with the Golden Calf XXXII Exod. 20. and Jacob in ancienter time buried all the strange Gods as well as the Ear-rings that were in their Ears XXXV Gen. 4. And Josiah in future Ages burnt every thing that had been imployed to Idolatry even the Vessels that were made for Baal as well as the Images c. and stamp'd them to Powder 2 King XXIII 4 6 14 15. Nor take it unto thee lest thou be snared therein Be drawn into a Conceit that there was something sacred in it and so tempted to worship it For it is an abomination to the LORD thy God Whatsoever hath been employed to such idolatrous Worship is so detestable unto the Divine Majesty that he will not have it converted to any ordinary and common use but utterly destroyed Ver. 26. Neither shalt thou bring an Abomination into Verse 26 thy House And therefore he requires them not to bring any of that Silver and Gold which had belonged to those Idols which he calls an Abomination into their Houses to be employed unto any private use whatsoever So the Jews understand these words having made from hence one of their affirmative Precepts That no Man should seek the least profit or benefit from any thing appertaining to an Idol Lest thou be a cursed thing like it Every thing that was idolatrous was a Cherem devoted to Destruction as he saith in the last words It is a cursed thing which no Man might meddle withal XIII 17. If he did he became an accursed thing i. e. was devoted to destruction as the thing it self was This was apparent afterwards in the Example of Achan in the VII Josh who took a Wedge of Gold and a Babylonish Garment for his own private use when it had been made a Cherem by God's express Command VI Josh 17. and therefore was stoned to Death But thou shalt utterly detest it and thou shalt utterly abhor it Not only look upon it as useless and unprofitable but as hateful and execrable in the highest degree and therefore to be entirely destroyed All this tended to their preservation in the true Religion which taught them to have every thing contrary to it in the utmost detestation Insomuch as Maimonides interprets this Precept in his More Nevochim P. III. Cap. XXXVII that if any Man broke such Images Chapter VIII or melted them down and then sold the Silver and Gold he committed an Abomination and the Price of this being mingled with his other Riches proved the Rust of them all This he thinks is the meaning of bringing an Abomination into their House Which was so far from bringing a Blessing as the Heathen imagined that it brought a Curse upon all that they had The Jews were so sensible of all this after they had severely smarted for their Idolatry that they thought it unlawful to use any Vessel that had been employed in sacrificing to a false God Nay to warm themselves with the Wood of a Grove that was cut down or to sit under the Shadow of it for Coolness sake while it was standing or so much as to use the Ashes of the Wood that were left after the Grove was burnt See Selden Lib. II. De Jure Nat. Gent. juxta Discipl Hebr. Cap. VII pag. 215 216 c. CHAP. VIII Verse 1 Verse 1. ALL the Commandments which I command thee this day shall ye observe to do He seems still to press them to have a special care to observe the Ten Commandments and especially the first of them VI. 4 5 6. For it appears by the later end of this Chapter that he hath a regard to that That ye may live Long and happily For Life every one knows frequently signifies all the Comforts of Life as Death signifies all manner of Miseries And multiply Which is the effect of a long and happy Life And go in and possess the Land c. Or After ye go in and possess the Land which the LORD sware unto your Fathers See VI. 18. Ver. 2. And thou shalt remember all the way which Verse 2 the LORD thy God led thee these forty Years in the Wilderness Whereby they were severely punished for the Rebellion of their Forefathers against him which should be an Admonition to them to be more dutiful Others expound it of the care of God over them in providing for them and protecting them as well as leading them by a glorious Cloud all that time Which doth well enough agree with what follows See II. 7. To humble thee Or to afflict thee with tedious Wandrings up and down backward and forward without any certain Dwelling-place And prove thee To try whether they would be better by being kept so long out of the good Land promised unto them And to know what was in thine Heart whether thou wouldest keep his Commandments or no. God knew perfectly how they were disposed towards him but it was fit that they should know themselves better and Posterity be instructed by their Behaviour Ver. 3. And he humbled thee and suffered thee to Verse 3 hunger He afflicted thee by suffering thee to want Bread to eat XVI Exod. 2 3. And fed thee with Manna But it was that he might have an opportunity to make a bountiful Provision for such a vast multitude of People as were fed by him every Day from Heaven and teach them to depend on his good Providence Which thou knewest not neither did thy Fathers know XVI Exod. 15. He made an unusual as well as an unexpected Provision for them That he might make thee know that Man doth not live by Bread only That it is not only our common Food that preserves us But by every Word that proceedeth out of the Mouth of God doth Man live But by any thing whatsoever for so Word often signifies which God shall please to command to give us Nourishment This was a wonderful incouragement to Obedience that God would rather work a Miracle than suffer them to want Necessaries and by a light aerial sort of Bread give them as great strength and vigour as the most solid Nourishment was wont to afford them The remembrance of which could not but excite their Posterity to love God and serve him if they often and seriously reflected on it Verse 4 Ver. 4. Thy Raiment waxed not old upon thee neither did thy Foot swell these forty Years These were two other wonderful Benefits which if well considered could not but incline them to be obedient to him who multiplied Miracles to nourish and strengthen their Faith and Hope in him The Jews to increase the Miracle say Their Clothes inlarged as they grew bigger from Children to Men and so did their Shoes also But there was no need of this for the Clothes and Shoes of those Men that died might serve their Children when they grew up to their stature And it was sufficiently amazing without such additions that their Clothes should not so much as decay nor their Feet by so long travelling in hot
