a king, when he arose, would in seeking to promote himself, look to

Egypt, the one great earthly power of whom he was most aware. And would not

be reliable as a Judge. The one thing therefore that he would want them to avoid

was ‘a king like the nations’.

At the time Moses was Israel’s ‘Judge’ (Deuteronomy 1:17 b) with full powers of

‘kingship’ under Yahweh, and he knew that he would shortly be appointing

Joshua to have similar supreme authority. He had lived in the light of the

revelations of Yahweh and the records of the fathers of old, and he expected

Joshua to do the same. And he knew that always over Israel was Yahweh as

Great King and Overlord Who had proved His supremity even over the

Pharaoh.

But once established in the land he must have recognised that it was very likely

that, once Joshua had died and time had passed, the people would want to

appoint a king. At present Yahweh was their King with Moses as His deputy.

The same would apply with Joshua. But what about those who followed? Moses

knew men’s weaknesses. They would want to fall into line, and they would want

59

to be looked after. And as Scripture confirmed that kingship was to happen, that

made it obvious. But that made it necessary that getting the wrong kind of king

was guarded against. When they did seek a king he was concerned that that king

should recognise his true position under Yahweh, and be the kind of king that

Yahweh approved of. And he knew that the only difference between Joshua and

a king would be that Joshua had more authority because Yahweh was supreme

king and he was His voice, but had less pretensions. The king, if a bad one, might

act on his own authority and in his own name.

So Moses’ concern about kingship was fully understandable. He had especially

seen what it was like in Egypt. He had seen the frantic efforts to build up the

numbers of horses for military purposes, especially for the drawing of the

chariots which were so vital a weapon in warfare, so that pre-eminence might be

gained. He had himself been involved in the harems of Pharaoh, and experienced

the intrigues that were constantly going on. He had noted the great efforts that

kings and nobles put into gaining great wealth. And as he considered his people

he was afraid lest they find themselves under someone like that. And he was

concerned lest such a king might make treaties with Egypt, becoming their vassal

in order to obtain horses.

He had also no doubt experienced petty ‘kings’ while son-in-law to the priest of

Midian, and had noted that although their ambitions were on a smaller scale,

they were still there. He had recently had dealings with the kings of Edom, Moab

and Ammon who would all have treated him as a king, to say nothing of the

kings of the Amorites. He would have noted the harem and wealth of Sihon, king

of the Amorites, laid bare in Heshbon. He knew especially of Og, foreign king in

Bashan, descended from a ‘super-race’ whose very bedstead (or sarcophagus)

was the talk of all the nations around. Furthermore Israel were about to invade a

country of nations who all had kings. Kingship was very much a current issue.

And once they were settled in the land they would constantly be surrounded by

kings. But he wanted to save his people from kings like that. It would be better

for them to stick with Judges who had no such expectations. But if they would

not do that, and he suspected that they would not, for they would soon begin to

see them as the equivalent of kings, then let them consider what a king under

Yahweh must be like if they were not to regret the move.

So we may take it for granted that an astute leader like Moses would recognise

the very good likelihood, indeed certainty, that one day the people would seek to

make their Judge a king following a similar pattern to the nations round about.

How else could the prophecies be fulfilled? And it was after all only one step on

from the overall ‘Judge’. The only difference that there would be between

Joshua and a king would be that Joshua would not seek to behave with the bad

habits of a king. He thus now gave strict instructions of what any king they

60

considered appointing must be like.

Moses’ stress, then, was on the fact that he must not be like the kings round

about. Rather he was to be and ‘ideal’, one of themselves, chosen by Yahweh, a

native of Israel, and a student of Yahweh’s Instruction. He was to be a

disclaimer of foreign military power and foreign marriage treaties, and spurn

the accumulation of treasure for himself. He was to that end to write for himself

a book based on the records which were under the oversight of the levitical

priests and kept in the Tabernacle, the book which Moses himself had brought

together from ancient covenant and other records (Genesis) and from the details

of the Instruction (Torah) as directly revealed to him by God (the main basis of

Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers). And he was to live by them.

Indeed this picture of an ‘ideal’ king was so unlike any king that Israel ever

knew or would know that it could only have been a theoretical one posited before

the reality ruined the whole picture. Once kingship was established no one would

ever have dreamed of suggesting a king like this. For it was actually the very

opposite of what kings were. Instead they would have turned back to arguing for

judges or chieftains or councils of elders. Moses’ words would also act as a

warning to future judges. But until the coming of Jesus no such king ever lived.

We can consider in this respect how at least one such Judge, Gideon, was pressed

to become Israel’s king and his refusal may well have been a polite acceptance

(Judges 8:22-23). He certainly behaved like a king of the wrong kind (Judges

8:30), and one of his sons was expected to follow after him (Judges 9:2). Indeed

he lost the position for his family precisely because he ignored Moses’ words

here. He incidentally proved the wisdom of Moses’ instructions in his ignoring of

them, for his family suffered the consequences.

One remarkable thing about this idea of kingship here was that there was no

thought within it of the king making the laws. This king was rather to be like his

fellow countrymen, he was to be subject to Yahweh’s Instruction. He was to be

totally unlike other kings. He was to act as a judge under Yahweh. Indeed as he

will shortly reveal, there would be priests chosen by Yahweh and prophets raised

up by Yahweh to keep him in the right way.

We may note in passing that he expected that the king would write himself a

copy of the Law. It is hardly therefore likely that he himself would have failed to

ensure that such a book was available for Joshua.

Analysis using the words of Moses:

a When you are come to the land which Yahweh your God gives you, and

shall possess it, and shall dwell in it, and shall say, “I will set a king over me, like

all the nations that are round about me (Deuteronomy 17:14).

61

b You shall surely set him king over you, whom Yahweh your God shall

choose, one from among your brethren shall you set king over you. You may not

put a foreigner over you, who is not your brother (Deuteronomy 17:15).

c Only he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to

return to Egypt, to the end that he may multiply horses, forasmuch as Yahweh

has said to you, “You shall henceforth return no more that way” (Deuteronomy

17:16).

c Nor shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away, nor

shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold (Deuteronomy 17:17).

b And it shall be, when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, that he shall

write him a copy of this law in a book, out of that which is before the priests the

Levites, and it shall be with him, and he shall read in it all the days of his life,

that he may learn to fear Yahweh his God, to keep all the words of this law and

these statutes, to do them (Deuteronomy 17:18-19).

a That 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 his days in his kingdom, he and his children, in the midst of Israel

(Deuteronomy 17:20).

Note in ‘a’ his expectation and foreboding that when they are established in the

land they will want a king over them, thus in the parallel he warns against

appointing someone whose heart will be lifted up above his fellow-citizens, who

may then not walk within Yahweh’s covenant requirements (‘the

commandment’) and may then not prolong his days in the kingdom. In ‘b’ he

commands them to set over them only one whom Yahweh will choose, a true

worshipper of Yahweh circumcised within the covenant, and in the parallel he

declares that once such a one takes up his position he must be totally guided by

God’s word and covenant (law), and rule by the law provided for him in the

‘book’ which was in the hands of the priests and Levites, the scrolls or tablets of

the Testimony. In ‘c’ he declares that they must not appoint someone who

multiplies horses to himself, lest this beguile him to seek to Egypt, and in the

parallel that he is not to be someone who multiplies wives to himself or silver and

gold. In other words it must be someone whose only concern is to please Yahweh

and wants no grandeur out of his appointment.

The only king who was remotely like this was Saul at the very beginning. But at

that stage he was simply a war leader under Samuel, and even he soon began to

get delusions of grandeur. It was inevitable. The truth is that all kings that men

knew of multiplied wives for themselves and sought to use their position to make

themselves wealthy. It was rooted in their very nature. And with all his good

points David was no exception. He was far from Moses’ ideal king. Yet in later

62

centuries he was looked back on as the ideal king which demonstrates that the

ideas stated here are remote from any ideas of kingship that existed later. So in

these words we have Moses’ desperate attempts to do what he could to avoid

what was inevitable.

Deuteronomy 17:14

‘When you are come to the land which Yahweh your God gives you, and shall

possess it, and shall dwell in it, and shall say, “I will set a king over me, like all

the nations that are round about me,”

Aware thus of human nature, and especially of the failings of the people whom

he had led for so long, and possibly aware of rumblings already occurring in

some quarters (there was probably already a minority who longed for a king to

give them status. Compare also the rebellion of Dathan and Abiram who no

doubt coveted kingship), Moses knew that one day they would opt for someone to

be king over them. And the prophecies confirmed it. They too spoke of the rise of

kings. He therefore directed their minds to what a king under Yahweh must be

like. There was irony in his words.

He first stressed that they must recognise that this option would only be open to

them because of Yahweh’s activity. It was He Who was giving them the land. It

was He Who would ensure their possession. It was He Who would settle them in

it to dwell there. So they must not forget Him. But, as he knew from the past,

once all that had happened and they had settled down, they would still be

dissatisfied. They would find the burden of running the country very heavy.

They would look around and see the glories of kings and their pageantry and

how they took on all the responsibilities. And they would be envious. They would

crave someone to take on all their responsibilities too.

K&D, "Choice and Right of the King. - Deu_17:14, Deu_17:15. If Israel, when dwelling in the land which was given it by the Lord for a possession, should wish to appoint a king, like all the nations round about, it was to appoint the man whom Jehovah its God should choose, and that from among its brethren, i.e., from its own people, not a foreigner or non-Israelite. The earthly kingdom in Israel was not opposed to the theocracy, i.e., to the rule of Jehovah as king over the people of His possession, provided no one was made king but the person whom Jehovah should choose. The appointment of a king is not commanded, like the institution of judges (Deu_16:18), because Israel could exist under the government of Jehovah, even without an earthly king; it is simply permitted, in case the need should arise for a regal government. There was no necessity to describe more minutely the course to be adopted, as the people possessed the natural provision for the administration of their national affairs in their well-organized tribes, by whom this point could be decided. Moses also omits to state more particularly in what way Jehovah would make known the choice of the

63

king to be appointed. The congregation, no doubt, possessed one means of asking the will of the Lord in the Urim and Thummim of the high priest, provided the Lord did not reveal His will in a different manner, namely through a prophet, as He did in the election of Saul and David (1 Sam 8-9, and 16). The commandment not to choose a foreigner, acknowledged the right of the nation to choose. Consequently the choice on the part of the Lord may have consisted simply in His pointing out to the people, in a very evident manner, the person they were to elect, or in His confirming the choice by word and act, as in accordance with His will.

Three rules are laid down for the king himself in Deu_17:16-20. In the first

place, he was not to keep many horses, or lead back the people to Egypt, to multiply horses, because Jehovah had forbidden the people to return thither by that way. The notion of modern critics, that there is an allusion in this prohibition to the constitution of the kingdom under Solomon, is so far from having any foundation, that the reason assigned - namely, the fear lest the king should lead back the people to Egypt from his love of horses, “to the end that he should multiply horses” - really precludes the time of Solomon, inasmuch as the time had then long gone by when any thought could have been entertained of leading back the people to Egypt. But such a reason would be quite in its place in Moses' time, and only then, “when it would not seem impossible to reunite the broken band, and when the people were ready to express their longing, and even their intention, to return to Egypt on the very slightest occasion; whereas the reason assigned for the prohibition might have furnished Solomon with an excuse for regarding the prohibition itself as merely a temporary one, which was no longer binding” (Oehler in Herzog's Cyclopaedia: vid., Hengstenberg's Dissertations).

