1. And the Lord spake. This is the object of the exhortation: first, that they should not measure the service of God by their own conceits, but rather by His nature; and secondly, that they should begin by studying ▼

▼

“Pour le servir deuement, ils commencent par ce bout, de se purifier de toutes souillures;” in order to serve Him duly, they should begin by purifying themselves from all uncleanness — Fr.

to be holy. For nothing is harder than for men to divest themselves of their carnal affections to prepare for imitating God. Besides, they willingly lie slumbering in their own filthiness, and seek to cloak it by the outward appearance of religion. Here, then, they are recalled to the imitation of God, who, in adopting them, desired that they should bear His image, just as good and undegenerate children resemble their father. If any should pretend to equal God, his emulation would be madness; but although the most perfect come very far short even of the angels, yet the weakness of the very humblest does not prevent him from aspiring after the example of God. To this point did all the ceremonies tend, whereby God exercised His ancient people unto holiness, as we shall hereafter see. Although this declaration does not occur once only, yet because it is annexed in other places to special precepts in order to their confirmation, let it suffice at present to apprehend the general doctrine it contains.

Deuteronomy 6

Since this passage unquestionably relates to the explanation of the Fifth Commandment, it confirms what I have before shown, that the honor which God-commands to be paid to parents, does not consist in reverence only, but also embraces obedience. For the reverence which He now prescribes will render children submissive and compliant. Now, then, we more clearly understand how parents are to be honored, when God exhorts their children to beware of offending them; for this is, in a word, the true manifestation of filial piety, calmly to bear the yoke of subjection, and to prove by acts a sincere desire to obey.

The Supplements of the Fifth Commandment

Exodus 21

Leviticus 20

 

God here explains somewhat more clearly His mind and design, for He enumerates as thefts eases in which either deceit or violence is employed. The two words, which we have translated to deny, and to lie, signify also to deceive; as also to lie, or to frustrate hope. ▼

▼

A. V., “deal falsely, neither lie.” Ainsworth, “neither falsely deny, nor deal falsely.”

There is no question, then, but that God would restrain His people from all craft, or deceit, that they may deal sincerely and honestly with each other; even as Paul wisely explains the meaning of the Holy Spirit, when he exhorts believers to

“put away lying, and to speak every man truth with his neighbor; for we are members one of another.” (Ephesians 4:25.)

In the second passage, God commands men to demean themselves meekly and temperately with their neighbors, so as to abstain from all unjust oppression. The meaning which Jerome ▼

▼

A. V., “Non facies calumniam proximo tuo, nec vi opprimes eum.” “The first of these terms signifies to oppress by fraud; the second to oppress by violence. Against both these offenses, John the Baptist warned the soldiers who came to him; Luke 3:14.” — Bush from Ainsworth.

and others after him, have given to the word  עשק gnashak, to calumniate, is incorrect altogether; for it is everywhere used for to oppress, despoil, rob, or lay hands on the goods of another. It is clear, therefore, that as Moses had previously provided against frauds, he now prohibits the iniquity of extorting from our neighbor what we have no right to. Still, violence, or open rapine, is better expressed by the other word  גזל gezal; and these ▼

▼

“Et a mon avis que le premier est comme genre, et le second comme espece;” and, in my opinion, that the first is, as it were, genus, and the second species. — Fr.

two words are, ill my opinion, as it were, genus and species. After he had forbidden, therefore, that they should in any way oppress their brethren and possess themselves of their goods, he at the same time adds, that they should not use violence in despoiling them unjustly. Finally, he points out one mode of unjust oppression, when a person, who has hired himself as a laborer, is defrauded of his wages, and not only if he be sent away without payment, his wages being denied him, but if payment be deferred to the morrow. For we know that hirelings generally live from hand to mouth, and therefore, if there be ever so little delay, they must go without food. Consequently, if a rich man keeps a poor and wretched individual, whose labor he has abused, in suspense, he deprives him as it were of life, in depriving him of his daily food. The sum is, that humanity is so to be cultivated that none should be oppressed, or suffer loss from default of payment.

Deuteronomy 24

 

Since the Law comprehends under the word murder, all the wrongs whereby men are unjustly injured, that cruelty was especially to be condemned by which those wretched persons are afflicted, whose calamity ought rather to conciliate our compassion. For, if any particle of humanity exists in us, when we meet a blind man we shall be solicitous lest he should stumble or fall, and, if he goes astray, we shall stretch out our hands to him and try to bring him back into the way; we shall also spare the deaf, for to insult them is no less absurd or barbarous than to assail stones with reproaches. It is, therefore, gross brutality to increase the ills of those whom our natural sense impels us to relieve, and who are already troubled more than enough. Let us, then, learn from these words, that the weaker people are, the more secure ought they to be from all oppression or injury, and that, when we attack the defenseless, the crime of cruelty is greatly aggravated, whilst any insult against the calamitous is altogether intolerable to God.