was when a Cause came before them upon an Appeal for it was not so Criminal to disobey every Sentence of the Supream Court but only such as these or to the place where it was made which was to be no where else but at God's dwelling place or to the things about which the Decree was made which some will have to be only weighty Matters and the act of Contumacy also was considered for he was not put to death they say unless in open Court he declared a contrary Sentence The death he suffered was strangling and he could suffer in no other place but where this High Court sat See Selden of all these in the place before-mentioned N. II III IV V VI. And it may be further observed that the Prophets themselves were subject to the Power and Jurisdiction of this High Court by whom they might be sentenced to Capital Punishment if they taught contrary to the Law of God But our Mr. Thorndike makes a doubt whether the Constitution which the Jewish Writers mention about a Rebellious Elder as they call him who taught any thing contrary to the determination of this Supream Court was ever in force or no For it was made because of the differences between the Schools of Hillel and Sammai who lived not long before our Saviour's time when it appears by the Gospel that Nation had lost the Power of Life and Death See Rights of the Church Chap. V. p. 256. And thou shalt put away the evil from Israel This may refer either to the evil Person or to the great scandal and dangerous Example he gave by resisting the highest Authority and thereby breaking the Bond of Unity and Peace Verse 13 Ver. 13. And all the People shall hear and fear and do no more presumptuously This Punishment was intended to strike a terror into all the People that they should not adventure to oppose the Supream Authority And for this end the Offender was to be kept in custody as R. Aquiba understood this till the next great Feast either of the Passover or Pentecost or Tabernacles and then executed when the whole Nation i. e. all the Males were present This Mr. Selden observes in the forenamed place N. VII is the most received Opinion though R. Jehuda saith they did not make the Sentence sharper by a long delay but executed it presently And for the further publication of it they sent Letters to all the Tribes and Cities of Israel to give notice that such a Man was executed at such a time for this Crime See Selden there N. VIII Verse 14 Ver. 14. And when thou comest into the Land which the LORD thy God giveth thee and shalt possess it and shalt dwell therein When they had conquered the Land of Canaan and were settled in it And shalt say I will set a King over me The Jews commonly from this and the next Verse fancy that God commanded them to make a King when they came to the Land of Canaan and had a quiet possession of it following herein the Gemara of the Sanhedrim Cap. II. Insomuch that they have presumed to make this an affirmative Precept That a King of the People should be chosen and quote this place for it To which some Learned Men among Christians have seemed to incline particularly Petrus Cunaeus Lib. de Republ. Hebr. Cap. XIV and Guil. Schikardus in his Jus Regium Cap. I. Theor. I. But Abarbinel himself contradicts this and so doth Josephus who observes that God intended they should keep their present Government but if they would have a King he should be one of their Brethren For thus he interprets this place Lib. I. Antiq. Cap. VIII that they should not affect any other Government but love the present having the Laws for their Master and living according to them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for it is sufficient that God is your Ruler And then he adds but if you desire to have a King 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let him be one of your own Nation as it here follows in the next Verse Like as all the Nations that are about me Such as the Edomites who had been governed by Kings before the days of Moses See XXXVI Gen. 31. Ver. 15. Thou shalt in any wise set him King over thee Install and receive him into the Throne Whom the LORD thy God shall choose They could not elect whom they pleased but the first King at least was to be appointed oy God himself who was their Supream Governour So the People understood it when they desired Samuel who was their chief Ruler under God to make them a King 1 Sam. VIII 5. but durst not to presume to set one up of themselves And to confirm them in this Opinion Samuel saith to Saul 1 Sam. X. 1. The LORD hath anointed thee to be Captain over his Inheritance and saith to all the People v. 24. See ye him whom the LORD hath chosen And accordingly when the lot was to be cast to show who was to be their King Samuel bids all the Tribes present themselves before the LORD v. 19. And when it fell upon Saul and they could not find him they enquired of the LORD and the LORD answered where he was v. 22. In like manner when Saul was rejected the LORD himself appointed David to be anointed their King and settled that Authority in his Family And to determine which of his Sons should have it God himself appointed his immediate Successor viz. Solomon For so David declares to all the Princes and the great Men whom he assembled before his death Of all my Sons the LORD hath chosen Solomon to sit upon the Throne of the Kingdom of the LORD God of Israel 1 Chron. XXVIII 5. And again XXIX 1. David said unto all the Congregation Solomon my son whom alone God hath chosen is yet young c. But though it was thus in the beginning of this Kingdom yet God intended at length to make it hereditary as appears from v. 20. of this Chapter One from amongst thy Brethren shalt thou set over thee i. e. Saith the Tradition mentioned by the Jews out of Tosiphta the most select and choice Person that could be found not one of mean Extraction or Employment This they fancy is meant by from among thy brethren Thou mayest not set a stranger over thee which is not thy brother This the Jews extend to all Offices whatsoever as Maimonides reports their sense See Selden Lib. VI. de Jure Nat. Gent. Cap. XX. p. 647. And by thy brother some of them understand one that was an Israelite both by Father and Mother though others think it sufficient if a King was an Israelite by the Mother's side See there Cap. XXII Which in his Book de Succession ad Pontificat Lib. II. he shows was sufficient for any Dignity among the Israelites but only the Priesthood See also Lib. III. de Synedr Cap. IX N. VI. where he observes the Talmudists say the great Sanhedrim was