(Note: When Riehm objects to this, that if such a prohibition had been unnecessary in a future age, in which the people had reached the full consciousness of its national independence, and every thought of the possibility of a reunion with the Egyptians had disappeared, Moses would never have issued it, since he must have foreseen the national independence of the people; the force of this objection rests simply upon his confounding foreseeing with assuming, and upon a thoroughly mistaken view of the prophet's vision of the future. Even if Moses, as “a great prophet,” did foresee the future national independence of Israel, he had also had such experience of the fickle character of the people, that he could not regard the thought of returning to Egypt as absolutely an impossible one, even after the conquest of Canaan, or reject it as inconceivable. Moreover, the prophetic foresight of Moses was not, as Riehm imagines it, a foreknowledge of all the separate points in the historical development of the nation, much less a foreknowledge of the thoughts and desires of the heart, which might arise in the course of time amidst the changes that would take place in the nation. A foresight of the development of Israel into national independence, so far as we may attribute it to Moses as a prophet, was founded not upon the character of the people, but upon the divine choice and destination of Israel, which by no means precluded the possibility of their desiring to return to Egypt, even at some future time, since God Himself had threatened the people with dispersion among the heathen as the punishment for continued transgression of His covenant, and yet, notwithstanding this dispersion, had

64

predicted the ultimate realization of His covenant of grace. And when Riehm

still further observes, that the taste for horses, which lay at the foundation of this fear, evidently points to a later time, when the old repugnance to cavalry which existed in the nation in the days of the judges, and even under David, had disappeared; this supposed repugnance to cavalry is a fiction of the critic himself, without any historical foundation. For nothing more is related in the history, than that before the time of Solomon the Israelites had not cultivated the rearing of horses, and that David only kept 100 of the war-horses taken from the Syrians for himself, and had the others put to death (2Sa_8:4). And so long as horses were neither reared nor possessed by the Israelites, there can be no ground for speaking of the old repugnance to cavalry. On the other hand, the impossibility of tracing this prohibition to the historical circumstances of the time of Solomon, or even a later age, is manifest in the desperate subterfuge to which Riehm has recourse, when he connects this passage with the threat in Deu_28:68, that if all the punishments suspended over them should be ineffectual, God would carry them back in ships to Egypt, and that they should there be sold to their enemies as men-servants and maid-servants, and then discovers a proof in this, that the Egyptian king Psammetichus, who sought out foreign soldiers and employed them, had left king Manasseh some horses, solely on the condition that he sent him some Israelitish infantry, and placed them at his disposal. But this is not expounding Scripture; it is putting hypotheses into it. As Oehler has already observed, this hypothesis has no foundation whatever in the Old Testament, nor (we may add) in the accounts of Herodotus and Diodorus Siculus concerning Psammetichus. According to Diod. (i. 66), Psammetichus hired soldiers from Arabia, Caria, and Ionia; and according to Herodotus (i. 152), he hired Ionians and Carians armed with brass, that he might conquer his rival kings with their assistance. But neither of these historians says anything at all about Israelitish infantry. And even if it were conceivable that any king of Israel or Judah could carry on such traffic in men, as to sell his own subjects to the Egyptians for horses, it is very certain that the prophets, who condemned every alliance with foreign kings, and were not silent with regard to Manasseh's idolatry, would not have passed over such an abomination as this without remark or without reproof.)

The second admonition also, that the king was not to take to himself many wives, and turn away his heart (sc., from the Lord), nor greatly multiply to himself silver and gold, can be explained without the hypothesis that there is an allusion to Solomon's reign, although this king did transgress both commands (1Ki_10:14. Deu_11:1.). A richly furnished harem, and the accumulation of silver and gold, were inseparably connected with the luxury of Oriental monarchs generally; so that the fear was a very natural one, that the future king of Israel might follow the general customs of the heathen in these respects.

15 be sure to appoint over you a king the Lord

65

your God chooses. He must be from among your

fellow Israelites. Do not place a foreigner over

you, one who is not an Israelite.

BARNES, "The king, like the judges and officers (compare Deu_16:18), is to be chosen by the people; but their choice is to be in accordance with the will of God, and to be made from among “their brethren.” Compare 1Sa_9:15; 1Sa_10:24; 1Sa_16:1; 1Ki_19:16.

Thou mayest not set a stranger over thee - The Jews extended this prohibition to all offices whatsoever (compare Jer_30:21); and naturally attached the greatest importance to it: from where the significance of the question proposed to our Lord, “Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar?” Mat_22:17. A Gentile head for the Jewish people, which it was a principal aim of the Law to keep special and distinct from others, was an anomaly.

CLARKE, "One from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee -It was on the ground of this command that the Jews proposed that insidious question to our Lord, Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar, Or No? Mat_22:17; for they were then under the authority of a foreign power. Had Christ said Yes, then they would have condemned him by this law; had he said No, then they would have accused him to Caesar. See this subject discussed in great detail in the notes, Mat_22:16 (note), etc.

GILL, "Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee whom the Lord thy God shall choose,.... The Jews take this to be a command to set a king over them: whereas it is only a permission in case they should desire and determine on having one, as God foresaw they would; and this with a limitation and restriction to appoint none but whom God should choose, and which was their duty and interest to attend unto; for none could choose better for them, and was what he had a right unto, and it became them to submit to it, since he was their King in a civil and special sense, and another was only his viceregent; accordingly we find, when they expressed their desire to have a king in the time of Samuel, and it was granted, though not without some resentment, the Lord chose their first king for them, Saul, and, after him, David, and even Solomon, David's son; and though, in later times, they appointed kings without consulting him, it is complained of, Hos_8:4 hence this clause is prefaced in the Targum of Jonathan,

"ye shall seek instruction from the Lord, and after set him king, &c.''which was to be done by the mouth of a prophet, or by Urim, as Aben Ezra observes:

one from among thy brethren shall thou set king over thee: that is, one of their own nation, an Israelite, a brother both by nation and religion:

66

thou mayest not set a stranger over thee that is not thy brother; one of another nation, that is not of the family of Israel, as Aben Ezra notes, even not an Edomite, though called sometimes their brother; and Herod, who was an Idumean, was set up, not by them, but by the Romans; now in this their king was a type of the King Messiah, of whom it is said, "their nobles shall be of themselves", Jer_30:21.

JAMISON, "thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother — that is, by their free and voluntary choice. But God, in the retributions of His providence, did allow foreign princes to usurp the dominion (Jer_38:17; Mat_22:17).

CALVIN, "15.Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee. First of all, God

maintains His own supremacy in the appointment of a king, and does not consign

the matter to the people’s own suffrages; that thus He may chastise their

audacity in demanding a king in accordance with a hasty impulse. Secondly, He

commands that he should be taken from the people themselves, and excludes

foreigners, because, if they had been admitted, a door was opened to apostasy;

for each would have tried to force upon them his native gods, and true religion

would have been persecuted by the force and threatenings of the royal power.

Behold why God would not suffer a king to be sought elsewhere but from the

bosom of His Church; in order that he might cherish and maintain that pure

worship which he had imbibed from his childhood.

PETT, "Deuteronomy 17:15

‘You shall surely set him king over you, whom Yahweh your God shall choose,

one from among your brethren shall you set king over you. You may not put a

foreigner over you, who is not your brother.’

When they did reach this position they must ensure that the king they appointed

was the chosen of Yahweh and one of themselves. There must be no Og’s over

Israel, foreigners selected for their great fighting ability, no submissions to

Pharaoh. No foreign overlord must be allowed. (Note how this stress on the king

being one chosen of Yahweh demonstrates that when the phrase ‘whom Yahweh

your God shall choose’ is used the emphasis is on Yahweh’s choosing. Thus for

‘in the place that He will choose’ the same applies.

BENSON, "Deuteronomy 17:15. Whom the Lord thy God shall choose —

Approve of, or appoint. So it was in Saul and David. God reserved to himself the

nomination both of the family and of the person. Thy brethren — Of the same

nation and religion; because such a person was most likely to maintain true

religion, and to rule with righteousness, gentleness, and kindness to his subjects;

and that he might be a fit type of Christ, their supreme king, who was to be one

of their brethren.

67

16 The king, moreover, must not acquire great numbers of horses for himself or

make the people return to Egypt to get more of them, for the Lord has told you,

“You are not to go back that way again.”

BARNES, "The horse was not anciently used in the East for purposes of agriculture or traveling, but ordinarily for war only. He appears constantly in Scripture as the symbol and embodiment of fleshly strength and the might of the creature (compare Psa_20:7; Psa_33:16-17; Psa_147:10; Job_39:19 ff), and is sometimes significantly spoken of simply as “the strong one” (compare Jer_8:16). The spirit of the prohibition therefore is that the king of Israel must not, like other earthly potentates, put his trust in costly and formidable preparations for war (compare Hos_1:7).

Egypt was the principal source from where the nations of western Asia drew their supplies of this animal (compare Exo_14:5 ff; 1Ki_10:28-29; 2Ki_7:6); but contact, traffic, or alliance which would “cause the people to return to Egypt” would be to reverse that great and beneficent wonderwork of God which inaugurated the Mosaic covenant, the deliverance from the bondage of Egypt; and to bring about of set purpose that which God threatened Deu_28:68 as the most severe punishment for Israel’s sin.

CLARKE, "He shall not multiply horses - As horses appear to have been generally furnished by Egypt, God prohibits these,

1. Lest there should be such commerce with Egypt as might lead to idolatry.

2. Lest the people might depend on a well-appointed cavalry as a means of security, and so cease from trusting in the strength and protection of God. And,

3. That they might not be tempted to extend their dominion by means of cavalry, and so get scattered among the surrounding idolatrous nations, and thus cease, in process of time, to be that distinct and separate people which God intended they should be, and without which the prophecies relative to the Messiah could not be known to have their due and full accomplishment.

GILL, "But he shall not multiply horses to himself,.... That he might not put his trust and confidence in outward things, as some are apt to trust in horses and chariots; and that he might not tyrannise over and distress his subjects by keeping a number of horses and chariots as a standing army, and chiefly for a

68

reason that follows; he was to have no more than for his own chariot, so Jarchi, and so the Misnah (g) and Maimonides (h); the Targum of Jonathan restrains it to two:

nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should multiply horses; which was a country that abounded with them, and therefore he was not to encourage, and much less oblige his subjects to travel thither or trade with that people for the sake of increasing his stock of horses, Isa_31:1.

forasmuch as the Lord hath said unto you, ye shall henceforth return no more that way; not that going into Egypt on any account whatsoever was forbidden, as for trade and merchandise in other things, or for shelter and safety, for which some good men fled thither; but for outward help and assistance against enemies, and for horses on that account, and particularly in order to dwell there, from which the Jews in the times of Jeremiah were dissuaded by him, and threatened by the Lord with destruction, in case they should, Jer_42:15. When the Lord said this is not certain; it may be when they proposed to make a captain, and return unto Egypt; or he said this in his providence, this was the language of it ever since they came out of it, or however this he now said; see Deu_28:68.

HENRY, "II. Laws are here given to the prince that should be elected for the due administration of the government.

1. He must carefully avoid every thing that would divert him from God and

religion. Riches, honours, and pleasures are the three great hindrances of

godliness (the lusts of the flesh, the lusts of the eye, and the pride of life), especially

to those in high stations: against these therefore the king is here warned. (1.) He

must not gratify the love of honour by multiplying horses, Deu_17:16. He that

rode upon a horse (a stately creature) in a country where asses and mules were

generally used looked very great; and therefore though he might have horses for

his own saddle, and chariots, yet he must not set servants on horseback (Ecc_

10:7) nor have many horses for his officers and guards (when God was their

King, his judges rode on asses, Jdg_5:10; Jdg_12:14), nor must he multiply

horses for war, lest he should trust too much to them, Psa_20:7; Psa_33:17; Hos_

14:3. The reason here given against his multiplying horses is because it would

produce a greater correspondence with Egypt (which furnished Canaan with

horses, 1Ki_10:28, 1Ki_10:29) than it was fit the Israel of God should have, who

were brought thence with such a high hand: You shall return no more that way,

for fear of being infected with the idolatries of Egypt (Lev_18:3), to which they

were very prone. Note, We should take heed of that commerce or conversation

by which we are in danger of being drawn into sin. If Israel must not return to

Egypt, they must not trade with Egypt; Solomon got no good by it.

JAMISON, "he shall not multiply horses to himself — The use of these animals was not absolutely prohibited, nor is there any reason to conclude that they might not be employed as part of the state equipage. But the multiplication

69

of horses would inevitably lead to many evils, to increased intercourse with foreign nations, especially with Egypt, to the importation of an animal to which the character of the country was not suited, to the establishment of an Oriental military despotism, to proud and pompous parade in peace, to a dependence upon Egypt in time of war, and a consequent withdrawal of trust and confidence in God. (2Sa_8:4; 1Ki_10:26; 2Ch_1:16; 2Ch_9:28; Isa_31:3).

CALVIN, "16But he shall not multiply horses. The royal power is here

circumscribed within certain limits, lest it should exalt itself too much in reliance

on the glory of its dignity, (70) For we know how insatiable are the desires of

kings, inasmuch as they imagine that all things are lawful to them. Therefore,

although the royal dignity may be splendid, God would not have it to be the

pretext of unrestrained power, but restricts and limits it to legal bounds. (71) רק,

rak, is an adversative particle which some construe only; almost with the same

meaning, because this exception was added to restrain the passions of their

kings. The first prohibition is, that he should not collect for himself a multitude

of horses; but, since it is twice repeated, we must consider why it is so. Many thus

translate it, “He shall not multiply horses, nor cause the people to return to

Egypt, to multiply horses;” but this manner of speaking is harsh and obscure.