The Ceremonial Supplements of the Sixth Commandment

Deuteronomy 21

 

I doubt not but that this part of the verse should be taken separately, nor do I approve of the introduction of the adversative particle but, by which translators ▼

▼

So in V. “Non oderis fratrem tuum in corde tuo, sed publice argue eum,” etc.

connect it with what follows. We know that we are not always to trust to the division of verses; and, since it is clear that whatever precepts we meet with in the writings of Moses for the regulation of our lives depend on the Decalogue, this sentence sufficiently proves that murder was forbidden, not only in order that none should slay his brother by his ]land, or by a weapon, but also that he should not indulge in wrong-doing, by cherishing in himself hatred and ill-will. Hence the statement of Paul is confirmed, that “the Law is spiritual,” (Romans 7:14;) and their folly is refuted who pretend that Moses was an earthly lawgiver to the Jews, like Lycurgus or Solon, since he thus penetrates even to the secret affections. It is also probable that John derived from this passage his saying, “He that hateth his brother is a murderer,” (1 John 3:15;) for the word heart is here used emphatically; since, although no outward signs of hatred may appear, yet the internal feeling is accounted murder before God.

Leviticus 19

 

17. Thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbor. Because many, under the pretext of conscientiousness, are not only rigid censors of others, but also burst out in the open proclamation of their defects, Moses seeks to prevent this preposterous zeal, shewing how they may best restrain it, not by encouraging sin through their connivance or silence, whilst they are still far from evil-speaking. For those who labor under this disease of carping and vituperating, are wont to object that sins are nourished by silence, unless all are eager in reproving them; and hence their ardor in exclaiming against them and deriding them. But Moses points out a more useful remedy, that they should bring back wanderers into the way by private rebukes, and not by publishing their offenses. For whosoever triumphs in the infamy of his brother, precipitates his ruin as far as in him lies; whereas a well-regulated zeal consults the welfare of one who is ruining himself. Therefore we are commanded to rebuke the wandering, and not to regard our brethren as enemies. A similar course is prescribed by Christ, “If thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone.” (Matthew 18:15.) In fine, an immoderate love of fault-finding will always be found to be arrogant and cruel. The word  נשא, nasa, undoubtedly means to publish what was concealed, and thus by exposure to drive to despair those who would else have been corrigible.

Supplement to the Ninth Commandment

Deuteronomy 19

 

Hence it clearly appears that God had a further object than that men should not kill each other, for He not only restrains their hands, but requires their hearts to be pure from all hatred. For, since the desire of vengeance is the fountain and cause of enmities, it follows that under the word kill is condensed whatever is opposed to brotherly love. And this is confirmed by the antithesis, that none should hate his brother, but rather love him as himself. We need, then, seek for no other expositor of the Commandment but God Himself, who pronounces those to be guilty of murder who are affected with any malevolence, and not only those who, when offended, desire to return evil for evil, but those who do not sincerely love their neighbors, even when with justice they deem them to be their enemies. Wherefore, in order that God may absolve us from spiritual murder, let us learn to purify our hearts from all desire of vengeance, and, laying aside hatred, to cultivate fraternal affection with all men.

Although the latter part of the verse embraces the sum of the whole Second Table, yet, because love is contrasted with vengeance, I have not thought fit to separate things which are so properly connected with each other, especially when one depends on the other. The precept is indeed only given with reference to the children of Abraham, because the crime of vengeance would be more atrocious between those who were bound together by fraternal rights; yet it is not to be doubted but that God generally condemns the vice. In the schools ▼

▼

Fr., “Les Theologiens de la Papaute.” C. refers elsewhere to this scholastic maxim: “Nor is the argument worth a straw, That the thing regulated must always be inferior to the rule. The Lord did not make self-love the rule, as if love towards others was subordinate to it; but whereas, through natural pravity, the feeling of love usually rests on ourselves, He shows that it ought to diffuse itself in another direction — that is, should be prepared to do good to our neighbor with no less alacrity, ardor, and solicitude, than to ourselves.” — Inst., book 2, 8, Section 54. “Again, when Moses commanded us to love our neighbors as ourselves, he did not intend to put the love of ourselves in the first place, so that a man may first love himself and then love his neighbors: as the sophists of the Sorbonne are wont to cavil, that the rule must always go before what it regulates.” — Harm. of the Evangelists, (C. Society’s Trans.,) vol. 3, p. 59.

this sentence was grossly corrupted; for, since the rule (as they say) is superior to what is regulated by it. they have invented a preposterous precept, that every one should love himself first, and then his neighbors; of which subject I will treat more fully elsewhere. The word  נטר, natar, meaning to guard, when used without any addition, is equivalent to bearing an injury in mind; as we also say in French: “garder une injure.” ▼

▼

Addition in Fr., “Et pourtant il faut suppleer ou injure ou rancune; and, therefore, injury or grudge must be supplied.