was hanged VIII Josh 29. and five Kings more X. 26. and they were not hanged because they were Blasphemers or Idolaters for then all the rest of the Canaanites should have been so treated but because they were such Enemies of God as had rebelliously withstood the gracious Summons of Surrender And there are other Examples also which confute this as the two Traitors that murdered Isbosheth 2 Sam. IV. 12. and the five Sons of Saul 2 Sam. XXI 9. It is more probable therefore that all those whom the Judges thought to be such great Offenders that it was fit to make them very publick Examples were hanged up after they had suffered the punishment of Death to which they were sentenced This seems to be denoted in the word Chatta which signifies sometimes a very great Crime as appears from XII Hosea 8. where he speaks of iniquity which is sin Not as if all iniquity were not sin but some acts of iniquity were not so heinous as to be called by that name And thou hang him After he had been put to death as appears by the foregoing words which speak of his being put to death before this Suspension Which shows that this Punishment was not the same with the Roman Crucifixion as Baronius Sigonius Lipsius and others have mistaken for they hanged Men alive upon the Gibbet whereby they expired before they were taken down But this was only hanging up their Bodies after they were dead and exposing them to open shame for a time On a Tree On a piece of Timber saith the Sanhedrim struck into the Ground out of which came a Beam whereunto his Hands were tied as they tell us in the place before-mentioned And so Schickard in his Mischpat Hammelech Cap. IV. Theor XIV So that his Body hung in such a posture as crucified Men did Ver. 23. His body shall not remain all night upon the Tree but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day This is excellently interpreted by Josephus Lib. IV. Archaeol Verse 23 Cap. VIII 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Having remained the whole day a Spectacle unto all he was to be buried at night for as soon as the Sun went down the Body also was taken down Examples of which we have in the Book of Joshua VIII 29. X. 26 27. In which he is far more sincere then their Rabbins who say the Law was satisfied if they hanged up the Body just before the setting of the Sun and presently after took it down again Which Exposition seems to have been contrived in favour of their Country-men for only Israelites they confess were to be thus exposed not Proselytes of the Gate as Mr. Selden observes Lib. II. de Jure Nat. Gent. c. Cap. XII For he that is hanged is accursed of God The Jews interpret this Clause as if the meaning were he was hanged because he blasphemed God So Onkelos himself and the Samaritan Versions with those of the Spanish and Mauritanian Jews as Selden observes L. II. de Synedr Cap. XIII N. IV. And Hottinger in his Smegma Orientale p. 96 97. But though this be a common Opinion among the Hebrew Doctors yet the LXX have taken the sense right 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cursed of God is every one that is hanged on a Tree And so S. Paul III Galat. with very little difference For they observed what those Doctors did not that Moses doth not here give a reason why the Man was hanged up but why he was to be taken down from the Gallows Now what Consequence is there in this Let him be taken down and buried because he cursed God Every one sees that though the word cursed should be taken in an active sense this is not a right interpretation of these words For though it had been good sense to have said Let him be hanged because he cursed God yet not let him be taken down for that reason Now such Persons are said here to be accursed of God not because they were hanged up but because of their Sin which deserved they should be thus exposed So S. Hierom upon III Galatians Non ideo maledictus quia pendet sed ideo pendet quia maledictus He was not accursed because he was hanged but he was therefore hanged because he was accursed Hanging up being a Token that the Man had committed a horrid Crime whereby he had incurred the high displeasure of Almighty God So that every one who saw him hang on that fashion were to think with themselves This Man was under the Curse of God because of his Sin And unless he had undergone this Curse he could not have been buried and put into the Condition of other Men. But when he had undergone it for his Sin then it had been a sin in the People not to have taken him down or prolonged his Suspension longer than God imposed this Curse upon him And the Land had been defiled if after this Suffering which God had appointed they had not buried him To this purpose Abarbinel who refutes several other accounts of this matter particularly that of Sol. Jarchi who thinks he was not to hang longer than till the Evening because it would have been a dishonour to the Soveraign of the World after whose Image Man was made This is followed by many and even by Grotius himself who gives no other reason of it in his Book de Jure Belli Pacis Lib. II. Cap. XIX Sect. IV. But this is a reason as Abarbinel notes why he should not have been hanged up at all It may be also usefully noted further that they say in the Tract called Sanhedrim that not only the Malefactor but all the Instruments of Punishment were to be buried at the going down of the Sun Even the Tree it self upon which he was hanged was to be buried that no memory of so foul a thing might be left in the World nor any might say Behold this was the Tree upon which such a one was hang'd That the Land be not defiled which the LORD thy God giveth thee By the stench of the Body after it putrified as the same Abarbinel expounds it who observes that the dead Body of no Creature corrupts and stinks sooner than that of a Man which is exceeding offensive to the living For which cause saith he the Book Siphre determines not only that all Malefactors should be buried as soon as the Law here orders that they might not imitate the manners of the Egyptians and Philistims and such like People who let Bodies rot in the Air after they were hanged up but that every Man should bury his dead the same day they died or be deemed to have transgressed a Negative Precept Which may pass for a very good natural reason of it but there is something more in it respecting a Legal Pollution under which their whole Country lay as long as an accursed thing hung openly among them just as all that entred into the Tent where a dead Body lay and all that