Now, since the particle למען lemagnan, signifies “for the sake of (propter), it may

be properly translated to the letter, “for the sake of multiplying horses, ”

(propter multiplicare, vel propter ad multiplicandum.) I have no doubt, then, but

that God condemns an immoderate number of horses from the consequences

which might ensue; because it might excite the minds of the kings rashly to

undertake expeditions against the Egyptians. This, therefore, I consider to be the

genuine meaning, that the king should not provide himself with horses in too

great numbers, lest, when he was in possession of many horses, he should lead

his army into Egypt. Thus, amongst other evils which might arise from a

multitude of horses, Moses mentions this, that the king’s mind will be puffed up

with pride, so as to invade Egypt with an army of horse. Now, the question is,

why God forbade His people to return by that way? Some explain it, that the

horses would be brought contrary to God’s command, who had forbidden them

to trade (with that people;) (72) but this does not seem appropriate. Others think

that the people were prohibited from passing the desert, lest in their curiosity

they should be ungrateful to God; but this, too, is far-farfetched. To me it seems

probable, that this journey was prohibited them, in order that, being mindful of

their deliverance, they should be content with their own boundaries. They had

been rescued from a thousand deaths: if they had voluntarily gone thither to

provoke an adversary, their confidence would have been a sign of their despising

and forgetting God’s grace. Therefore, in order that the recollection of their

redemption should be deeply impressed upon their minds, God would have the

honor put upon His miracles, that they should avoid those regions like the

abysses of death. Unless perhaps this reason may be preferred, that a handle for

70

those wicked alliances was cut off, which we see were audaciously contracted,

because the kings of Israel gloried in the abundance of their cavalry. But the

former explanation is most suitable. This law, however, was not obeyed by their

best kings; and hence it appears that the wilfulness and pride of their kings

could scarcely be repressed by any restraints.

ELLICOTT, "(16,17) He shall not multiply horses . . . wives . . . neither shall he

greatly multiply . . . silver and gold.—It is not a little remarkable that these are

the very things which Solomon did multiply; and that under him the monarchy

attained its greatest glory. But the prophecy avenged itself by its literal

fulfilment: “When Solomon was old . . . his wives turned away his heart” (1

Kings 11:4). Yet it is easier to read the words as prophecy than as later history.

What Israelite could have written this sentence after the time of Solomon without

some passing allusion to the glories of his reign? Compare the recorded allusion

in Nehemiah 13:26 : “Did not Solomon, king of Israel, sin by these things? yet

among many nations was there no king like him, who was beloved of his God,

and God made him king over all Israel; nevertheless even him did outlandish

women cause to sin.”

The question, how Solomon came to transgress these orders, may easily be met

by another—How came David to attempt the removal of the ark of God in a

cart? The wealth which Solomon had is represented as the special gift of

Jehovah. His many marriages may be partly accounted for by the fact that only

one son is mentioned, and he was born before his father became king. The

question, “Who knoweth whether he shall be a wise man or a fool?” is singularly

applicable to this individual. And one of the Psalms, which is by its title ascribed

to Solomon, pursues a similar line of thought (Ps. cxxvii).

The caution against multiplying horses marks the profound wisdom of the

writer. The Israelitish infantry was Israel’s strength. The conquest of Canaan

was entirely effected by infantry. There are not many battle-fields in Canaan

suited for chariots and cavalry. An army of infantry can choose its own ground.

PETT, "Deuteronomy 17:16

‘Only he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to

Egypt, to the end that he may multiply horses, forasmuch as Yahweh has said to

you, “You shall henceforth return no more that way.” ’

He must not be one who will depend on horses and chariotry (compare Isaiah

2:7; Micah 5:10), for that would only lead to further contact with Egypt as the

obvious provider (compare 1 Kings 10:28). In those days the horse was the

symbol of military power, and the army was built around them, so the

multiplying of horses indicated the building up of military power. They must not

gaze with envy at Egypt’s power, and its many horses with its chariotry, nor

71

appoint a king who would submit to Pharaoh and return them under Egypt’s

rule in return for some of those horses to be at his disposal. Egypt depended on

their chariots and horses and they had been very much involved in the attempt to

prevent Israel’s getaway (Exodus 14:7; Exodus 14:9; Exodus 14:17; Exodus

14:23), so Israel were very conscious of them. Israel still sang about it in Moses’

day (Exodus 15:4; Exodus 15:21). To them they were a symbol of Egypt’s

greatness, and Egypt’s oppression. But Israel must depend on Yahweh for

security, not on Pharaoh and Egypt and horses (compare Isaiah 31:1; Isaiah

31:3). To look to Egypt could only lead to subjection to Egypt.

Some connect this with trading with Egypt, possibly trading slaves or

mercenaries for horses. But the emphasis is surely more on the danger of

becoming embroiled with Egypt once again, and trusting in them with all its

downside rather than in Yahweh.

BENSON, "Deuteronomy 17:16. He shall not multiply horses — Though he

might have horses for his own use, yet he was not to have many horses for his

officers and guard, much less for war, lest he should trust in them. The

multiplying horses is also forbidden, lest it should raise too great a

correspondence with Egypt, which furnished Canaan with them. The Lord hath

said — The Lord hath now said to me, and I, by his command, declare it to you.

Ye shall no more return that way — Into Egypt, lest ye be again infected with

her idolatries.

SBC, "It is not now necessary to trace the historical connection of this fragment of a verse. It forms an appropriate motto and admonition for the close of the year.

I. The close of a year is a most significant time for the taking of spiritual stock. It is well to have a clearing out, even if one is afraid he may be suffocated with the lifted dust Many a Christian man is hindered in growth by reason of his proud trying to retain an old experience, of which he can make nothing valuable, but which he thinks he is bound to defend for consistency’s sake.

II. This, again, is a good time for us to give over lackadaisical complainings about short chances in the past. You will not have to take the same chances again. "Ye shall henceforth return no more by that way" of youth. But does anybody really want to do that? Victor Hugo confessed to a friend that the most disagreeable advance in age to him had been from thirty-nine to forty. "But," said his companion, "I should think it a great deal brighter to be forty than fifty." "Not at all," replied Hugo; "forty years is the old age of youth, while fifty is the youth of old age."

III. It is well to keep a clear look-out for what is still ahead. The glory of every true life is in the time to come. God has not yet exhausted Himself in apocalypses of splendid radiance to His waiting people. There is that in the distance "which eye hath not seen nor ear heard." And wise men may well think of readiness to make the great journey and meet the revelations.

72

IV. We ought to learn to estimate results and forget processes. It is not necessary to talk continually about faded flowers, and departed joys, and thwarted hopes. It is wiser to let the dead past bury its dead.

V. The close of the year is the time in which to inquire after unfinished work. We should bring our unfulfilled resolutions to God, and ask Him to grant us time to complete them.

C. S. Robinson, Sermons on Neglected Texts, p. 215.

BI, "Ye shall henceforth return no more that way.

Never again

Touching and sad is the last look of the emigrant leaving his old home and the white cliffs of his native land. Some partings have in them more than sorrow. Never again! is a mournful utterance. It has in it warning, admonition, and counsel.

1. The ways of youth are not to be trodden by us again. We are ever entering into new paths. Personality is ever changing, while individual identity remains the same.

2. The ways of possible improvement in the past cannot be trodden again. The capabilities of the organ are limited by its compass and the number of its stops. But within the necessary limits what marvellous varieties of music can be brought out of it! Our life, with measured capacities, is the instrument, and we the players. In the exercise of responsible will we can bring out heavenly harmonies, or unearthly discords. How the great player wishes the audience could come back and hear what he feels he can do now. But the chance is gone. Nothing can be done with the past.

3. If the past cannot be lived over again, it is our duty to make the best of our present. There is much to be done for ourselves and others. (Preacher’s Monthly.)

Once for all

If I can pass this way no more, then—

I. I cannot do what I then missed doing.

1. What thought I of myself?

2. Did I seek God’s way or my own?

II. I cannot undo what I have done. What manner of tracks did I leave in the way?

1. Oaths.

2. Drunkenness.

3. Temptations to others to do wrong.

III. In view of this, how should i walk?

1. Confessing my past sins.

73

2. Repenting of, and forsaking them.

3. Exercising a cheerful faith.

4. Doing good to all men as opportunity offers.

Lessons:

1. Sad and solemn things are in the past.

2. Eternal things are before us. (B. Knepper.)

Never this way again

We are told that at one of those splendid pageants in Berlin, not long ago, the wife of the English ambassador unfortunately unfastened the necklace she was wearing, and lost a costly pearl somewhere in the roadway. Perhaps it might have been regained if a serious search had been in order at such a time. But the grand procession must hurry along, and a lost place in the rank was of more account than a lost pearl. They did not return by the same way. We may be in equal peril if an accident should occur in this ceaseless rush of our years. An admonition in it for the close of the year.

I. It is now a most significant time for the taking of spiritual stock. Most religious people would be glad to know just where they are, and how the balance stands. It is well to have a clearing out, even if one is afraid he may be suffocated with the lifted dust.

II. Then, again, this is a good time for us to give over lackadaisical complainings about short chances in the past. You will not have to take the same chances again. “Ye shall henceforth return no more by that way” of youth. But does anybody really want to do that? Victor Hugo confessed to his close friends that the most disagreeable advance in age to him had been that from thirty-nine to forty. “But,” said his companion, “I should think it a great deal brighter to be forty than fifty.” “Not at all,” replied Hugo, gaily; “forty years is the old age of youth, while fifty is the youth of old age.” Ah, just think how many fine chances yet wait for a brave heart in the beautiful future which we hope to enter on after next New Year’s day!

III. It is best for us now, also, to keep a clear look out for what is still ahead. Almost all of us have some past worth looking over. But the glory of every true life is in the time to come. God has not yet exhausted Himself in apocalypses of splendid radiance to His waiting people. There certainly is, in the distance, that which “eye hath not seen nor ear heard.” And wise men, while the years chime on, might well think of readiness to make the great journey and meet the revelations.

IV. Once more; by this time we ought to learn to estimate results and forget processes. We do really respect hills that we have climbed painfully over; but it awakes no emotion in others when we keep rehearsing the steps which we took, and the snows we met, and the winds that we resisted. Wiser is it always to let the dead past bury its dead out of sight. “Ye shall henceforth return no more that way”; and to some the past year has been a year of conflict; and who wants to go over all that again? Please remember, moments of success are not always moments of

74

happiness; much depends on what the success has cost. “Ye shall henceforth return no more that way”; to some the past year has been one of self-discipline. How much it costs just to make a slender progress in Divine things!

V. Finally, this is the time in which to inquire after work yet left unfinished. We should bring our unfulfilled resolutions to God, and ask Him to grant us time to complete them. (C. S. Robinson, D. D.)

The irrevocable past; or, no going back

I. “Ye shall henceforth return no more that way,” to undo evil. It matters not how black may have been your deed, nor how terrible soever its burden, it must stand. It cannot be undone. It is man’s dread prerogative to do; but he cannot undo. In the drift of a far-off period in the geological ages, long before Adam was created, we find the feet marks of gigantic fowls. The mud, once soft, hardened into rock, and became the permanent record of life and activity now extinct from the globe. The effects of human action are as unchangeable. This it is that makes sin so terrible: when it has gone forth we cannot recall it. Sin is a monument of everlasting shame. A single careless miner, by a momentary act of folly, can do what can never be undone, and in an instant fill a land with sorrow, and hundreds of homes with the tears of widows and orphans. The shocking gap in human life and relationship nothing can repair. Reparation may be effected only within narrow limits; and then the wrong done cannot in the most trivial instance be wholly undone.

II. “Ye shall henceforth return no more that way,” to make imperfect good better. The merchant who has been slothful, inattentive, cannot live over again the months that are gone. The transactions and figures in his books are unalterable. He cannot transport industry into past idleness, nor introduce a single item of gain into past losses. Not a stroke of work is possible in time that is over, not a sixpence of profit can be added to the accounts which are closed. It is the same thing with the student. When his examinations are over, if his session has been indolent, unsuccessful, he cannot improve the work which has been unsatisfactorily performed. He may be grieved and ashamed that his time has been so little devoted to his vocation. But the insufficiency of the past is beyond his reach. The culture of the field and the vineyard exhibits the same law. If there has been neglect or inadequate tillage, when harvest time arrives there is no going back to re-sow or re-tend. There must be scanty crops, dwindled grain and fruit, and only half-filled ears and half-laden boughs. These laws have their fulfilment in the domain of spiritual life. In the day of reckoning you cannot number profits where there have been no gains, nor number victories, if no achievements have been won. The popular proverb says, “It is never too late to mend.” True, it is never too late to mend in the present, but always too late to mend in the past. The path of time gone by is closed.

III. “Ye shall henceforth return no more that way,” to use neglected opportunity. Christian, thou hast had thine opportunities. Perhaps, when thou wert blind—blinded by thy tears—thy opportunities were the nearest to thee. The Lord, it may be, laid Himself out with parental tenderness to purify thee by disappointment, crosses, and suffering. Yet

75

thou sawest no bright avenues crossing the path of thy shade, and conducting to beauty and peace. Has seed been put into thy hand, and hast thou not sown it? Has fruit hung within thy reach, and hast thou not plucked it? Has blessing been committed to thy solemn trust, and hast thou not scattered it? To all neglecters, opportunity is a narrowing path, which at length vanishes in trackless wilds; to the obedient, it is an ever-expanding, ascending, and illumined career, and into it all courses run which lead to glory, honour, and immortality. Every precious opportunity of each departed year is now dead to thee, dead to thine effort and industry.