Leviticus 19

 

18. Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. What every man’s mind ought to be towards his neighbor, could not be better expressed in many pages that in this one sentence. We are all of us not only inclined to love ourselves more than we should, but all our powers hurry us away in this direction; nay,  φιλαυτία (self-love) blinds us so much as to be the parent of all iniquities. Since, therefore, whilst we are too much given to love ourselves, we forget and neglect our brethren, God could only bring us back to charity by plucking from our hearts that vicious passion which is born with us and dwells deeply in us; nor, again, could this be done except by transferring elsewhere the love which exists within us. On this point no less has the dishonesty betrayed itself than the ignorance and folly of those ▼

▼

“Les docteurs Papistes.” — Fr. See ante on Leviticus 19:18, p. 23.

who would have the love of ourselves come first: “The rule (say they) is superior to the thing regulated by it; and according to God’s commandment, the charity which we should exercise towards others is formed upon the love of ourselves as its rule.” As if it were God’s purpose to stir up the fire which already burns too fiercely. Naturally, as I have said, we are blinded by our immoderate self-love; and God, in order to turn us away from this, has substituted our neighbors, whom we are to love no less than ourselves; nor will any one ever perform what Paul teaches us to be a part of charity, viz., that she “seeketh not her own,” (1 Corinthians 13:5,) until he shall have renounced himself.

Not only those with whom we have some connection are called our neighbors, but all without exception; for the whole human race forms one body, of which all are members, and consequently should be bound together by mutual ties; for we must bear in mind that even those who are most alienated from us, should be cherished and aided even as our own flesh; since we have ▼

▼

On Leviticus 19:33, ante p. 118.

seen elsewhere that sojourners and strangers are placed in the same category (with our relations; ▼

▼

Added from Fr.

) and Christ sufficiently confirms this in the case of the Samaritan. (Luke 10:30.)

The Use of the Law

Inasmuch as in the Law the difference between good and evil is set forth, it is given for the regulation of the life of men, so that it may be justly called the rule of living well and righteously. This object of the Law is known to almost all men, because all confess without controversy that God here prescribes what is right, lest we should wander all our lifetime in uncertainty; for since His will is the perfect law of righteousness, it can alone direct us to the mark. The knowledge of good and evil is indeed imprinted by nature on men, whereby they are rendered inexcusable; nor has any amount of barbarism ever so extinguished this light as that no form of law should exist. But, since the main principle of righteousness is to obey God, it was by special privilege that He deposited with His elect people the rule of living aright as a pledge of His adoption. Hence the declarations which so often occur in the writings of Moses: I command thee to keep and to do, etc. But, since we are “carnal, sold under sin,” (Romans 7:14,) we are so far from being able to fulfill the Law, which is spiritual, that all our imaginations are at enmity with its righteousness, as Paul teaches elsewhere. (Romans 7:7.) Those, therefore, who ▼

▼

“Ceux doncques qui ne cherchent en la Loy, sinon de savoir, comment on doit servir a Dieu, s’abusent, etc.;” those, therefore, who only search in the law to know how we ought to serve God, deceive themselves, etc. — Fr.

content themselves with using it for instruction, do wrong in confining themselves to this one point, since no advantage can hence be derived from it, as long as we shall remain in our corrupt nature. Nay, as soon as the Law presents itself before us, the curse of God falls upon our heads, as if He smote us with a thunder-bolt from heaven. I will not heap together all the testimonies to this effect; let one peculiarly striking passage suffice:

“The law (says Paul) is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good: but sin, that it might appear sin, worketh death in me by that which is good.” (Romans 7:12, 13.)

What he elsewhere says, that “the law worketh wrath,” (Romans 4:15,) and that “it was added because of transgressions,” (Galatians 3:19,) seems harsh indeed to profane persons, who only judge as philosophers; yet this is the theological use of the Law, for, by discovering our unrighteousness, it can bring nothing but death. Here, however, ▼

▼

“Or ici les esprits fantastiques s’escarmouchent en demandant.” — Fr.

rebellious questions arise, what use there could be in prescribing what we are unable to perform: why God should mock miserable men by imposing a burden whereby they are totally overwhelmed: how it is consistent that a law should be given for us to keep, and yet that we should be devoid of strength to do so: if we have not liberty to choose good or evil, why it should be brought in accusation against us that we yield to the sin to which we are naturally addicted? The enemies of God are very ingenious in amassing such calumnies, and eloquent in exaggerating them; but when they have disgorged all that their rabid dishonesty has dictated, their own conscience will always abundantly refute them; for they will be compelled to acknowledge that the Law is just, and that, when they transgress it by voluntary impulse, they are deservedly condemned. Let them, then, rave against God as they like, that He unjustly imposes upon them a heavier burden than they are able to bear, their natural reason will retain them under the conviction, that whatever God commands to be done for Him is His due. We must now see where the blame lies, that they are unable to satisfy Him. Surely their efforts to relieve themselves from it will be vain, because conscience will again make itself felt on the opposite side, and will hold them fast in the bond of condemnation, from which there is no escape. But the whole of Scripture teaches that it arises from the corruption of our nature that all our affections are repugnant to the Law, and also that, on the other hand, the Law is against us; for Adam, being alienated from God the fountain of all righteousness, ruined himself and us; and hence it comes that not only our strength is insufficient to perform the service we owe to God, but that we are impelled by a blind and headlong impetus to shake off His yoke. From this Paul infers that we are “under the curse,” because the Law pronounces all transgressors to be accursed. (Galatians 3:10.) For ridiculous will be the objection that it is in the power of every one’s free-will not to transgress, because there is nothing to be found in us which is not corrupt; and, in fact, the stupidity of those is most shameless who suppose that nothing impossible is commanded, whereas in every trifle, not merely our weakness, but our  ἀδυναμία (powerlessness) betrays itself. But, although Paul says that the Law ▼