Country And another Law punished this Ingratitude with Death See J. Meursius in his Themis Attica Lib. I. Cap. 2 3. where he shews That by Parents they understood not only Father and Mother but Grand-father and Grand-mother nay 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Great Grand-mother and Great Grand-father if they were yet alive as Isaeus tells us Orat. VII And the Ground of all these Laws was a Sence they had as Aeschines tells us That Men ought to honour their Parents as they did the Gods 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See Sam. Petitus in Leges Atticas Lib. III. Tit. 3. Whence Hierocles calls Parents 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Earthly Gods And Philo upon the Decalogue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Visible Gods who imitate him that is unbegotten by giving Life And accordingly next to the Precepts concerning the Worship of God Moses here places immediately the Duty owing unto Parents That thy Days may be prolonged and that it may go well with thee c. These last Words are added to what God spake XX Exod. 12. as an Explication of the foregoing Whereby they are excited to Obedience by the Promise not only of a long Life but of an happy I say Obedience for that 's included in Honour as the Apostle explains it III Coloss 20. Children obey your Parents in all things Where God that is hath not commanded the contrary and where it is not inconsistent with the Publick Good which is alway to be preferred ever before the Duty that is owing to Natural Parents Insomuch that common Reason taught the Heathen that for the Good of the Society the Son is to lay aside the Reverence he should pay to his Father and the Father to pay it unto the Son that is when he is in Publick Office Thus the famous Fabius Cunctator commended his Son for making him light off from his Horse when he met him in his Consulship as Plutarch tells us And see A. Gellius L. XI Noct. Attic. Cap. I. Lib. XIII Cap. ult Lib. XIV in the beginning Ver. 17. Thou shalt not kill If a Man killed another involuntarily he was banished by the Laws of Athens from his Country for a Year But if he kill'd Verse 17 another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Demosthenes speaks out of forethought and designedly he was put to Death See Sam. Petitus Lib. VII in Leges Atticas Tit. 1. p. 508 512. Yea so detestable was this Sin accounted that even 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Liveless Things such as Wood or Stone or Iron wherewith a Man was killed Draco ordered to be thrown out of their Coasts Ib. p. 523. Ver. 18. Thou shalt not commit Adultery This Verse 18 Crime was also punished with Death by the Laws of Draco Solon indeed left it to the Liberty of the Husband who caught another Man in Bed with his Wife either to kill him if he pleased or to let him redeem his Life with a Sum of Money But if after this he lived with his Wife he was infamous as Demosthenes tells us who saith she might not come publickly into their Temples If she did any Man might treat her as he pleased only not kill her So that she was so odious as to be thrown 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Both out of the House of her Husband and out of Holy Places of the City Nor might she go abroad with any Ornaments 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the Law of Solon If she did any Body might take them away from her and tear her Clothes in pieces and beat her only not maim her in any part of her Body See the same Petitus Lib. VI. Tit. 4. Ver. 19. Neither shalt thou steal The Laws of Verse 19 Draco punished all Theft with Death Which Solon thought too severe and therefore chang'd that Punishment into making Satisfaction by restoring double yet still making it Death if any Man stole above such a Value or took any thing out of the Publick Baths and such-like places tho' of never so little Value See in the same Author Lib. VII Tit. 5. Verse 20 Ver. 20. Neither shalt thou bear false Witness against thy Neighbour There was an Action at Athens lay both against false Witnesses and him that produced them Who had a Fine set upon them and were made infamous And if they were found thrice in the same Fault 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Both they themselves and all their Posterity were made infamous As Andocides speaks See Ib. page 559. Verse 21 Ver. 21. Neither shalt thou desire thy Neighbour's Wife neither shalt thou covet thy Neighbour's House c. It is observed by some that an exact Order is observed in the delivery of these Precepts For first he places such Offences as are consummate and then those that are but begun and not perfected And in the former he proceeds from those that are most heinous unto those that are less grievous For those Offences are the greatest which disturb the Publick Order and consequently do mischief unto a great many Such are those that are committed against Governors and Rulers who are comprehended under the Name of Parents by whose Authority Humane Society is preserved And then among those which are against particular Persons those are the greatest which touch a Man's Life Next those that wrong his Family the Foundation of which is Matrimony Then those that wrong him in his Goods either directly by Stealth or more craftily by bearing False-witness Then in the last place those Sins are mentioned which are not consummate being gone no further than desire which in Exodus XX. 17. are expressed by one and the same word but here by two which we translate desire and covet Between which I know no difference unless they express higher and lower degrees of the same Sin The contrary to which is contentedness with our Portion and thankfulness to God for it which will not let us covet any thing belonging to another Man with his loss and damage Ver. 22. These Words the LORD spake unto all the Verse 22 Assembly in the Mount out of the midst of the Fire of the Clouds and of the thick Darkness XIX Exod. 16. XX. 18. This confutes the foolish Fancy of the Jewish Doctors that the People heard only the first Words of God I am the LORD thy c. thou shalt have no other Gods but me i. e. They heard him declare his Existence and his Unity but all the rest were reported to them by Moses Nothing can be more contrary to what he here saith that all these Words that is the Ten Words before mentioned were spoken to their whole Assembly See More Nevochim P. II. Cap. XXXIII With a great Voice That is so loud that it might be heard by the whole Camp And he added no more All the rest of the Commandments which follow in the XXI XXII and XXIII of Exodus were delivered to Moses alone and by him to the People according to their own desire XX Exod. 19. XXI 1.