IV. “Ye shall henceforth return no more that way,” to encounter past trial, guilt, and suffering. Do manifold imperfection and unworthiness bow thee down? Have they cost thee tears? Are they the burden of thy prayers? Dost thou daily struggle for the mastery of self, and sin, and Satan; and yet do thy besetments discourage thee? In the years now behind thee, has the firmament of thy soul often been dull and sunless, and even louring and tempestuous? Thou wilt never tread that path any more. New ground is before thee, and every step is towards the light. Conclusion:

1. The peculiar character of the Gospel is due to the fact that we cannot undo the past. Sin remains. Moral laws are immutable in their foundations, and their penalties are irrepealable. But the Lord Jesus has effected a saving work. He stands between the sinner and the woe that pursues him. He fulfils, honours, and satisfies broken laws, and covers the defenceless head of the contrite, and turns aside the merited destruction which was sweeping towards him.

2. Since what is done cannot by you be undone, are you to sit down and weep the tears of despair? My message is salvation, but not salvation which you can effect in time that is gone. The great lesson is, Act in the present.

3. Let the sincere Christian be comforted. The Lord has borne your sins. Your holy life is watched and guarded by His sheltering love. Ponder what you have done. Throw away no lessons which it offers. Be true to your past experience and conviction. But brood not over bygone evil.

4. Let us be up and doing; for all things pure and beautiful sweep along the upward groove of progress to perfection. The movement of every world and sun and system is onward.

5. In a few more breaths thy life may close. The Lord may be saying with the most literal emphasis, “Ye shall henceforth return no more that way”—“no more” the way to business, “no more” the way to the house of thy friend, “no more” the way to the church, “no more” the way to thy family and home, “no more” the way from the grave whither thou thyself shalt have been carried. (H. Batchelor.)

The past irrevocable

I. I can conceive that to some of us there may be relief and even comfort in this assurance. The experiences through which we have come may have been such that we cannot wish for their renewal. The path over

76

which we have passed may have been so rough and steep and dangerous that we cannot contemplate traversing it again without a shudder. When I was in Chamounix, last summer, a friend who had crossed the glacier and come down by the “Mauvais Pas,” on which the iron railing put for the safety of travellers had parted from its fastenings in his grasp, assured me that be would not go through that experience again for all that earth could give. And there may be not a few among us who feel just in the same way concerning some chapters in our last year’s life. We are, perhaps, thankful to be through them, but we do not wish to repeat them. We feel regarding them as one does who has come safely out of a terrible railway accident, or who sets his foot on land after a dangerous and tempestuous voyage. We are glad that we have escaped, but, even although we should escape another time, we do not desire to be again in the same peril. Some, too, may have had such a time of labour and anxiety that they are glad to think that it is now behind them and not to be renewed. And some there are who have had such a fierce fight with temptation, and have come out of it, victorious indeed, yet with such exhaustion that they cannot but rejoice in the thought that now it is all behind them in “the irrevocable past.” They are glad for the result, but they would not willingly go back into the agony of the conflict. So this text, taken as an assurance, that we cannot re-live our lives, or go again through the experiences of the past, has in it an element of comfort. It is a relief to know that some things are over and done with.

II. But there is another side to the subject, and that is full of solemnity, not unattended with sorrow, For in the past there are many things which now we wish had been otherwise. Our afterthought has shown us much to which our forethought was blind; but we cannot alter anything now. The past is always seen more correctly after it has become the past than it was when it was present. Lost opportunities cannot be recalled, and no cement of human device can mend a broken vow. Ah! what a sad reflection have we here! You cannot recall the profane word; you cannot wipe out the impure act; you cannot undo the sins you have committed. What then? What is to be done with it? I answer, that if we cannot cancel it, we can confess the evil that is in it, and seek through Jesus Christ forgiveness for that. If we please, we can obtain, through the great atonement, acceptance with God notwithstanding our sins. The sting of our guilt may be extracted, and the past may cease to be a clog upon our spiritual progress.

III. And then, turning the thought which the words of my text express, we may make it full of admonition to ourselves for the future. We are about to enter upon a path in which there will be no possibility of retracing our steps; let us be very careful, therefore, where we plant our feet. We have only once to live; therefore let us live to purpose. The day that dawned this morning will never dawn again. So let us seize every moment as it comes, and use it as we shall wish we had done when we look back upon it from eternity. Remember, the year does not come to you all at once, in twelve months at a time, nor even in twelve distinct installments of a month each; no, nor yet in three hundred and sixty-five separate portions of a day apiece: but in individual moments. Do not, therefore, lose the moments in thinking that you will secure the year; but consider that the year is to be redeemed by the consecration of each moment to the Lord Jesus. Fill every day with His service. (W. M. Taylor, D. D.)

77

17�17�17�17�He�must�not�take�many�wives,�or�his�heart�will�He�must�not�take�many�wives,�or�his�heart�will�He�must�not�take�many�wives,�or�his�heart�will�He�must�not�take�many�wives,�or�his�heart�will�

be�led�astray.�He�must�not�accumulate�large�be�led�astray.�He�must�not�accumulate�large�be�led�astray.�He�must�not�accumulate�large�be�led�astray.�He�must�not�accumulate�large�

amounts�of�silver�and�gold.amounts�of�silver�and�gold.amounts�of�silver�and�gold.amounts�of�silver�and�gold.

BARNES, "Multiplication of wives would lead to sensuality, and so to an apostasy no less fatal in effect than downright idolatry (compare Exo_34:16). This rule, like the others, abridges to the ruler of Israel liberties usually enjoyed without stint by the kings of the East. The restriction was in the days of Moses unprecedented; and demanded a higher standard in the king of Israel than was looked for among his equals in other nations.

Neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold - In this third prohibition, as in the other two, excess is forbidden. Vast accumulation of treasure could hardly be effected without oppression; nor when effected fail to produce pride and a “trust in uncertain riches” 1Ti_6:17.

CLARKE, "Neither shall he multiply wives - For this would necessarily lead to foreign alliances, and be the means of introducing the manners and customs of other nations, and their idolatry also. Solomon sinned against this precept, and brought ruin on himself and on the land by it; see 1Ki_11:4.

GILL, "Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away,.... From attending to the duty of his office, the care and government of his people, and from serious religion; and particularly from the worship of the true God, as the heart of Solomon was turned away from it by his numerous idolatrous wives, 1Ki_11:3, it is a common notion of the Jews that a king might have eighteen wives, and no more (k): neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold; he might increase his wealth, but not greatly, lest his heart should be lifted up with pride by it, and lest his subjects should be oppressed and burdened with taxes for that purpose; or he, being possessed of so much, should make use of it to enslave them, and especially should be so elated with it as to deny God, and despise his providence, and disobey his laws; see Pro_30:9. The Jews generally say (l), that he ought not to multiply more than what will pay the stipends or wages of his servants, and only for the treasury of the house of the Lord, and for the necessity of the congregation (or commonwealth), and for their wars; but not for himself, and his own treasury.

78

HENRY, "He must not gratify the love of pleasure by multiplying wives (Deu_17:17), as Solomon did to his undoing (1Ki_11:1), that his heart, being set upon them, turn not away from business, and every thing that is serious, and especially from the exercise of piety and devotion, to which nothing is a greater enemy than the indulgence of the flesh. (3.) He must not gratify the love of riches by greatly multiplying silver and gold. A competent treasure is allowed him, and he is not forbidden to be good husband of it, but, [1.] He must not greatly multiply money, so as to oppress his people by raising it (as Solomon seems to have done, 1Ki_12:4), nor so as to deceive himself, by trusting to it, and setting his heart upon it, Psa_62:10. [2.] He must not multiply it to himself. David multiplied silver and gold, but it was for the service of God (1Ch_29:4), not for himself; for his people, not for his own family.

JAMISON, "Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away — There were the strongest reasons for recording an express prohibition on this point, founded on the practice of neighboring countries in which polygamy prevailed, and whose kings had numerous harems; besides, the monarch of Israel was to be absolutely independent of the people and had nothing but the divine law to restrain his passions. The mischievous effects resulting from the breach of this condition were exemplified in the history of Solomon and other princes, who, by trampling on the restrictive law, corrupted themselves as well as the nation.

neither shall he greatly multiply ... silver and gold — that is, the kings were forbidden to accumulate money for private purposes.

CALVIN, "17Neither shall he multiply wives to himself. Polygamy at that time had

generally prevailed, so that the very humblest of the people violated the marriage vow

with impunity; and therefore it was necessary that the kings should be bound with

closer restrictions, lest by their example they should give greater countenance to

incontinency. And thus their ignorance is easily refuted who conclude that what was

specially interdicted to the kings was permitted to private individuals, whereas the law

of chastity was imposed upon the former, because without this remedy there would be

no bounds to their lasciviousness. Besides, the people would have been subjected to

great expense on their account, since such is the ambition of women, that they would all

have desired to receive royal treatment, and would have even vied with each other in

finery, as actually came to pass. David transgressed this law, and in some degree

excusably on account of his repudiation by Michal; still it appears that lust had more

power over him than the continency prescribed by God. What follows is so connected

by some as if it were the reason of the foregoing sentence, in this way, “that�kings�were�that�kings�were�that�kings�were�that�kings�were�

not�to�multiply�wives�to�themselves,�lest�their�heart�should�turn�away�from�what�was�right,not�to�multiply�wives�to�themselves,�lest�their�heart�should�turn�away�from�what�was�right,not�to�multiply�wives�to�themselves,�lest�their�heart�should�turn�away�from�what�was�right,not�to�multiply�wives�to�themselves,�lest�their�heart�should�turn�away�from�what�was�right,”

as�was�the�case�with�Solomon;�for,�from�being�too�devoted�to�his�wives,�and�being�deceived�as�was�the�case�with�Solomon;�for,�from�being�too�devoted�to�his�wives,�and�being�deceived�as�was�the�case�with�Solomon;�for,�from�being�too�devoted�to�his�wives,�and�being�deceived�as�was�the�case�with�Solomon;�for,�from�being�too�devoted�to�his�wives,�and�being�deceived�

by�the�snares�of�women,�he�fell�into�idolatry.�And�assuredly�it�can�scarcely�fail�to�happen,�by�the�snares�of�women,�he�fell�into�idolatry.�And�assuredly�it�can�scarcely�fail�to�happen,�by�the�snares�of�women,�he�fell�into�idolatry.�And�assuredly�it�can�scarcely�fail�to�happen,�by�the�snares�of�women,�he�fell�into�idolatry.�And�assuredly�it�can�scarcely�fail�to�happen,�

that�when�many�wives�beset�a�man,�they�must�render�his�mind�effeminate,�and�stifle�in�him�that�when�many�wives�beset�a�man,�they�must�render�his�mind�effeminate,�and�stifle�in�him�that�when�many�wives�beset�a�man,�they�must�render�his�mind�effeminate,�and�stifle�in�him�that�when�many�wives�beset�a�man,�they�must�render�his�mind�effeminate,�and�stifle�in�him�

all�his�manly�good�sense.�Yet�I�prefer�taking�the�clause�separately,�that�kings�must�beware�all�his�manly�good�sense.�Yet�I�prefer�taking�the�clause�separately,�that�kings�must�beware�all�his�manly�good�sense.�Yet�I�prefer�taking�the�clause�separately,�that�kings�must�beware�all�his�manly�good�sense.�Yet�I�prefer�taking�the�clause�separately,�that�kings�must�beware�

lest�the�splendor�of�their�dignity�should�affect�the�soundness�of�their�judgment,�for�nothing�lest�the�splendor�of�their�dignity�should�affect�the�soundness�of�their�judgment,�for�nothing�lest�the�splendor�of�their�dignity�should�affect�the�soundness�of�their�judgment,�for�nothing�lest�the�splendor�of�their�dignity�should�affect�the�soundness�of�their�judgment,�for�nothing�

79

is�more�difficult�than�for�one�in�great�power�to�continue�disposed�to�temperance.�is�more�difficult�than�for�one�in�great�power�to�continue�disposed�to�temperance.�is�more�difficult�than�for�one�in�great�power�to�continue�disposed�to�temperance.�is�more�difficult�than�for�one�in�great�power�to�continue�disposed�to�temperance.�

Therefore�God�does�not�in�vain�enjoin�that�they�should�constantly�persevere�in�their�duty,�Therefore�God�does�not�in�vain�enjoin�that�they�should�constantly�persevere�in�their�duty,�Therefore�God�does�not�in�vain�enjoin�that�they�should�constantly�persevere�in�their�duty,�Therefore�God�does�not�in�vain�enjoin�that�they�should�constantly�persevere�in�their�duty,�

and�not�lose�their�understanding.�Moreover,�He�forbids�kings�to�heap�up�treasures,�and�not�lose�their�understanding.�Moreover,�He�forbids�kings�to�heap�up�treasures,�and�not�lose�their�understanding.�Moreover,�He�forbids�kings�to�heap�up�treasures,�and�not�lose�their�understanding.�Moreover,�He�forbids�kings�to�heap�up�treasures,�

because�it�cannot�be�done�without�rapine�and�violent�exactions;�whilst,�at�the�same�time,�because�it�cannot�be�done�without�rapine�and�violent�exactions;�whilst,�at�the�same�time,�because�it�cannot�be�done�without�rapine�and�violent�exactions;�whilst,�at�the�same�time,�because�it�cannot�be�done�without�rapine�and�violent�exactions;�whilst,�at�the�same�time,�

wealth�encourages�them�audaciously�to�undertake�unjust�wars,�incites�them�to�gross�wealth�encourages�them�audaciously�to�undertake�unjust�wars,�incites�them�to�gross�wealth�encourages�them�audaciously�to�undertake�unjust�wars,�incites�them�to�gross�wealth�encourages�them�audaciously�to�undertake�unjust�wars,�incites�them�to�gross�

dissipation,�and�at�length�hurries�them�forward�to�tyrannical�excesses.�First,�therefore,�dissipation,�and�at�length�hurries�them�forward�to�tyrannical�excesses.�First,�therefore,�dissipation,�and�at�length�hurries�them�forward�to�tyrannical�excesses.�First,�therefore,�dissipation,�and�at�length�hurries�them�forward�to�tyrannical�excesses.�First,�therefore,�

God�would�have�kings�beware,�lest�in�their�pursuit�of�riches�they�should�exhaust�the�blood�God�would�have�kings�beware,�lest�in�their�pursuit�of�riches�they�should�exhaust�the�blood�God�would�have�kings�beware,�lest�in�their�pursuit�of�riches�they�should�exhaust�the�blood�God�would�have�kings�beware,�lest�in�their�pursuit�of�riches�they�should�exhaust�the�blood�

of�the�people,�and�lest�they�should�lavish�their�illof�the�people,�and�lest�they�should�lavish�their�illof�the�people,�and�lest�they�should�lavish�their�illof�the�people,�and�lest�they�should�lavish�their�ill----gotten�money�in�superfluous�expenses,�gotten�money�in�superfluous�expenses,�gotten�money�in�superfluous�expenses,�gotten�money�in�superfluous�expenses,�

and�be�extravagant�with�what�belongs�to�others;�and�lastly,�lest�they�should�be�tempted�by�and�be�extravagant�with�what�belongs�to�others;�and�lastly,�lest�they�should�be�tempted�by�and�be�extravagant�with�what�belongs�to�others;�and�lastly,�lest�they�should�be�tempted�by�and�be�extravagant�with�what�belongs�to�others;�and�lastly,�lest�they�should�be�tempted�by�

the�pride�of�wealth�to�attempt�unlawful�things.the�pride�of�wealth�to�attempt�unlawful�things.the�pride�of�wealth�to�attempt�unlawful�things.the�pride�of�wealth�to�attempt�unlawful�things.

PETT, "Deuteronomy 17:17

‘Nor shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away, nor shall he

greatly multiply to himself silver and gold.’

Nor�must�he�seek�to�build�up�his�position�by�marriage�treaties�which�would�involve�Nor�must�he�seek�to�build�up�his�position�by�marriage�treaties�which�would�involve�Nor�must�he�seek�to�build�up�his�position�by�marriage�treaties�which�would�involve�Nor�must�he�seek�to�build�up�his�position�by�marriage�treaties�which�would�involve�

marrying�foreign�wives�who�would�turn�his�heart�away�from�Yahweh�(compare�marrying�foreign�wives�who�would�turn�his�heart�away�from�Yahweh�(compare�marrying�foreign�wives�who�would�turn�his�heart�away�from�Yahweh�(compare�marrying�foreign�wives�who�would�turn�his�heart�away�from�Yahweh�(compare�

Deuteronomy�Deuteronomy�Deuteronomy�Deuteronomy�7:37:37:37:3----5555).�The�use�of�marriage�to�maintain�a�dynasty�had�been�practised�by�).�The�use�of�marriage�to�maintain�a�dynasty�had�been�practised�by�).�The�use�of�marriage�to�maintain�a�dynasty�had�been�practised�by�).�The�use�of�marriage�to�maintain�a�dynasty�had�been�practised�by�

Abraham.�It�was�even�more�common�among�kings.�He�had�watched�it�happening�in�Egypt,�Abraham.�It�was�even�more�common�among�kings.�He�had�watched�it�happening�in�Egypt,�Abraham.�It�was�even�more�common�among�kings.�He�had�watched�it�happening�in�Egypt,�Abraham.�It�was�even�more�common�among�kings.�He�had�watched�it�happening�in�Egypt,�

with�Pharaoh�erecting�temples�for�his�foreign�wives.�For�marriage�secured�treaty�with�Pharaoh�erecting�temples�for�his�foreign�wives.�For�marriage�secured�treaty�with�Pharaoh�erecting�temples�for�his�foreign�wives.�For�marriage�secured�treaty�with�Pharaoh�erecting�temples�for�his�foreign�wives.�For�marriage�secured�treaty�

relationships,�and�treaty�relationships�with�the�right�people�gave�strength,�and�the�wives�relationships,�and�treaty�relationships�with�the�right�people�gave�strength,�and�the�wives�relationships,�and�treaty�relationships�with�the�right�people�gave�strength,�and�the�wives�relationships,�and�treaty�relationships�with�the�right�people�gave�strength,�and�the�wives�

had�to�be�kept�sweet.�Again�there�is�the�implied�command�to�avoid�foreign�treaties.�They�had�to�be�kept�sweet.�Again�there�is�the�implied�command�to�avoid�foreign�treaties.�They�had�to�be�kept�sweet.�Again�there�is�the�implied�command�to�avoid�foreign�treaties.�They�had�to�be�kept�sweet.�Again�there�is�the�implied�command�to�avoid�foreign�treaties.�They�

were�not�needed.�Yahweh�alone�was�sufficient.were�not�needed.�Yahweh�alone�was�sufficient.were�not�needed.�Yahweh�alone�was�sufficient.were�not�needed.�Yahweh�alone�was�sufficient.

But he also knew how much plotting and intrigue there could be among king’s�wives,�s�wives,�s�wives,�s�wives,�

even�homeborn�ones,�as�each�plotted�and�schemed�for�their�own�born�sons�to�be�given�even�homeborn�ones,�as�each�plotted�and�schemed�for�their�own�born�sons�to�be�given�even�homeborn�ones,�as�each�plotted�and�schemed�for�their�own�born�sons�to�be�given�even�homeborn�ones,�as�each�plotted�and�schemed�for�their�own�born�sons�to�be�given�

power.�He�wanted�also�to�save�Israel�from�that.�And�from�the�sway�of�women�behind�the�power.�He�wanted�also�to�save�Israel�from�that.�And�from�the�sway�of�women�behind�the�power.�He�wanted�also�to�save�Israel�from�that.�And�from�the�sway�of�women�behind�the�power.�He�wanted�also�to�save�Israel�from�that.�And�from�the�sway�of�women�behind�the�

throne,�each�seeking�their�own�benefit,�regardless�of�what�was�for�the�good�of�the�people.throne,�each�seeking�their�own�benefit,�regardless�of�what�was�for�the�good�of�the�people.throne,�each�seeking�their�own�benefit,�regardless�of�what�was�for�the�good�of�the�people.throne,�each�seeking�their�own�benefit,�regardless�of�what�was�for�the�good�of�the�people.

Nor must he seek to amass great wealth in silver and gold so as to exercise his influence

in that way (compare Isaiah 2:7). Multiplying silver and gold could involve raids into

other people’s�territory�and�heavy�taxes�on�the�people.�It�could�cause�great�hardship�to�s�territory�and�heavy�taxes�on�the�people.�It�could�cause�great�hardship�to�s�territory�and�heavy�taxes�on�the�people.�It�could�cause�great�hardship�to�s�territory�and�heavy�taxes�on�the�people.�It�could�cause�great�hardship�to�

those�from�whom�the�wealth�was�extracted,�and�it�would�signify�greed�and�being�those�from�whom�the�wealth�was�extracted,�and�it�would�signify�greed�and�being�those�from�whom�the�wealth�was�extracted,�and�it�would�signify�greed�and�being�those�from�whom�the�wealth�was�extracted,�and�it�would�signify�greed�and�being�

unsatisfied�with�what�Yahweh�had�given.�And�it�would�lead�to�the�desire�for�more�and�unsatisfied�with�what�Yahweh�had�given.�And�it�would�lead�to�the�desire�for�more�and�unsatisfied�with�what�Yahweh�had�given.�And�it�would�lead�to�the�desire�for�more�and�unsatisfied�with�what�Yahweh�had�given.�And�it�would�lead�to�the�desire�for�more�and�

80

more.�His�eyes�would�more�be�on�gold�than�on�God.more.�His�eyes�would�more�be�on�gold�than�on�God.more.�His�eyes�would�more�be�on�gold�than�on�God.more.�His�eyes�would�more�be�on�gold�than�on�God.

We must remember that Moses knew only too well, from experience, what swayed men.

He had seen it all too often. Power, women and wealth, that was what ruined men, and

he would have seen through his experiences in the Egyptian court, and in Midian in his

association with the priest of Midian and other Midianite tribes with their kings, how

different royal connections sought to build up their own influence so as to gain great

wealth. But while horses with their chariots, and foreign alliances, and wealth were the

way to victory and success for other nations, they were not to be so for Israel. They

were to look only to Yahweh. This description of kingship gone to the bad was widely

illustrated in every king around, some to a greater extent than others, and his recent

experiences with regards to Sihon and Og would simply have confirmed it to him.

Moses was not a fool.

So to suggest that these words could only have been written after the time of Solomon is

naive in the extreme. His words were a photograph of all kings. They were a

photograph of the Pharaohs and of known petty kings. They were even a photograph of

Gideon (Judges 8:30).

BENSON. "Deuteronomy 17:17. Neither shall he multiply wives to himself — As�the�As�the�As�the�As�the�

manner�of�other�kings�was,�contrary�to�the�design�of�God�from�the�beginning.�That�his�manner�of�other�kings�was,�contrary�to�the�design�of�God�from�the�beginning.�That�his�manner�of�other�kings�was,�contrary�to�the�design�of�God�from�the�beginning.�That�his�manner�of�other�kings�was,�contrary�to�the�design�of�God�from�the�beginning.�That�his�

heart�turn�not�awayheart�turn�not�awayheart�turn�not�awayheart�turn�not�away — From�God�and�his�law,�as�SolomonFrom�God�and�his�law,�as�SolomonFrom�God�and�his�law,�as�SolomonFrom�God�and�his�law,�as�Solomon’s�did.�Neither�silver�nor�golds�did.�Neither�silver�nor�golds�did.�Neither�silver�nor�golds�did.�Neither�silver�nor�gold —

Lest�this�should�lift�up�his�heart�in�confidence�and�pride,�which�God�abhors,�and�beget�in�Lest�this�should�lift�up�his�heart�in�confidence�and�pride,�which�God�abhors,�and�beget�in�Lest�this�should�lift�up�his�heart�in�confidence�and�pride,�which�God�abhors,�and�beget�in�Lest�this�should�lift�up�his�heart�in�confidence�and�pride,�which�God�abhors,�and�beget�in�

him�a�contempt�of�his�people.him�a�contempt�of�his�people.him�a�contempt�of�his�people.him�a�contempt�of�his�people.

They are not simply forbidden to be rich, if God made them so, which was the case of

David, Solomon, Jehoshaphat, and some others; but they are forbidden, either

inordinately to desire, or irregularly to procure great riches, by grinding the faces of

their own subjects, or possessing themselves, contrary to justice, of the property of

others.

18 When he takes the throne of his kingdom, he

is to write for himself on a scroll a copy of this

law, taken from that of the Levitical priests.

81

BARNES, "It is in striking consistency with the dignity which everywhere throughout the Mosaic legislation surrounds the chosen people of God, that even if they will be “like as all the nations about” Deu_17:14, and be governed by a king, care should nevertheless be taken that he shall be no Oriental despot. He is to be of no royal caste, but “one from among thy brethren” Deu_17:15; he is to bear himself as a kind of “primus inter pares,” his heart “not being lifted up above his brethren” Deu_17:20; he is, like his subjects, to be bound by the fundamental laws and institutions of the nation, and obliged, as they were, to do his duty in his station of life with constant reference thereto. The spirit of the text is that of Mat_23:9.

A copy of this law - The whole Pentateuch, or, at any rate, the legal portion of the Pentateuch.

A book ... before the priests the Levites - Compare the marginal reference.

CLARKE, "He shall write him a copy of this law - �mishneh משנה�התורה�הזאת

hattorah�hazzoth, an iteration or duplicate of this law; translated by the Septuagint, το�

δευτερονοµιον�τουτο this deuteronomy. From this version both the Vulgate Latin and

all the modern versions have taken the name of this book; and from the original word

the Jews call it Mishneh. See the preface to this book.