▼

“The letter killeth.” — A.V.

is deadly to us, (2 Corinthians 3:6,) yet he vindicates it from all objection, when he shews that this evil is accidental, and therefore must be imputed to ourselves. Let it therefore be established, that the Law was given not only for instruction, so that men might follow what they had learnt from it to be right, but also to convict them of their iniquity, that they might acknowledge themselves to be lost; as if they saw in a mirror their destruction through the just vengeance of God. Now this knowledge would by itself overwhelm all with horrible despair if they did not emerge from the deep abyss; for, since they are puffed up with vain confidence, and arrogate to themselves the merit of living righteously, it is necessary that they should be humbled; first of all, that, being condemned, they may learn to fly for refuge to God’s mercy; and secondly, that being convinced of their infirmity, they may implore the aid of the Holy Spirit, which in their security they had before neglected. Hence it appears that it is expedient for them to be slain by the Law, and that the death which it inflicts is life-giving. And this occurs in two ways; for, first, being stripped of the false opinion of their righteousness, wherein they prided themselves, they begin to seek in Christ what they mistakenly supposed might be found in themselves, so as to please God by gratuitous reconciliation, whereas they had previously sought to propitiate Him by the merit of their works; secondly, they learn that they are not sufficient to perform a single tittle of the Law, unless, being regenerated by God’s Spirit, they who were the slaves of sin live unto righteousness. And hence, in fine, the utility and fruit of the teaching of the Law proceeds; for, until we are renewed and God has given us hearts of flesh instead of hearts of stone, in vain are precepts dinned in our ears, since in our natural depravity we cordially reject them; but when He has engraved His law within our hearts, its outward instruction also profits us; for He so governs His children by the Spirit of reconciliation, as at the same time to will that they should be attentive and obedient to His voice. Still, because they are always far from attaining to perfect observance of it, they not only learn from it what is right, but also that they have need of His gratuitous mercy, that they may please Him through indulgence and grace, although they are still conscious of much infirmity.

Further, because Paul seems to abrogate the Law, as if now-a-days it did not concern believers, we must now see how far this is the case. And, first, indeed, it is easy to perceive that he does not treat of the Law in the abstract, but sets it forth invested with those of its qualities, wherein it is opposed to the Gospel; for, inasmuch as his controversy was with those who interpreted it amiss, he could not help contrasting the Law with the Gospel, as if they were in opposition to each other: not that they were really so, if their respective doctrine be dexterously applied to its proper object, but because such a conflict arose from the absurd mixture, which the false apostles introduced. They asserted that men are justified by the works of the Law, and, if this were admitted, the righteousness of faith was destroyed, and the Gospel fell to the ground. They, moreover, restored the yoke imposed on the ancient people, as if no liberty had been obtained by the blood of Christ. In this discussion it was necessary for Paul to advert only to that which is peculiar to Moses, and distinct from Christ; for although Christ and Moses perfectly accord in the substance of their doctrine, still, when they are compared with each other, it is fitting to distinguish what is peculiar to each. In this respect Paul calls the Law “the letter,” ▼

▼

“By the term letter he means outward preaching, of such a kind as does not reach the heart; and, on the other hand, by spirit he means living doctrine, of such a nature as worketh effectually (1 Thessalonians 2:13) on the minds of men, through the grace of the Spirit. By the term letter, therefore, is meant literal preaching, that is, dead and ineffectual, perceived only by the ear. By the term spirit, on the other hand, is meant spiritual doctrine, that is, whatever is not merely uttered with the mouth, but effectually makes its way to the souls of men with a lively feeling.” — C. on 2 Corinthians 3:6, Cal. Soc. edit., vol. 2, p. 172.

because Moses had no other charge than to speak in the name of God, (2 Corinthians 3:6;) and this in itself is not only useless, but also deadly; for when the word resounds in the ears only, it produces nothing but condemnation. Besides, he considers the Law as connected with promises and threatenings. Whence it follows, that salvation can only be procured by it if its precepts be exactly fulfilled. Life is indeed promised in it, but only if whatever it commands be complied with; whilst, on the other hand, it denounces death against its transgressors, so that to have offended in the slightest point is enough to condemn and destroy a person; and thus it overwhelms all men with despair. Lastly, because the ceremonies by which God prepared His ancient people as by puerile and elementary instruction for the faith of the Gospel, ▼

▼

“Comme par un a, b, c, de petits enfans.” — Fr.