their own hands to apprehend him and bring him before the Court though it seems reasonable enough that both Father and Mother should agree in the Complaint against him and desire Officers might be sent to lay hold of him In which one cannot well suppose that they would consent to have such a Punishment as follows inflicted upon him unless he were intolerable And bring him unto the Elders of his City Who were to examine the proofs and accordingly to pass Sentence upon him Concerning these Elders see v. 3 4. And unto the gate of his place Where the Court of Judgment was wont to sit See XVI 18. The Paternal Power among the ancient Romans was so great that they might put their Children to death as they did their Slaves without any Process before a Magistrate And this some have taken to be a Natural Right and imagined God would not have commanded Abraham to kill his Son but that it was a part of his inherent Power However this be they were not thought fit to be long intrusted with it for God here orders by Moses that it should be committed to the publick Judges as the most disinterested Persons Ver. 20. And they shall say unto the Elders of his City Verse 20 This seems to intimate the Authority of Parents was still so preserved that their Testimony alone was sufficient to convict a rebellious Son without any further proof The Hebrew Doctors indeed are of another mind as I shall show in the Explication of what follows This our Son is stubborn and rebellious he will not obey our voice This is to be understood say they of a Son that was no less then Thirteen years old and a day and so might be presumed to know his Duty and to be capable of being governed by Counsel and good Advice And this is reasonable enough But what they say concerning the time when he became his own Man is monstrously absurd See Selden Lib. II. de Synedr Cap. XIII p. 559 560. What they say of a Daughter not to be comprehended under this Law may be admitted because she was not capable to do so much Mischief in a Family as a rebellious Son He is a glutton and a drunkard These Sins are no where made capital by the Law of Moses but when they were accompanied with rebellious Disobedience to Parents Who were to bring Witnesses as the Hebrew Doctors say that this Son had stoln some of their Goods and sold them that he might spend the Money in these Vices under which others are comprehended which usually attend them And that he had done this after he had been admonished and chastised so that he was not to be punished as this Law at last prescribes till he was grown incorrigible For they say the Court was first to order him to be whipt and not to proceed further till upon a new Complaint it was proved that he had run into the same riotous Courses since that punishment Then upon this second Testimony as they call it the Court gave Sentence against him that he should be stoned to death unless the Parents before the Sentence was pronounced said they gave him their Pardon There are a great many little Niceties about the quantity of Meat and Wine that he eat and drank and other Matters with which I do not think fit to trouble the Reader Verse 21 Ver. 21. And all the Men of his City shall stone him with stones that he die This is such a severe Sentence that it inclines me to think the Parents lookt upon such a Son as so debaucht that he would not only spend all their Estate if he had it but was inclined to kill them that he might get it into his own hands For the Sentence of Death is denounced elsewhere against one that struck his Father or Mother XXI Exod. 15. or that cursed them v. 17. It is not said indeed he should be stoned but put to death which they interpret of strangling this punishment of stoning being appointed for Idolaters and Blasphemers of God Next to whom Parents are to be reverenced being in God's place with respect to their Children See upon the fifth Commandment And therefore other Nations were very severe in their punishment of such Children as are here described and particularly the Romans after the power was taken from Parents to sell them or put them to death and the Censure of them committed to the Magistrates See Hen. Stephen in his Fontes Rivi Juris Civilis p. 18. And among the Athenians Lysias saith in his Oration against Agoratus he that beats his Parents or did not maintain them and provide an habitation for them when they were in want 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 deserved to be put to death The Law indeed did not inflict that punishment but only said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let him be infamous That is as they expound it he might not come into the Publick Assemblies nor enter into their Temples nor wear a Crown in their Publick Festivals and if any such Persons presumed so to do they were brought before the Magistrates who set a Fine upon their Heads and committed them to Prison till they paid it See Sam. Petitus in his Commentary upon the Attick Laws Lib. II. Tit. IV. p. 163. No wonder therefore Moses ordained this punishment when a Son was come to such a degree of profligate wickedness that he indeavoured to undo his Parents Which some States have thought fit to follow in these latter Ages For David Chytraeus saith he himself saw an Example of this Severity at Zurich in the year One thousand five hundred and fifty where a disobedient Son was beheaded who had cursed his Mother and beaten her So shalt thou put evil away from among you and all Israel shall hear and fear See concerning this before upon XIX 20. Verse 22 Ver. 22. If a man have committed a sin worthy of death and he be put to death There were several sorts of Capital Punishments viz. Strangling Burning Cutting off by the Sword and Stoning Now the Hebrew Doctors limit this unto such Offenders as were stoned of which Punishment he speaks in the foregoing Verse But there being Eighteen sorts of Offenders who were to be Sentenced to this Death they put a further limitation upon these words their Tradition being as they tell us the Sin worthy of death or Stoning is only Idolatry or Blasphemy So we read in the Sanhedrim Cap. VI. Sect. IV. All that were stoned were also hanged according to the opinion of R. Eliezer but the wise Men say none were hanged but the Idolater and Blasphemer And they add there that only Men not Women were thus used for which I can see no reason but their sticking to the meer Letter of these words as if the word Man did not comprehend both senses But if we examine the Scripture we shall find this not to be true that no Men were hanged but they that were stoned for the King of Ai