Out of that which is before the priests the Levites - It is likely this means, that the copy which the king was to write out was to be taken from the autograph kept in the tabernacle before the Lord, from which, as a standard, every copy was taken and with which doubtless every copy was compared; and it is probable that the priests and Levites had the revising of every copy that was taken off, in order to prevent errors from creeping into the sacred text.

GILL, "And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom,.... When he is settled on it, and is even amidst all the pomp and glory of it: that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book; which copy the Septuagint and Vulgate Latin versions interpret of this book of Deuteronomy, which is a summary abstract and repetition of the various laws of God to the people of Israel; though the Jewish writers commonly understand it of the whole Pentateuch, the five books of Moses; which perhaps may be enlarging it too much, as it would be reducing it to too little to restrain it to this law concerning kings, as the Targum of Jonathan. The word "Mishneh", rendered "copy", signifies "double"; hence some take it to mean a double exemplar or copy of the law he was obliged to write out, whereby it would be the more imprinted on his mind, and he would be furnished with it for his use at home and abroad, as the Jewish writers observe; so Jarchi by the copy understands two books of the law, one to be left in his treasury, the other to go out and in with him. The same is said in the Talmud (m), and with which Maimonides (n) agrees, whose words are,"at the time a king sits on the throne of his kingdom, he writes for himself a book of the law, besides what his fathers left him; and he copies it out of the book of the court by the order of the sanhedrim of seventy one; if his fathers have left him none, or it is lost, he writes two books of the law, one he leaves in the house of his treasures, which he is commanded, as everyone of Israel is, and the second never

82

departs from him;''but one may seem sufficient on all occasions, and for all purposes; and this was to be wrote out of that which is before the priests and Levites; the original copy of it, which was deposited in the side of the ark; see Deu_31:26.

HENRY, "He must carefully apply himself to the law of God, and make that his rule. This must be to him better than all riches, honours, and pleasures, than many horses or many wives, better than thousands of gold and silver.

(1.) He must write himself a copy of the law out of the original, which was in the custody of the priests that attended the sanctuary, Deu_17:18. Some think that he was to write only this book of Deuteronomy, which is an abstract of the law, and the precepts of which, being mostly moral and judicial, concerned the king more than the laws in Leviticus and Numbers, which, being ceremonial, concerned chiefly the priests. Others think that he was to transcribe all the five books of Moses, which are called the law, and which were preserved together as the foundation of their religion. Now, [1.] Though the king might be presumed to have very fair copies by him from his ancestors, yet, besides those, he must have one of his own: it might be presumed that theirs were worn with constant use; he must have a fresh one to begin the world with. [2.] Though he had secretaries about him whom he might employ to write this copy, and who perhaps could write a better hand than he, yet he must do it himself, with his own hand, for the honour of the law, and that he might think no act of religion below him, to inure himself to labour and study, and especially that he might thereby be obliged to take particular notice of every part of the law and by writing it might imprint it in his mind. Note, It is of great use for each of us to write down what we observe as most affecting and edifying to us, out of the scriptures and good books, and out of the sermons we hear. A prudent pen may go far towards making up the deficiencies of the memory, and the furnishing of the treasures of the good householder with things new and old. [3.] He must do this even when he sits upon the throne of his kingdom, provided that he had not done it before. When he begins to apply himself to business, he must apply himself to this in the first place. He that sits upon the throne of a kingdom cannot but have his hands full. The affairs of his kingdom both at home and abroad call for a large share of his time and thoughts, and yet he must write himself a copy of the law. Let not those who call themselves men of business think that this will excuse them from making religion their business; nor let great men think it any disparagement to them to write for themselves those great things of God's law which he hath written to them, Hos_8:12.

JAMISON, "he shall write him a copy of this law in a book — The original scroll of the ancient Scriptures was deposited in the sanctuary under the strict custody of the priests (see on Deu_31:26; see on 2Ki_22:8). Each monarch, on his accession, was to be furnished with a true and faithful copy, which he was to keep constantly beside him, and daily peruse it, that his character and sentiments being cast into its sanctifying mould, he might discharge his royal functions in the spirit of faith and piety, of humility and a love or righteousness.

CALVIN, "18.And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne. It would not be enough

to correct their errors unless kings were also instructed in the fear of God, and properly

taught their duty; now, therefore, a system of discipline is added, whereby it was

profitable for them to be grounded in the study of religion and justice, viz., that they

83

should take the Law from the priests and Levites, which was to be the rule of all their

actions. Because the demonstrative pronoun is used, (73) some think that only the book

of Deuteronomy is referred to, but without good reason. I make no doubt but that the

whole sum of doctrine is included, which is delivered both here and in Exodus and

Leviticus. But although it was without exception to be common to all, yet in order that

kings might be more assiduously attentive in reading it, God would have a copy

peculiarly dedicated to their use by the priests and Levites, and given into their hands

in a solemn ceremony; that kings might know that they required greater wisdom and

counsel for ruling the people than private persons. When, therefore, the priests and

Levites presented them with this book, it was as if God deposited this treasure with the

king. He then enjoins that they should exercise themselves in the doctrine of the Law

through the whole course of their lives, because kings are usually supplied with books

only out of ostentation and pomp, and when they have tasted of what is taught in them,

straightway grow tired and cease to read them. Finally, the object of their reading is

subjoined: first of all, in general, that they may learn to fear God and keep His statutes;

and, secondly, lest, being lifted up with pride and vanity, they should despise and

oppress their brethren. And the word brethren is used designedly, lest they should

imagine that the law of brotherhood was abolished, because they were set over the

whole people; but rather that they should study to cherish all as members (of

themselves.) Again, it is afterwards repeated, lest they should “turn�aside�to�the�right�turn�aside�to�the�right�turn�aside�to�the�right�turn�aside�to�the�right�

hand�or�the�left;hand�or�the�left;hand�or�the�left;hand�or�the�left;” because,�when�men�have�much�liberty�of�action,�their�lusts�can�never�be�because,�when�men�have�much�liberty�of�action,�their�lusts�can�never�be�because,�when�men�have�much�liberty�of�action,�their�lusts�can�never�be�because,�when�men�have�much�liberty�of�action,�their�lusts�can�never�be�

sufficiently�restrained.�But,�lest�it�should�be�grievous�to�them�to�be�thus�reduced�to�order,�sufficiently�restrained.�But,�lest�it�should�be�grievous�to�them�to�be�thus�reduced�to�order,�sufficiently�restrained.�But,�lest�it�should�be�grievous�to�them�to�be�thus�reduced�to�order,�sufficiently�restrained.�But,�lest�it�should�be�grievous�to�them�to�be�thus�reduced�to�order,�

finally�God�reminds�them�that�this�moderation�would�be�useful�to�them,�for�that�they�thus�finally�God�reminds�them�that�this�moderation�would�be�useful�to�them,�for�that�they�thus�finally�God�reminds�them�that�this�moderation�would�be�useful�to�them,�for�that�they�thus�finally�God�reminds�them�that�this�moderation�would�be�useful�to�them,�for�that�they�thus�

would�prolong�their�reigns;�whereas�the�tyranny�of�kings�is�often�their�destruction;�as�the�would�prolong�their�reigns;�whereas�the�tyranny�of�kings�is�often�their�destruction;�as�the�would�prolong�their�reigns;�whereas�the�tyranny�of�kings�is�often�their�destruction;�as�the�would�prolong�their�reigns;�whereas�the�tyranny�of�kings�is�often�their�destruction;�as�the�

Lacedemonian�king�replied,�when�his�wife�was�annoyed�that�the�Ephori�were�appointed�to�Lacedemonian�king�replied,�when�his�wife�was�annoyed�that�the�Ephori�were�appointed�to�Lacedemonian�king�replied,�when�his�wife�was�annoyed�that�the�Ephori�were�appointed�to�Lacedemonian�king�replied,�when�his�wife�was�annoyed�that�the�Ephori�were�appointed�to�

restrain�him,restrain�him,restrain�him,restrain�him, “that�he�should�indeed�leave�less�power�to�his�children,�but�that�it�would�be�that�he�should�indeed�leave�less�power�to�his�children,�but�that�it�would�be�that�he�should�indeed�leave�less�power�to�his�children,�but�that�it�would�be�that�he�should�indeed�leave�less�power�to�his�children,�but�that�it�would�be�

the�more�lasting.�(the�more�lasting.�(the�more�lasting.�(the�more�lasting.�(74747474)�But,�here�a�long�succession�is�promised�by�God)�But,�here�a�long�succession�is�promised�by�God)�But,�here�a�long�succession�is�promised�by�God)�But,�here�a�long�succession�is�promised�by�God’s�favor,�if�they�were�s�favor,�if�they�were�s�favor,�if�they�were�s�favor,�if�they�were�

willing�to�guide�themselves�aright,willing�to�guide�themselves�aright,willing�to�guide�themselves�aright,willing�to�guide�themselves�aright,

COFFMAN, "We are able to find no agreement whatever with the learned opinions to

the effect that "That book" which the king was to study throughout his life was nothing

more that two or three verses from this chapter in Deuteronomy! "The law of the

kingdom is the law of God (Deuteronomy 17:18-20).[17] Davies listed the Book of

Deuteronomy only as the book the king was to receive.[18] Even the usually dependable

McGarvey gave as his opinion that "It was not a very long document!'"[19] The

statement that the king himself was to "write him a copy of this law in a book," "is a

Hebraism with the meaning that `there shall be written for him' a copy of this law,

etc."[20]

In our opinion, neither a few verses nor a short document qualifies as "a book."

Perhaps this is the reason that the Septuagint (LXX) translated this place in such a

84

manner as to make the meaning "a copy of all the law of God." Of course, the critics

have been screaming about that Septuagint (LXX) rendition, for the Septuagint (LXX)

rendition is obviously incorrect. Recent knowledge of the suzerainty treaties and the

resemblance to them found in Deuteronomy has shed some light on this, and, as Kline

expressed it: "A duplicate copy of the suzerainty treaty was provided for each vassal

king."[21] Moreover, that "copy" was not a few excerpts, but the whole document, the

entire treaty. That is clearly what is indicated here. Canon Cook discerned this a long

time ago, writing that, "What was given to the king was the whole Pentateuch, or at any

rate the legal portion of it."[22] "Only the whole law of the covenant could preserve the

king from the dangers of his position."[23] Note also, in this connection, what was to be

copied: It was that which was laid up "before the priests and the Levites,"

(Deuteronomy 17:18) and that is a clear reference to ALL of the sacred law. Alexander

also concurred in this view: "The priests were the custodians of the written Law

(Deuteronomy 31:26), and from the text of their codex was the king's copy to be

written.[24] Alexander also explained the error in Septuagint (LXX) thus:

"Deuteronomy 17:18 has `a double of this law,' not, as in Septuagint (LXX) `the

reiteration of the law,' but a duplicate or copy of the Pentateuchal law."[25] This

mistaken rendition in the LXX, where reiteration occurs is actually "deuteronomy"

from which the name of this Book is derived.

Dummelow further commented on the giving of God's law to the King, writing, "To this

day, when a Christian monarch is crowned, the Bible is delivered to him with the

words: `We present you with this book, the most valuable thing that the world affords;

here is wisdom; this is the royal law: these are the living oracles of God!'"[26]

"He and his children, in the midst of Israel ..." (Deuteronomy 17:20). Many have noted

that this seems to sanction a hereditary monarchy. Adam Clarke's comment on this

was:

"From this it has been inferred that the crown of Israel was designed to be hereditary;

and this is probably true. Long experience has proved in almost all of the nations of the

world, that hereditary succession in the regal government is, on the whole, the safest,

and best calculated to secure the public tranquility.[27]

Edward Gibbon has written the following on the advantages of the hereditary system in

the succession of monarchs: Our most serious thoughts must respect the principle of

heredity in the succession of kings, because it establishes a principle of succession that is

independent of the passions of mankind ... Experience teaches us that in a large society

the election of a monarch can never be entrusted to "the wisest" or "to the most

numerous" of the people. The military is the only order of men that is sufficiently

united and powerful enough to impose their choice upon the people, but the army,

habituated to violence and slavery, renders them very unsafe guardians of a

constitution?

ELLICOTT, "(18) He shall write him a copy of this law.—This phrase is the

source of the Greek title of the book, Deuteronomion, or in English,

Deuteronomy. The word appears also in Joshua 8:32. The English conveys the

right sense of the word, which primarily denotes repetition. In Hebrew it is

85

Mishneh, the name afterwards given to the “text” of the Talmud, of which the

idea is to repeat the law; though it is a somewhat peculiar repetition, in which

minutiœ are chiefly dealt with, and weightier matters left out.

There are traces of this direction (1) in the coronation of Joash (2 Chronicles

23:11, “they gave him the testimony;” (2) in the reign of Jehoshaphat, who had

the Book of the Law taught to his people (2 Chronicles 17:9); and (3) in the

delivery of the book when discovered in the Temple to Josiah (2 Chronicles

34:18), and in the effect of the perusal of it upon that king. But it is singular that

we do not hear of the Book of the Law in connection with David and Solomon.