were annexed to the Law, Paul embraces those also in his comparison between the Law and the Gospel. Hence it follows that, in so far as Moses is distinguished from Christ, his ministration has ceased, although his embassy was identical with that which Christ afterwards discharged. As regards the ceremonies, we must consider that an end was put upon them by Christ’s coming, in such a way as to establish their truth more firmly than as if they still remained in use: for we acknowledge that in them, as in a mirror, was formerly shewn to the Fathers, what is now displayed to us in its reality. Whence it appears that they are greatly mistaken who altogether reject as useless that instruction which we read in the writings of Moses; and that the squeamishness of those who despise it is also intolerable. ▼

▼

“Et que ceux, qui le meprisent comme superflu, sont aussi a condamner comme trop delicats;” and that those who despise it as superfluous are to be condemned as too fastidious. — Fr.

Let my readers seek in the Second Book of my Institutes, Chapter 7., what further tends to the explanation of this subject.

Sanctions of the Law

contained in the Promises and Threats

We now come to the conclusion of the Exposition of the Law, wherein we are to treat of the sanctions of it contained both in the promises and threats. For, although God might in His own right simply require what He pleased, yet such is His kindness to men, that He chose to entice them by promises to obey Him freely. Since, therefore, we are naturally attracted by the hope of reward, we are slow and lazy, until some fruit appears. Consequently God voluntarily promises, in order to arouse them from their sloth, that if men obey His Law, He will repay them. Nor is this an ordinary act of liberality that He prefers to agree with us for the payment of a recompense, rather than simply to command by His sovereignty. For we must bear in mind the declaration of Christ, that when we have fulfilled the whole Law, we still deserve nothing; since God claims for Himself our entire services. (Luke 17:10.) However we may strive, therefore, even beyond our strength, and devote ourselves entirely to keep the Law, still God lies under no obligation to us, except in so far as He has Himself voluntarily agreed, and made Himself our spontaneous debtor. And this has been pointed out even by the common theologians, that the reward of good works does not depend upon their dignity or merit, but upon His covenant. ▼

▼

“Sur ceste paction, que Dieu en a faite;” but upon that agreement which God has made to give it. — Fr. Bishop Davenant, after quoting William Archbishop of Paris, Aquinas, and Durandus, to the same effect, says, “To these may be added Scotus, Gregory, Occam, Gabriel, (Biel,) Alfonsus, and very many others of the better class of writers among the Romanists, who avowedly maintain that the works of the righteous, wrought by the assistance of grace, do not on that account acquire any intrinsic worthiness for life eternal; but that, as regards this reward, it depends entirely upon the gracious acceptance and promise of God.” — Disputatio de Justitia. Allport’s Transl., vol. 2, p. 70.

Still, as we shall soon see, such promises would not avail us the least if God rewarded every one according to his works; but, because this defect is adventitious, God’s great mercy nevertheless shines forth in the fact that he has deigned to encourage us to obedience by setting before us the hope of eternal life. And hence He reproves the ingratitude of the Israelites by Ezekiel 20:21; because they had despised His good commandments, of which it was said that “if a man do them, he should live in them.”

We now perceive how the authority of the Law was confirmed by the promises; but because we are not only indolent but also refractory, He added on the other side threats which might inspire terror, both to subdue the obstinacy of the flesh and to correct the security in which we are too apt to indulge. It will be expedient now to treat of both.

Leviticus 18

 

Albeit in God’s sight there is no difference between bond and free, yet their condition is diverse as regards courts of justice; ▼

▼

“Quant aux jugemens terreins, et humains.” — Fr.

nor do the same evil consequences ensue from adultery with a bond-maid, (as with a free woman.) ▼

▼

Added from Fr.

Notwithstanding, therefore, that the crime is worthy of death, still, in consideration of the people’s infirmity, the punishment is mitigated, so that, if a person shall have corrupted a betrothed bond-maid, both shall be scourged. ▼

▼

C.’s Latin version and Commentary agree here with the margin of, A. V. rather than the text, “she shall be scourged;” margin, “there shall be a scourging.” Dathe’s translation is “vapulabunt ambo,” and his note, “sic Vulgatus recte, sequitur enim pluralis non moriantur. Cf. Michaelis in J. M. P. V., p. 50.”

From hence we infer that, if a concubine, who had already cohabited with a man, were seduced, it was accounted a capital adultery. Lest it should be falsely held, from the lenity or indulgence of the law, that the offense was a trifling one, this error is at once anticipated by the addition of the expiation: for, if one already beaten with stripes still required reconciliation, it follows that the measure of the offense is not to be estimated by its penalty.

Exodus 21 ▼

▼

This passage also taken further on in Fr.