of thy strangers that are in thy Land within thy gates No difference was to be made between a Natural Jew and a Proselyte of the Gate according to the general Law XIX Levit 34. For such oppression might tempt them to do very wicked things for instance expose or kill their Children when they were not able to maintain them after the manner of the Heathen who were frequently guilty of this and thought it no Crime when their Poverty constrained them to it See Petrus Petitus Lib. III. Miscell Observ Cap. XVII where he produces many proofs of it both out of Greek and Roman Authors Verse 15 Ver. 15. At his day thou shalt give him his hire Which was due to him either by Contract or by natural Equity and whether he had agreed to serve him for a Day or a Month or a Year At the time when his Wages was due it was to be punctually paid unless he were willing to have it remain in his hands For this was not an Act of Mercy but of Justice to pay an Hireling his Wages Neither shall the Sun go down upon it for he is poor This shows he speaks particularly of one that served for a days Wages and could not forbear the payment of it because he was so poor as not to be able to provide himself and family Necessaries without it And setteth his heart upon it Eagerly expects it as the Support of his Life So the Vulgar translates it with it he supports his Soul that is his Life Lest he cry unto the LORD Make grievous Complaints to him who made both Rich and Poor And it be sin unto thee God will hear his Cry and severely punish thee See V James 4. Ver. 16. The father shall not be put to death for the Verse 16 children neither shall the children be put to death for the father every man shall be put to death for his own sin This is a Rule of Common Reason which was anciently expressed in this vulgar saying Noxa Caput sequitur And is excellently expressed by Dion Chrysostom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let every Man be the Author of his own Misfortune Which Amaziah King of Judah thought extended to the Children of Traitors unto whom he allowed the benefit of this Law as we read in so many words 2 Kings XIV 6. 2 Chron. XXV 4. And not only Philo but Dionys Hallicarnassaeus condemns the Custom of those Nations who put to death the Children of Tyrants or Traitors See Grotius Lib. II. de Jure Belli Pacis Cap. XXI Sect. XIII XIV where he observes that God indeed threatens to visit the sins of the Fathers upon the Children but in this Case Jure dominij non poenae utitur he uses the Right of Dominion not of Punishment Verse 17 Ver. 17. Thou shalt not pervert the judgment of the stranger nor of the fatherless Nor of the Widow who is joyned with them v. 19. For such Persons commonly had none to stand by them and plead their Cause and therefore the Judges were to take the greater Care to see them have Justice done XXII Exod. 21. XXIII 9. Nor take the widows raiment to pledge Which is to be understood of one that is poor as appears from v. 12. See XXII Exod. 21 26 27. Verse 18 Ver. 18. But thou shalt remember that thou wast a bond-man in Egypt and the LORD redeemed thee thence therefore I command thee to do this thing The remembrance of their own miserable Condition in Egypt till God took pity upon them was to work Compassion in them towards others in the like forlorn Estate otherwise they did not remember them as they ought This is often urged as a Reason for showing Mercy to Strangers and such like helpless Persons particularly in XIX Levit. 33 34. and in this Book X. 19 20. XV. 15. Ver. 19. When thou cuttest down thine harvest in thy field and hast forgot a sheaf in the field thou shalt not go back again to fetch it There are many merciful Laws about the Poor See XIX Levit. 9 10. XXIII 22. They are all put together by Mr. Selden Lib. VI. de Jure Nat. Gent. Cap. VI. where the Exposition the Talmudists give of this Law seems to me to be so strict that it could do little good For they say a Sheaf was not taken to be forgotten unless not only the Owner of the Field but all the Labourers forgot it and if none of them remembred it yet if any Man that passed by that way came and gave them notice of it it was not lookt upon as left by forgetfulness Yet they are so kind as to extend this Law not only to Sheaves of Corn left in the Field but to Bunches of Grapes and other Fruit which was left behind in their Vineyards or Orchards And it seems no unreasonable Interpretation of this Law that if an Owner of a Field or his Workmen called to mind before they were gone quite out of the Field that a Sheaf was left in such a place they might go back and fetch it but not if they did not remember it till they came into the City They that would see more Cases about this matter may look into Maimonides de Donis Pauperum translated by Dr. H. Prideaux Cap. V. and his very learned Annotations upon it Josephus seems to me to have interpreted this Law most charitably Lib. IV. Archaeolog Cap. VIII where he saith they were not only not to go back to fetch what they had forgot but to leave on purpose Corn and Grapes and Olives c. for the benefit of the Poor It shall be for the stranger for the fatherless and for the Widow Who are commonly put together as proper Objects of Charity and are as Mr. Selden speaks a kind of Paraphrase upon the word Poor That the LORD thy God may bless thee in all the work of thy hand Make their Land still very fruitful which was a reward of their Charity Ver. 20. When thou beatest thine Olive-tree As Verse 20 they were wont to do in those Countries with Sticks to bring down the Olives Thou shalt not go over the boughs again Not search the Boughs after they are beaten whether any be left It shall be for the stranger c. Who might go into the Olive-yards after the Owner had carried out his Fruit and gather what they found still remaining on the Trees Verse 21 Ver. 21. When thou gatherest the grapes of thy Vineyard thou shalt not glean it afterwards By making a new gathering after the first But if the poor themselves left any behind after the usual time allowed for the gathering such Fruits or Corn as were left for them it was lawful for the Owner to take it himself and he was not bound either to pay the Poor the price of it or to leave it for the Beasts and the Birds For the command is say the Jewish Doctors who nicely scan these things that it shall be for the Poor and