Possibly, as David was a prophet himself, and not only a king, it may be thought

unnecessary to make special mention of his study of the law. In many things he

acted upon the direct commands of God to himself or to his seers.

We must not forget that the true king of Israel is He whose special mission it was

“to fulfil the law and the prophets.” “Lo, I come, in the volume of the book it is

written of me, I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my

heart.”

PETT, "Deuteronomy 17:18-19

‘And it shall be, when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write

him a copy of this law in a book, out of that which is before the priests the

Levites, and it shall be with him, and he shall read in it all the days of his life,

that he may learn to fear Yahweh his God, to keep all the words of this law and

these statutes, to do them,’

So their king must rather be one who submits himself to Yahweh’s instruction.

When he sits on his throne his consideration should not to be on how to build up

his power base and his wealth, and how to please his wives, but on how to please

Yahweh, the One Who had given them everything that they had, and how to

build up the wealth of the nation. Thus he should ensure that he had his own

copy of the record of Yahweh’s doings and of His Law as contained in the books

which were in the levitical priests’ care. (As Deuteronomy was not, at this stage

in his speech, in written form, this must refer to an earlier written Law). And he

must keep it ever by him and read it every day of his life, so that he might learn

to fear Yahweh his God, and keep His Instruction and what He had laid down, in

accordance with what was now being spoken of by Moses. Such a king might be

conceived of as possible in the beginning, but not once Saul had been king for a

few years. And certainly not once kingship had been established. Even Hezekiah

and Josiah, presented from the best possible view, were not remotely like this. No

one later could have been foolish enough to suggest such an ideal as possible.

Those who did not want such kings would turn away from kingship. But it was

86

certainly a theoretical possibility while they were still without a home.

HAWKER, "Verses 18-20

Observe, it was not enough to have it written for him, he must do it with his own

hand: and the highest honour be could arrive at, was the sacred employment

here enjoined him. But this was not all. Writing it was not enough, he was to

meditate therein. Reader! in how many families is the word of GOD a reproach,

when the Bible is made to rest upon their shelves unused from day to day. Will

not GOD'S word be a swift witness against such in the day of judgment? Blessed

JESUS! may thy word dwell in my heart richly in all wisdom, and may it be my

meditation all the day.

BENSON. "Verse 18-19

Deuteronomy 17:18-19. He shall write — With his own hand, say the Jews. Out

of that which is before the priests — Out of that original, which was carefully

kept by the priests in the sanctuary, that it might be a perfect copy, and that it

might have the greater influence upon him, coming to him as from the hand and

presence of God. He shall read therein — Diligently and constantly: neither the

greatness of his place, nor the weight and multitude of his business, shall excuse

or hinder him; all the days of his life — It is not enough to have Bibles, but we

must use them, yea, use them daily. Our souls must have constant meals of that

manna, which, if well digested, will afford them true nourishment and strength.

K&D 18-20, "And thirdly, instead of hanging his heart upon these earthly things, when he at upon his royal throne he was to have a copy of the law written out by the Levitical priests, that he might keep the law by him, and read therein all the days of his life. כתב does not involve writing with his own hand (Philo), but simply having it written. הזאת התורה משנה does not mean τὸ δευτερονόμιον τοῦτο(lxx), “this repetition of the law,” as הזאת cannot stand for הזה; but a copy of this law, as most of the Rabbins correctly explain it in accordance with the Chaldee version, though they make mishneh to signify duplum, two copies (see Hävernick, Introduction). - Every copy of a book is really a repetition of it. “From before the

priests,” i.e., of the law which lies before the priests or is kept by them. The object of the daily reading in the law (Deu_17:19 and Deu_17:20) was “to learn

the fear of the Lord, and to keep His commandments” (cf. Deu_5:25; Deu_6:2; Deu_14:23), that his heart might not be lifted up above his brethren, that he might not become proud (Deu_8:14), and might not turn aside from the commandments to the right hand or to the left, that he and his descendants might live long upon the throne.

BI 18-19, "He shall read therein.

How we may read the Scriptures with most spiritual profit

The Holy Scripture is, as Austin saith, a golden epistle sent to us from God. This is to be read diligently. “Ignorance” of Scripture is “the mother of” error, not

87

“devotion.” “Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures” (Mat_22:29). We are commanded to “search the Scriptures” (Joh_5:39). The Greek word signifies to search as for a vein of silver. How diligently doth a child read over his father’s will and testament, and a citizen peruse his charter! With the like diligence should we read God’s Word, which is our Magna Charta for heaven. It is a mercy the Bible is not prohibited. Trajan, the emperor, forbade the Jews to read in the book of the law. But there is no danger of touching this tree of Holy Scriptures; if we do not eat of this tree of knowledge we shall surely die.

I. Remove those things which will hinder your profiting.

1. Remove the love of every sin. The body cannot thrive in a fever; nor can the soul under the feverish heat of lust.

2. Take heed of the thorns which will choke the Word read. A covetous man is a pluralist; he hath such diversity of secular employments, that he can scarce find time to read; or if he doth, what solecisms doth he commit in reading! While his eye is upon the Bible, his heart is upon the world; it is not the writings of the apostles he is so much taken with, as the writings in his account book. Is this man likely to profit? You may as soon extract oils and syrups out of a flint, as he any real benefit out of Scripture.

3. Take heed of jesting with Scripture. This is playing with fire.

II. Prepare your hearts to the reading of the Word. The heart is an instrument that needs putting in tune. This preparation to reading consists in two things—

1. In summoning our thoughts together to attend that solemn work we are going about. The thoughts are stragglers; therefore rally them together.

2. In purging out those unclean affections which do indispose us to reading. Many come rashly to the reading of the Word; and no wonder, if they come without preparation, that they go away without profit.

III. Read the scripture with reverence. Think every line you read God is speaking to you. When Ehud told Eglon he had a message to him from God, he arose from his throne (Jdg_3:20). The Word written is a message to us from Jehovah; with what veneration should we receive it!

IV. Read the books of scripture in order. Though occurrences may sometimes divert our method, yet for a constant course it is best to observe an order in reading. Order is a help to memory: we do not begin to read a friend’s letter in the middle.

V. Get a right understanding of Scripture (Psa_119:73). If the Word shoot above our head, it can never hit our heart.

VI. Read the Word with seriousness. Well may we be serious if we consider the importance of those truths which are bound up in this sacred volume. “It is not a vain thing for you, because it is your life” (chap. 32:47). If a letter were to be broken open and read, wherein a man’s whole estate were concerned, how serious would he be in reading of it! In the Scripture our salvation is concerned; it treats of the love of Christ, a serious subject (Tit_3:4).

VII. Labour to remember what you read. The memory should be like the chest in the ark, where the law was put. Some can better remember a piece of news than

88

a line of Scripture; their memories are like those ponds where the frogs live, but the fish die.

VIII. Meditate upon what you read. Meditation is the bellows of the affections: “While I was musing the fire burned” (Psa_39:3). The reason we come away so cold from reading the Word is, because we do not warm ourselves at the fire of meditation.

IX. Come to the reading of Scripture with humble hearts. An arrogant person disdains the counsels of the Word, and hates the reproofs; is he likely to profit? “God giveth grace unto the humble” (Jas_4:6). The most eminent saints have been but of low stature in their own eyes; like the sun in the zenith, they showed least when they were at the highest.

X. Give credence to the Word written. Believe it to be of God; see the name of God in every line. The Romans, that they might gain credit to their laws, reported that they were inspired by the gods at Rome. Believe the Scripture to be “Divinely inspired.” Whence should the Scripture come, if not from God?

1. Sinners could not be the authors of Scripture. Would they indite such holy lines? or inveigh so fiercely against those sins which they love?

2. Saints could not be the authors of Scripture. How could it stand with their sanctity to counterfeit God’s name, and put “Thus saith the Lord” to a book of their own devising?

3. Angels could not be the authors of Scripture. What angel in heaven durst personate God, and say, “I am the Lord”? Believe the pedigree of Scripture to be sacred, and to come from the “Father of lights.”

XI. Highly prize the Scriptures (Psa_119:72). St. Gregory calls the Bible “the heart and soul of God.” It is the library of the Holy Ghost. It is the compass by which the rudder of our wheel is to be steered; it is the field in which Christ, the Pearl of price, is hid; it is a rock of diamonds; it is a sacred “eye-salve”; it mends their eyes that look upon it; it is a spiritual optic-glass in which the glory of God is resplendent; it is the “universal medicine” for the soul.

XII. Get an ardent love to the word. Prizing relates to judgment, love to the affections. “Consider how I love Thy precepts” (Psa_119:159; Rom_7:22). He is likely to grow rich who delights in his trade; “a lover of learning will be a scholar.” St. Austin tells us, before his conversion he took no pleasure in the Scriptures, but afterwards they were his “chaste delights.”

XIII. Come to the reading of the Word with honest hearts.

1. Willing to know the whole counsel of God.

2. Desirous of being made better by it.

XIV. Learn to apply scripture. Take every word as spoken to yourselves.

XV. Observe the preceptive part of the Word, as well as the permissive. Such as east their eye upon the promise, with a neglect of the command, are not edified by Scripture; they look more after comfort than duty. The body may be swelled with wind as well as flesh: a man may be filled with false comfort, as well as that which is genuine and real.

89

XVI. Let your thoughts dwell upon the most material passages of Scripture. The bee fastens on those flowers where she may suck most sweetness. Though the whole contexture of Scripture is excellent, yet some parts of it may have a greater emphasis, and be more quick and pungent.

XVII. Compare yourselves with the word. See how the Scripture and your hearts agree, how your dial goes with this sun. Are your hearts, as it were, a transcript of Scripture? Is the Word copied out into your hearts?

XVIII. Take special notice of those scriptures which speak to your particular case. Were a consumptive person to read Galen or Hippocrates, he would chiefly observe what they writ about a consumption. Great regard is to be had to those paragraphs of Scripture which are most apposite to one’s present case. I shall instance only in three cases—

1. Affliction.

2. Desertion.

3. Sin.

XIX. Take special notice of the examples in scripture. Make the examples of others living sermons to you.

1. Observe the examples of God’s judgments upon sinners. They have been hanged up in chains in terrorem.

2. Observe the examples of God’s mercy to saints. Jeremy, was preserved in the dungeon, the three children in the furnace, Daniel in the lions den. These examples are props to faith, spurs to holiness.

XX. Leave not off reading in the bible till you find your hearts warmed.

XXI. Set upon the practice of what you read. “I have done Thy commandments” (Psa_119:166). A student in physic doth not satisfy himself to read over a system or body of physic, but he falls upon practising physic: the life-blood of religion lies in the practical part. So, in the text: “He shall read” in the book of the law “all the days of his life; that he may learn to keep all the words of this law and these statutes, to do them.” Christians should be walking Bibles.

XXII. Make use of Christ’s prophetical office. He is “the Lion” of the tribe of Judah,” to whom it is given “to open the book” of God, “and to loose the seven seals thereof (Rev_5:5). Christ doth so teach as He doth quicken.

XXIII. Tread often upon the threshold of the sanctuary. Ministers are God’s interpreters; it is their work to expound dark places of Scripture. We read of “pitchers, and lamps within the pitchers” (Jdg_7:16). Ministers are “earthen” pitchers (2Co_4:7). But these pitchers have lamps within them, to light souls in the dark.

XXIV. Pray that God will make you profit. “I am the Lord thy God, which teacheth thee to profit” (Isa_48:17). Make David’s prayer: “Open Thou mine eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of Thy law” (Psa_119:18). Pray to God to take off the veil on the Scripture, that you may understand it; and the veil on your heart, that you may believe it. Pray that God will not only give you His Word as a rule of holiness, but His grace as a principle of holiness. I shall

90

conclude all with two corollaries—

1. Content not yourselves with the bare reading of Scripture, but labour to find some spiritual increment and profit. Get the Word transcribed into your hearts: “The law of his God is in his heart” (Psa_37:31). Never leave till you are assimilated into the Word. Such as profit by reading of the Book of God are the best Christians alive; they answer God’s cost, they credit religion, they save their souls.

2. You who have profited by reading the Holy Scriptures, adore God’s distinguishing grace. (T. Watson, M. A.).

19 It is to be with him, and he is to read it all the

days of his life so that he may learn to revere the

Lord his God and follow carefully all the words

of this law and these decrees

CLARKE, "And it shall be with him, etc. - It was the surest way to bring the king to an acquaintance with the Divine law to oblige him to write out a fair copy of it with his own hand, in which he was to read daily. This was essentially necessary, as these laws of God were all permanent, and no Israelitish king could make any new law, the kings of this people being ever considered as only the vice-gerents of Jehovah.