 

27. Ye shall not round the corners. It clearly appears that God had no other object than by the interposition of this obstacle to sever His people from heathen nations. For there is nothing to which men are more prone than to conform themselves to the customs of others; and hence it arises, that they mutually communicate each other’s vices. Wherefore care was especially to be taken lest the people of Israel should adopt foreign habits, and by this pliableness should fall away from the true worship of God; from whence too the ordinary phrase has arisen, that the word “common” should be used for “unclean.” God then strictly forbids them from declining to the habits of the Gentiles, and confounding the distinction which He had Himself placed between them. There is no doubt but that it was usual for the Gentiles, out of superstition, to cut marks ▼

▼

“Most of the barbarous nations lately discovered have their faces, arms:, breasts, etc., curiously carved or tattooed, probably for superstitious purposes. Ancient writers abound with accounts of marks made on the faces, arms, etc., in honor of different idols; and to this the inspired penman alludes, (Revelation 13:16-17; 14:9-11, etc.), where false worshippers are represented as receiving in their hands, and in their forehead, the marks of the beast. These were called  στίγματα among the Greeks, and to these St. Paul refers when he says, “I bear about in my body the marks ( στίγματα ) of the Lord Jesus.".(Galatians 6:17}

"All the castes of the Hindoos bear on their foreheads, or elsewhere, what are called sectarian marks, which not only distinguish them in a civil, but in a religious point of view, from each other."

"Herodotus observes that the Arabs shave, or cut their hair round, in honor of Bacchus; (lib. 3. ch. 8). He says, also, that the Macians, a people of Lybia, cut their hair round, so as to leave a tuft on the top of the head; (lib. 4. ch. 175."

"That the ancients were very violent in their grief, tearing the hair and face, beating the breast, etc., is well known. Virgil represents the sister of Dido: —  Unguibus ora — foedans, et pectora pugnis. AEn. iv. 672.” — Adam Clarke, in loco.

upon their faces, to trim the hair in certain steps or circles, and in their mourning to lacerate their flesh, or to disfigure it with marks. It is well known that the priests of Cybele ▼

▼

The authorities for this practice of the Galli, or Priests of Cybele, are too numerous to mention. The following extract from a curious description given by Apuleius, of the religious dance of her worshippers, may suffice: “ Die sequenti variis coloribus indusiati, et deformiter quisque formarti, facie coenoso pigmento delita, et oculis obunctis graphice, prodeunt; mitellis, et crocotis, et carbasinis, et bombycinis injecti. Quidam tunicas albas, in modum lanciolarum quoquoversum fluente purpura depictas, cingulo subligati, pedes luteis induti calceis, Deamque serico contectam amiculo mihi gerendam imponunt: brachiisque suis humero tenus renudatis, attollentes immanes gladios ac secures, evantes exsiliunt, incitante tibiae cantu lymphaticum tripudium.

" Nec paucis pererratis casulis, ad quandam villam possessoris beati perveniunt, et ab ingressu primo statim absonis ululatibus constrepentes, fanatice pervolant. Diuque capite demisso, cervices lubricis intorquentes motibus, crinesque pendulos rotantes in circulum, et nonnunquam morsibus suos incursantes musculos, ad postremum ancipiti ferro, quod gerebant, sua quisque brachia dissecant.” — Metam. (lib. 8, Edit). (Bipont. 1. 184-185)

made gashes in their flesh with knives and razors, and covered themselves all over with wounds, for the sake of shewing their zeal. The same thing was also commonly practiced by others; inasmuch as the world is easily deceived by external ceremonies. But though this were a thing in itself indifferent, yet God would not allow His people to be at liberty to practice it, that, like children, they might learn from these slight rudiments, that they would not be acceptable with God, unless they were altogether different from uncircumcised foreigners, and as far as possible from following their examples; and especially that they should avoid all ceremonies whereby their religion was testified. For experience teaches how greatly the true worship of God is obscured by anything adscititious, and how easily foul superstitions creep in, when the comments of men are tacked on to the word of God. Doubtless that part, “Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead,” etc., might be expounded as a correction of immoderate grief; because we know how intemperately men set themselves against God when they give the reins to their sorrow; but since the object of the Gentiles was to pay what was due to the dead, and to celebrate their funeral obsequies ▼

▼

“ Et user de satisfactions pour racheter leurs ames;” and to offer satisfactions for the redemption of their souls. — Fr.

as a kind of propitiation, it is probable, and more suitable, that by the whole context those preposterous gestures are condemned, which were proofs of piety among the Gentiles, but which would have been defilements to the people of God.

The same thing appears more clearly from the passage in Deuteronomy, which next follows, wherein Moses condemns cutting themselves, and making themselves bald for the dead in connection with each other, as if they were one thing; and confirms the law by a general argument, that they might withdraw themselves from every pollution as the children of God; since they were chosen to be His peculiar people; as much as to say, that God’s grace would be altogether frustrated, if they did not differ at all from foreign nations. As to his saying that they were chosen out of all the nations, it does not a little illustrate the gratuitous mercy of God, wherewith He honored them alone, by calling them to the hope of eternal salvation, and passing by the Gentiles; for there was no nobility found in them, nor did they exceed others either in number or in any other superiority, on account of which He should prefer them to the whole world. But the design of Moses in magnifying the extraordinary goodness of God, was that they might the more abhor that impure cornmixture, which, by bringing them on a par with the Gentiles, degraded them from this high honor.