sufficient if they were such as they called Elders of the Street or common Men. See Lib. I Vxor Hebr. Cap. XV. and Lib. II. de Synedr Cap. VII N. III. And say my husband's brother refuseth to raise up unto his brother a name in Israel he will not perform the duty of my husband's brother She was to put in a Bill of Complaint against him in these words Verse 8 Ver. 8. Then the Elders of his City shall call him and speake to him c. He being summoned to appear before them together with the Woman who they say was to be fasting and two Witnesses at the least she opened the whole matter And then the question being askt Whether it were three Months since her Husband's death which were to be allowed to see whether she proved with Child or no and whether this Man was next of kin And a satisfactory answer being returned the Judges laid the Law before them and admonished them seriously to consider on each side their Age or any Disparity or Incommodity that might be in their Marriage and accordingly to resolve And then they ask't the Man in express words Whether he would marry her and raise up Seed to his Brother If he stood to his first Resolution as it here follows and said I like not to take her then the Woman read the words foregoing v. 7. My husband's brother refuseth to raise up unto his brother a name in Israel c. and then proceeded to do as follows v. 9. See Selden in the Book fore-named Cap. XIV Ver. 9. Then shall his brother's wife come unto him in the Verse 9 presence of the Elders and loose his shoe from off his foot From his right foot as the Hebrew Doctors say which was done I suppose as a Mark of Infamy for his want of Natural Affection which made him unworthy to be reckoned among Free-men but rather deserve to be thrust down into the Condition of Slaves who were wont to go barefoot And spit in his face In contempt of him who had despised her The Hebrew Doctors indeed expound this only of her spitting upon the Earth directly before his face so that the Spittle might be seen by the Judges And they give this a reason why the King was not subject to this Law of marrying his Brother's Wife and they might add the High-Priest XXI Lev. 13 14. because it would have been below his dignity to have had his Shoe pulled off if he had not liked the Woman or to have had her spit before him as Bartenora's words are Which would have been a better reason if they had said It had been very unbecoming for her to have spit in the King's Face See Selden Lib. I. Vxor Hebr. Cap. X. and Hackspan Lib. I. Miscellan Cap. VII N. VIII where he observes the King was bound to all the DCXIII Precepts but only this of marrying his Brother's Wife And shall answer To his peremptory refusal of her And say so shall it be done unto that man that will not build up his brother's house She was immediately to read these words of the Law And then the Judges gave her a Writing signifying his renunciation of her in the manner now related that so it might be free for any other Man to marry her See the form of it in Selden Lib. I. Vxor Hebr. Cap. XIV where he hath observed certain Niceties about the kind of the Shoe that was to be pulled off but gives no account why this Ceremony was used Verse 10 Ver. 10. And his name shall be called in Israel the house of him that hath his shoe loosed As soon as she had loosed his Shoe both the Judges and all the By-standers round about cried aloud three times The Shoe is pulled off the Shoe is pulled off the Shoe is pulled off and thereupon his Family had this Name as a disgrace for not doing the Duty of a Brother Some will have this pulling off the Shoe to have been only a mark that he parted with his right to her but these words show that it was in the nature of a Brand upon him and his Posterity And so Josephus saith Lib. IV. Archaeolog Cap. VIII that he went out of the Court with a Mark of Ignominy Which doth not relate meerly to her spitting in his face for Maimonides saith expresly in his More Nevochim P. III. Cap. XLIX that this Action viz. of pulling off the Shoe as well as the other was a foul and ignominious thing in those days intended to move Men to perform the Duty of a Husband's Brother that they might avoid such Reproach J. Wagenseil hath given us the exact form of the Shoe which was used on such occasions in his Annotations upon Sota p. 664. and see 1212. where he commends Leo Modena his account of this whole Business Which differs not at all from that which I have given only I observe that he saith when the Woman taketh off the Shoe fom the Man's foot she lifts it up on high and throweth it against the ground which I take to be a Note of Indignation and Contempt And he saith also it was anciently accounted a more laudable thing to take her than to release her and imputes it to the Corruption of Men's Manners and the Hardness of their Hearts that now they look only after worldly ends either of Riches or Beauty which makes very few in these days especially among the Dutch and Italian Jews to marry their Brother's Widow See his History of the Rites and Customs of the Jews Part IV. Chap. VII Ver. 11. When men strive together one with another Verse 11 Fall out as we speak and fight either with their Fists or Sticks or other Weapons And the wife of the one draweth near for to deliver her husband out of the hand of him that smiteth him Who had wounded him and was likely I suppose to be too hard for him And putteth forth her hand and taketh him by the secrets As a sure means to make him let go his hold of her Husband that he might preserve himself Ver. 12. Then thou shalt cut off her hand This Verse 12 was to be done by the Sentence of the Court as a punishment for her Impudence and for the hurt which perhaps the Man might have received hereby in those Parts whereby Mankind is propagated Thine eye shall not pity her The word her not being in the Hebrew Text several of the Jews and Grotius seems to approve their Opinion interpret this Law quite otherwise As if the Woman might both take hold of his Secrets for the delivery of her Husband and also cut off the other Man's hand and they should not pity him who suffered thus nor punish the Woman who might do any thing of this nature to preserve one so dear to her as her Husband But this is a very forced Interpretation Maimonides is a little more reasonable in his Exposition of these words which he will have to signifie that they