GILL, "And it shall be with him,.... Always, when at home or abroad, sitting on his throne or lying down, or wherever he went, unless in such places where it was not proper to read it, as the Jews observe (o): and he shall read therein all the days of his life; every day of his life; meditate on it night and day, as a good man does, that he might be well versed in it, and know how to govern his people according to it:

that he may learn to, fear the Lord his God; to serve and worship himboth internally and externally, he having the fear of God always before his eyes, and on his heart, which the holy law of God directs to and instructs in:

91

to keep all the words of this law, and these statutes, to do them; not only such as concerned him as a king, but all others that concerned him as a man, a creature subject to the Lord, and as an Israelite belonging to the church and commonwealth of Israel, and so includes all laws, moral, ceremonial, and judicial.

HENRY 19-20, " Having a Bible by him of his own writing, he must not think it enough to keep it in his cabinet, but he must read therein all the days of his life,Deu_17:19. It is not enough to have Bibles, but we must use them, use them daily, as the duty and necessity of everyday require: our souls must have their constant meals of that manna; and, if well digested, it will be true nourishment and strength to them. As the body is receiving benefit by its food continually, and not only when it is eating, so is the soul, by the word of God, if it meditate therein day and night, Psa_1:2. And we must persevere in the use of the written word of God as long as we live. Christ's scholars never learn above their Bibles, but will have a constant occasion for them till they come to that world where knowledge and love will both be made perfect.

(3.) His writing and reading were all nothing if he did not reduce to practice what he wrote and read, Deu_17:19, Deu_17:20. The word of God is not designed merely to be and entertaining subject of speculation, but to be a commanding rule of conversation. Let him know, [1.] What dominion his religion must have over him, and what influence it must have upon him. First, It must possess him with a very reverent and awful regard to the divine majesty and authority. He must learn (and thus the most learned must by ever learning) to fear the Lord his God; and, as high as he is, he must remember that God is above him, and, whatever fear his subjects owe to him, that, and much more, he owes to God as his King. Secondly, It must engage him to a constant observance of the law of God, and a conscientious obedience to it, as the effect of that fear. He must keep all the words of this law (he is custos utriusque tabulae - the keeper of both tables), not only take care that others do them, but do them himself as a humble servant to the God of heaven and a good example to his inferiors. Thirdly, It must keep him humble. How much soever he is advanced, let him keep his spirit low, and let the fear of his God prevent the contempt of his brethren; and let not his heart be lifted up above them, so as to carry himself haughtily or disdainfully towards them, and to trample upon them. Let him not conceit himself better than they because he is greater and makes a fairer show; but let him remember that he is the minister of God to them for good (major singulis, but minor universis - greater than any one, but less than the whole). It must prevent his errors, either on he right hand or on the left (for there are errors on both hands), and keep him right, in all instances, to his God and to his duty. [2.] What advantage his religion would be of to him. Those that fear God and keep his commandments will certainly fare the better for it in this world. The greatest monarch in the world may receive more benefit by religion than by all the wealth and power of his monarchy. It will be of advantage, First, To his person: He shall prolong his days in his kingdom. We find in the history of the kings of Judah that, generally, the best reigns were the longest, except when God shortened them for the punishment of the people, as Josiah's. Secondly, To his family: his children shall also prosper. Entail religion upon posterity, and God will entail a blessing upon it.

20 and not consider himself better than his

92

fellow Israelites and turn from the law to the

right or to the left. Then he and his descendants

will reign a long time over his kingdom in Israel.

CLARKE, "He, and his children, in the midst of Israel - From this verse it has been inferred that the crown of Israel was designed to be hereditary, and this is very probable; for long experience has proved to almost all the nations of the world that hereditary succession in the regal government is, on the whole, the safest, and best calculated to secure the public tranquillity.

He, and his children, in the midst of Israel - From this verse it has been inferred that the crown of Israel was designed to be hereditary, and this is very probable; for long experience has proved to almost all the nations of the world that hereditary succession in the regal government is, on the whole, the safest, and best calculated to secure the public tranquillity.

GILL, "That his heart be not lifted up above his brethren,.... On account of his office, the dignity of it, considering that he was subject to the law of God, and accountable to the Lord for all his actions:

and that he turn not aside from the commandment, to the right hand or to the left; not in the least deviate from the law of God in the whole of his conduct, and particularly in the exercise of his kingly office:

to the end that he may prolong his days in his kingdom; ruling well according to the laws of God being the way to rule long:

he and his children in the midst of Israel; this shows, as Jarchi observes, that if his son was fit for the kingdom, he was to be preferred to any other man; for though it was elective, yet to be continued in the same family, provided they walked in the ways of the Lord, and observed his laws.

HENRY, "What advantage his religion would be of to him. Those that fear God and keep his commandments will certainly fare the better for it in this world. The greatest monarch in the world may receive more benefit by religion than by all the wealth and power of his monarchy. It will be of advantage, First, To his person: He shall prolong his days in his kingdom. We find in the history of the kings of Judah that, generally, the best reigns were the longest, except when God shortened them for the punishment of the people, as Josiah's. Secondly, To his family: his children shall also prosper. Entail religion upon posterity, and God will entail a blessing upon it.

ELLICOTT, "(20) To the end that he may prolong his days in his kingdom, he,

93

and his children.—Shows�that�the�kingdom�in�Israel�would�be�hereditary�only�so�Shows�that�the�kingdom�in�Israel�would�be�hereditary�only�so�Shows�that�the�kingdom�in�Israel�would�be�hereditary�only�so�Shows�that�the�kingdom�in�Israel�would�be�hereditary�only�so�

far�as�Jehovah�willed�it�to�be�so.�Again�we�may�say�that�the�striking�fact�that�no�far�as�Jehovah�willed�it�to�be�so.�Again�we�may�say�that�the�striking�fact�that�no�far�as�Jehovah�willed�it�to�be�so.�Again�we�may�say�that�the�striking�fact�that�no�far�as�Jehovah�willed�it�to�be�so.�Again�we�may�say�that�the�striking�fact�that�no�

dynasty�except�that�of�David�ever�continued�for�more�than�five�generations,�and�dynasty�except�that�of�David�ever�continued�for�more�than�five�generations,�and�dynasty�except�that�of�David�ever�continued�for�more�than�five�generations,�and�dynasty�except�that�of�David�ever�continued�for�more�than�five�generations,�and�

only�two�dynasties�for�more�than�two�generations,�while�Davidonly�two�dynasties�for�more�than�two�generations,�while�Davidonly�two�dynasties�for�more�than�two�generations,�while�Davidonly�two�dynasties�for�more�than�two�generations,�while�David’s�dynasty�was�s�dynasty�was�s�dynasty�was�s�dynasty�was�

perpetual�by�promise,�could�hardly�have�escaped�notice,�if�known�to�the�writer�of�perpetual�by�promise,�could�hardly�have�escaped�notice,�if�known�to�the�writer�of�perpetual�by�promise,�could�hardly�have�escaped�notice,�if�known�to�the�writer�of�perpetual�by�promise,�could�hardly�have�escaped�notice,�if�known�to�the�writer�of�

this�book.this�book.this�book.this�book.

K&D, "Verses 18-20

And thirdly, instead of hanging his heart upon these earthly things, when he at

upon his royal throne he was to have a copy of the law written out by the

Levitical priests, that he might keep the law by him, and read therein all the days

of his life. תבכ does not involve writing with his own hand (Philo), but simply

having it written. ורה משנהתאת הזה does not mean τὸ δευτερονόμιον τοῦτο (lxx),

“this repetition of the law,” as אתזה cannot stand for הזה ; but a copy of this law,

as most of the Rabbins correctly explain it in accordance with the Chaldee

version, though they make(mishneh) to signify (duplum), two copies (see

Hהvernick, Introduction). - Every copy of a book is really a repetition of it.

“From before the priests,” i.e., of the law which lies before the priests or is kept

by them. The object of the daily reading in the law (Deuteronomy 17:19 and

Deuteronomy 17:20) was “to learn the fear of the Lord, and to keep His

commandments” (cf. Deuteronomy 5:25; Deuteronomy 6:2; Deuteronomy 14:23),

that his heart might not be lifted up above his brethren, that he might not

become proud (Deuteronomy 8:14), and might not turn aside from the

commandments to the right hand or to the left, that he and his descendants

might live long upon the throne.

PETT, "Deuteronomy 17:20

‘That 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 his days in his kingdom, he and his children, in the midst of Israel.’

And the reason why he should do this with Yahweh’s Law was so that he might

not become proud, nor see himself as mighty, but so that he might rather obey

Yahweh’s instructions as given in His commandment (His statutes and His

ordinances), not turning from them either one way or the other, but walking

humbly before God. Then he would ensure his own long success, and that of his

successors and the continuance of their rule over Israel.

94

This is the way too that we can ensure God’s blessing on us and on our families

and on His people, by continually having by us His word, and reading it, and

applying it to our lives.

Excursus On The Kingship Described Here.

Note how here all the thought is on avoiding Egypt. Once established in the land

other neighbours to the north would have come to mind, but at this time Egypt,

the Egypt that they had left behind and which still had a fatal attraction for the

people, was the one great reality he knew of to be avoided. This fits with Moses’

environment and fears and awareness exactly. None knew better than he the

promises that Egypt would make in order to gain dominion over nations. And he

had not brought Israel to this place to see them again submit themselves to

Egypt. They must remain a free people, whose whole trust and dependence was

on Yahweh, the fighter of their battles.

(It is difficult to believe that anyone who lived in the times of the later great

empires could have written in this manner, restricting his thoughts to Egypt. In

those days such a historic sense would not have been possible).

We must repeat that no king appointed in Israel (and then Judah) was ever like

the ideal that Moses describes here. It was purely theoretical and ideal,

demonstrating that it was certainly written before kingship arose, for once that

happened it shattered into smithereens the ideal once and for all. This comes out

especially in the fact that even from the beginning of the concept of kingship the

people rejected this type of king altogether and never even considered it. It was

not at all what they wanted. They wanted one who was like other kings, and they

shrugged off the consequences (1 Samuel 8:10-21). They did not want a man who

was involved in God’s Law and would thus disapprove of how they continually

disobeyed it, they wanted a shoulder to cry on.

It is probable indeed that Moses’ sketch of a suitable king made them shudder. It

described the last kind of king that they would want. By the time that the

possibility of kingship arose they had long since laid much of that Law aside in

their behaviour with the Canaanites, and they would not want one therefore who

would pull them up short over the way that they lived. What they wanted was a

king like other peoples had who would fight their battles, and they were ready to

meet the consequences.

How they had described what they wanted to Samuel comes out in the way that

Samuel gave his warning to them (1 Samuel 8:11-21). Had they opted for a king

like Moses described Yahweh would not have been displeased, and Samuel

would not have said what he did. But they had made plain what they wanted,

and it was inevitably not in accordance with the Mosaic ideal. For by the time of

Saul they had long since gone past any such dedication the Law. It would have

95

been cynical in the extreme, no we must say utterly foolish, for a later writer to

even have suggested such a kingship as a possibility once kingship was

established in the way it was. By then the ways and ideas of kingship was firmly

established.

So the thought that anyone would later write like this when there was not even

the slightest chance that such a kingship could possibly arise is ludicrous. Such a

concept would not even have been considered, even by a religious fanatic. Any

later writer would rather have allowed the king more in the way of prestige so as

hopefully to win his argument and make his idea attractive. And an extremist

would have wanted rid of kingship altogether. The description here is the ideal of

the wilderness when no Israelite king had yet been known. Then only could it

have been put forward. And then only it might have had a chance. This picture

did not even have a remote chance once kingship had been established and

enjoyed. Thus it must have been written by someone who was looking forward to

a theoretical situation.

HAWKER, "REFLECTIONS

BLESSED JESUS! thou art the unblemished spotless offering of my soul, and

while I desire of thine own, O my GOD, to bring the best and choicest offerings,

in token that all I am, and all I have is thine: it is JESUS himself, my sin-

offering, my only righteousness, with which I would come to thine altar. And oh!

how sweet and lovely art thou dearest Redeemer, in all thy person, offices, and

characters! In purity, in comeliness, thou art not only fairer than the children of

men, for grace is poured into thy lips, but thou dost infinitely transcend the

angels. And is it not on behalf of thy people that thou appearest to our view, and

art presented by faith to our GOD in the everlasting righteousness of thy spotless

purity and holiness? Dearest JESUS! be thou ever my sacrifice of a sweet

smelling savor!

Blessed SPIRIT! help me to look up to thee in the perusal of this chapter, and

seeing thou didst enjoin the king of Israel, to copy with his own hand the sacred

word, and to read therein all the days of his life; Oh! give me grace to meditate

therein day and night; and like thy servant of old, may I be enabled to say,

"Mine eyes prevent the night watches, that I may be occupied in thy words.

LORD, make the law of thy mouth dearer to me than thousands of gold and

silver."

BENSON, "Deuteronomy 17:20. That his heart be not lifted up — He intimates,

that the Scriptures, diligently read, are a powerful means to keep a person

humble, because they show him that, though a king, he is subject to a higher

monarch, to whom he must give an account of all his administrations, and

receive from him his sentence, agreeably to their quality, which is sufficient to

96

abate the pride of the haughtiest person in the world.

97