Another Supplement touching

the Clean and Unclean Beasts ▼

▼

Heading added from the Fr., “ Autre dependance, touchant les bestes pures ou impures."

Leviticus 20

 

Deuteronomy 14

 

This passage more clearly proves that all unlicensed connections ▼

▼

“Toute compagnie d’homme et de femme hors le mariage.” — Fr.

were always unlawful in God’s sight. It is a tame and forced interpretation to apply what is here said to spiritual fornication; and those also, who suppose that public stews only are forbidden, restrict the law too much, whereas God rather gives a general injunction that parents should preserve their daughters by means of a pure and chaste education. But even although we admit that nothing else is prohibited but that parents should be the panders of their daughters, still we gather from the word pollute ▼

▼

Margin A. V., “profane.”

(for some render the word  חלל, chalal, too tamely to make common) that they are contaminated by their whoredom, and the reason given abundantly confirms the fact, that all whoredom is hateful to God, “lest the land fall to whoredom, (He says,) and the land become full of wickedness.” It is plain that adultery is not in question here; but God declares it to be criminal if a man and woman have connection out of wedlock. Consequently, the people are taught in the Seventh Commandment to beware of all unchastity.

Deuteronomy 23

 

Leviticus 19:30; 26:2. Ye shall keep my Sabbaths. From these two passages it is manifest that the service of the tabernacle was annexed to the Sabbath, and that the two things were not only connected by an indissoluble tie, but that the rest from labor had reference to the sacrifices; since it would have been a mere mockery to rest without any ulterior object; nay more, after Moses has spoken of the rest, he seems to subjoin the reverencing of the sanctuary, as if it were the generic ordinance; so that the people might understand that all impediments were removed which are wont to withdraw them from the service of God. The expression, “fear the sanctuary,” ▼

▼

“Reverence my sanctuary.” — A.V. Ainsworth says, “In Targum Jonathan this law is explained thus, Ye shall go to the house of my sanctuary in fear;” and then quotes from Maimon many Jewish rites observed in the temple.

is a figurative one; but is equivalent to this, that they should shew by their very reverence of the sanctuary how truly and sincerely they fear God, who had promised that He would be present there, whenever He should be invoked.

Exodus 23

 

32. Thou shalt rise up before the hoary head. God teaches us that some sparks of His majesty shine forth in old men, whereby they approach to the honor of parents. It is not my purpose to gather quotations from profane authors in reference to the honor due to the old; let it suffice that what God here commands is dictated by nature itself. This appeared at Athens, ▼

▼

Cicero, de Senectute, 18; and Val. Max., lib. 4:5.

when an old man had come into the theater, and found no place among his fellow-citizens; but, when at length he was admitted with honor by the Spartan ambassador, (because old age is greatly reverenced among the Lacedemonians,) applause was raised on all sides; and then the Lacedemonian exclaimed, that “the Athenians knew what was right, but would not do it.” It was surely manifested by this universal consent of the people that it is a natural law in the hearts of all to reverence and honor old men. Many old men, indeed, either by their levity, or lewdness, or sloth, subvert their own dignity; yet, although gray hairs may not always be accompanied by courteous wisdom, still, in itself, age is venerable, according to God’s command.

Deuteronomy 16

 

Leviticus 19:33. And if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land. Before I pass on to the other iniquities, I have thought fit to introduce this precept, wherein the people are commanded to cultivate equity towards all without exception. Fob if no mention had been made of strangers, the Israelites would have thought that, provided they had not injured any one of their own nation, they had fully discharged their duty; but, when God recommends guests and sojourners to them, just as if they had been their own kindred, they thence understand that equity is to be cultivated constantly and towards all men. Nor is it without cause that God interposes Himself and His protection, lest injury should be done to strangers; for since they have no one who would submit to ill-will in their defense, they are more exposed to the violence and various oppressions of the ungodly, than as if they were under the shelter of domestic securities. The same rule is to be observed towards widows and orphans; a woman, on account of the weakness of her sex, is exposed to many evils, unless she dwells under the shadow of a husband; and many plot against orphans, as if they were their prey, because they have none to advise them. Since, then, they are thus destitute of human aid, God interposes to assist them; and, if they are unjustly oppressed, He declares that He will be their avenger. In the first passage He includes widows and orphans together with strangers; in the latter He enumerates strangers only; yet the substance is the same, viz., that all those who are destitute and deprived of earthly succor, are under the guardianship and protection of God, and preserved by His hand; and thus the audacity of those is restrained, who trust that they may commit any wickedness with impunity, provided no earthly being resists them. No iniquity, indeed, will be left unavenged by God, but there is a special reason why He declares that strangers, widows, and orphans are taken under His care; inasmuch as the more flagrant the evil is, the greater need there is of an effectual remedy. He recommends strangers to them on this ground, that the people, who had themselves been sojourners in Egypt, being mindful of their ancient condition, ought to deal more kindly to strangers; for although they were at last oppressed by cruel tyranny, still they were bound to consider their entrance there, viz., that poverty and hunger had driven their forefathers thither, and that they had been received hospitably, when they were in need of aid from others. When He threatens, that if the afflicted widows and orphans cry unto Him, their cry shall be heard, He does not mean that He will not interfere, if they endure their wrongs in silence; but He speaks in accordance with the ordinary practice, that those who find no consolation elsewhere, are wont to appeal to Him. Meanwhile, let us be sure that although those who are injured abstain from complaining, yet God does not by any means forget His office, so as to overlook their wrongs. Nay, there is nothing which incites Him more to inflict punishment on the ungodly, than the endurance of His servants.