Land Verse 20 which I sware unto their Fathers that floweth with milk and honey VI. 10 c. XV. 8 9. And they shall have eaten and filled themselves and waxen fat VIII 10 11 12 c. XXVII 15. Then they will turn unto other gods and serve them c. Against which he had most solemnly foremarned them in the places before-mentioned and XI 16. XII 29 30. Ver. 21. And it shall come to pass when many evils Verse 21 and troubles are befaln them that this Song shall testifie against them as a witness That they are most justly punished for their foul ingratitude and unbelief with which this Song upbraided them having told them plainly XXXII 18 19. what would be the effect of their forsaking him and at the delivery of it God having solemnly said here v. 17. that when they went a whoring from him he would forsake them and hide his face from them For it shall not be forgotten out of the mouth of their seed The Calamities which fell upon them according to what is predicted in this Song brought it to their remembrance when they had forgotten it or did not regard it For these words do not seem to be a Precept requiring them to remember this Song but a Prediction foretelling that their Miseries should not suffer them quite to forget it For I know their imagination which they go about even now before I have brought them into the Land which I sware He saw the secret Inclinations and Designs which were in their hearts and perceived that at that very present they hankered as we speak after Idols Verse 22 Ver. 22. Moses therefore wrote this Song the same day And so did Joshua as he was commanded v. 19. who spake the words of this Song unto the People as well as Moses XXXII 44. And taught it the Children of Israel Commanded them to learn it v. 19. In order to which the Jews say every Man was bound to write for himself a Copy of it and more than that they make it one of the affirmative Precepts as Maimonides tells us which obliged every Israelite to write out the whole Book of the Law with his own hand For so they interpret those words v. 19. Write ye this Song for you as if they were spoken to all the People and their meaning had been Write ye this Law for you wherein is this Song for they were not to write the Law by small parts and sections as his words are but all of it intirely And if a Man's Parents had left him a Copy yet he was bound to write one himself or if he could not write to procure one to be written for him by some other Person c. See Schickard's Mischpat Hameleck Cap. II. Theor. V. Verse 23 Ver. 23. And he gave Joshua the son of Nun a charge That is the LORD who had hitherto spoken to him by Moses now spake to him himself and gave him this charge to gain him the greater Authority For which end he had ordered Joshua to present himself before him together with Moses verse 14. Be strong and of a good courage Which he repeats to him after the death of Moses I Josh 6 7. For thou shalt bring the Children of Israel into the land which I sware unto them I have appointed thee to be the Captain of my People to lead them into the Land of Canaan And I will be with thee To give him success in all his Enterprises Which words being spoken in the audience of all the People as may be supposed from v. 14. made them readily submit to the Authority of Joshua and confide in his Conduct Ver. 24. And it came to pass when Moses had made Verse 24 an end of writing the words of this Law in a Book until they were finished The whole Book of his Laws which he put together before his death as I said on v. 9. Ver. 25. That Moses commanded the Levites c. Verse 25 The Priests who were of the Tribe of Levi. See v. 9. Ver. 26. Take this Book of the Law and put it in the Verse 26 side of the Ark of the Covenant of the LORD your God Not in the inside of it for he doth not say put it into the Ark but in the side of the Ark that is on the outside in a little Box as Jonathan and others expound it For it is the very same Phrase with that 1 Sam. VI. 8. where the Philistims are said to have put the Jewels of Gold which they returned for a Sin-offering in a Coffer by the side of the Ark. Where none could put it but the High Priest because no Body else might go into the Holy Place where the Ark was And therefore those Priests who received the Book of the Law from Moses delivered it to Eleazer to be there placed See Buxtorf Histor Arcae Cap. V. and Huetius more lately in his Demonstratio Evangelica Propos IV. Cap. de Can. Libr. Sacrorum Sect. VIII where he observes that R. Meir in both the Talmuds Abarbinel himself and many others have been of opinion from this very place that the Book of the Law was put into the Ark it self being no less precious than the Tables of Stone which were there But the Scripture tells us There was nothing in the Ark save the two Tables of Stone 1 Kings VIII 9. 2 Chron. V. 10. and their reason is good for nothing the two Tables far excelling this Book because written by the Finger of God And therefore other great Doctors among the Jews rightly place it without the Ark as the very words of Moses import That it may be there for a witness against thee It was deposited in that place as a publick Record that if any one should falsifie or deprave any thing in the Law as Abarbinel interprets it he might be convicted out of this Book which was sacredly preserved to be produced as a Witness against him Or as the Author of Tzeror Hammor expresses it that if they should be so wicked as to lose the Books of the Law this Copy kept under the care of the Priests might remain to testifie what was the Will of God As we see it did in the days of Josiah when it was casually found in the House of God as they were about the reparations of it Though I cannot say they found it in the side of the Ark but rather upon the Roof of the House or in the Rafters where the Priests had hid it as some of the Jews think when Manasseh endeavoured to destroy this Authentick Copy of the Law as he had done all other that he could find and when they came to uncover the House there it appeared Ver. 27. For I know thy rebellion and thy stiff-neck I have been sufficiently acquainted with your perverse disposition Behold while I am yet alive with you this day ye Verse 27 have been rebellious against the LORD and how much more after my death For it was not