The nature of the punishment is also expressed; those who have afflicted widows and orphans shall perish by the sword, so that their own widows and orphans may be exposed to the audacity, violence, and knavery of the ungodly. Moreover, it must be observed that, in the second passage, they are commanded to love strangers and foreigners as themselves. Hence it appears that the name of neighbor is not confined to our kindred, or such other persons with whom we are nearly connected, but extends to the whole human race; as Christ shows in the person of the Samaritan, who had compassion on an unknown man, and performed towards him the duties of humanity neglected by a Jew, and even a Levite. (Luke 10:30.)

Deuteronomy 10

 

Leviticus 19:35 Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment. If you take the word judgment in its strict sense, this will be a special precept, that judges should faithfully do justice to all, and not subvert just causes from favor or ill-will. But since the word  משפט, mishpat, often means rectitude, it will not be unsuitable to suppose that all iniquities contrary to integrity are generally condemned; and that he afterwards proceeds to particular cases, which he adverts to elsewhere, where he enumerates the most injurious thefts of all, and such as involve the grossest violation of public justice. For the corruption which tends to the subversion of judgments, or, by undermining rectitude, vitiates all contracts, leaves nothing in security; whilst deception in weights and measures destroys and sweeps away all legitimate modes of dealing. Now, if the laws of buying and selling are corrupted, human society is in a manner dissolved; so that he who cheats by false weights and measures, differs little from him who utters false coin: and consequently one, who, whether as a buyer or seller, has falsified the standard measures of wine or corn, or anything else, is accounted criminal. ▼

▼

“Inter falsarios.” — Lat. “Pour faussaire.” — Fr.

By the laws of Rome, ▼

▼

Modest. 1. penult, ad legem Corn. de fals. — C. This law is to be found in Digest. 48, tit. 11, De falsis, 32, “Si venditor mensuras publice probatas vini, frumenti, vel cujuslibet rei, aut emptor corruperit, dolove malo fraudem fecerit, quanti ea res est, ejus dupli condemnatur. Decretoque Divi Hadriani praeceptum est in insulam eos relegari, qui pondera, aut mensuras falsassent.”

he is condemned to a fine of double the amount; and by a decree of Adrian, he is to be banished to an island. It is not, therefore, without reason that Solomon reiterates this decree, that he may fix it the deeper in the hearts of all. (Proverbs 20:10, 23.) But although this pestilent sin is by no means to be endured, but to be severely punished, still God, even if legal punishments be not inflicted, summons men’s consciences before His tribunal, and this he does both by promises and threats. A just weight (He says) and a just measure shall prolong a man’s life; but he who has been guilty of deception in them, is an abomination before me. Length of life, indeed, has only a figurative connection with just weights and measures: but, because the avaricious, in their pursuit of dishonest gain, are too devoted to this transitory life, God, in order to withhold His people from this blind and impetuous covetousness, promises them long life, if they keep themselves from fraud and all knavish dealings. We perceive from the conclusion, that, not in this respect only, but in all our affairs, those trickeries are condemned, by which our neighbors are defrauded. For, after God has said that He abominates “all that do such things,” He adds immediately by way of explanation, “all that do unrighteously.” We see, then, that He sets Himself against all evil and illicit arts of gain.

Deuteronomy 19

 

36. I am the Lord your God. In these first four passages he treats of the same points which we have observed in the preface to the Law; for he reasons partly from God’s authority, that the law should be reverently obeyed, because the Creator of heaven and earth justly claims supreme dominion; and, partly, he sets before them the blessing of redemption, that they may willingly submit themselves to His law, from whom they have obtained their safety. For, whenever God calls Himself Jehovah, it should suggest His majesty, before which all ought to be humbled; whilst redemption should of itself produce voluntary submission. At the beginning he repeats the same words which he had lately used; and thence exhorts them to observe His statutes and judgments, i.e., treasure them diligently in their minds. Afterwards he reminds them wherefore they ought attentively to observe the Law, viz, that they may perform the works which God therein requires. Nor is it without a reason that at the end of the second verse He declares Himself to be Jehovah, because it is not easy either to subdue rebellious minds or to retain fickle ones in the fear of God. In the next verse, the qualification “which sanctify you” is added, to arouse them earnestly to prove their gratitude to God, who has by peculiar privilege separated them from the rest of mankind.

leviticus 22