Ex. 21:1 Now these are the judgments which thou shalt set before them.
Now we get to specific laws and judgments for specific situations. This is where I got bogged down in my journaling so I am going to try a different approach. Instead of trying to explain everything in my own words, I am just going to make observations as they jump out at me.
Ex. 21:2 If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing.
Ex. 21:3 If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him.
Ex. 21:4 If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master’s, and he shall go out by himself.
Ex. 21:5 And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free:
Ex. 21:6 Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever.
Observations:
This is where we are presented with the concept of being a bondservant—a slave by choice. This is a good picture of our relationship to the LORD. Once we accept His invitation to become part of His family, we are His forever.
It is also a picture of Christ’s love for us by His willingness to be pierced to make us part of His family.
Slavery was an accepted part of the culture of the time.
Women had a different position in society in that culture.
No man had to serve more than six years to pay off his debt.
A man who was married when indentured would be allowed to take his family with him at the end of the six years of service.
A man who married a woman given to him by his master would not be able to take his family with him when he was freed since they were possessions of the master to begin with. I have to admit that this is one I have trouble with.
These laws show respect for the person in servitude and responsibility on the part of the master.
Implied is that good treatment is expected for there to be the likely consideration that a man would choose to enslave himself for life and to have accepted a wife from the master knowing the choice he would have to make.
Guzik notes four reasons that a person would become a bondservant:
To escape poverty - Leviticus 25:39 “And if thy brother that dwelleth by thee be waxen poor, and be sold unto thee; thou shalt not compel him to serve as a bondservant….”
Your father sells you - Exodus 21:7 “And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do.”
To pay off debt due to bankruptcy - 2 Kings 4:1 “Now there cried a certain woman of the wives of the sons of the prophets unto Elisha, saying, Thy servant my husband is dead; and thou knowest that thy servant did fear the LORD: and the creditor is come to take unto him my two sons to be bondmen.”
Restitution for a theft - Exodus 22:3 “If the sun be risen upon him, there shall be blood shed for him; for he should make full restitution; if he have nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft.”
Courson: “Slavery was already deeply embedded into the fabric of Hebrew culture. God was not introducing or instituting slavery, but rather regulating it. The same principle is seen concerning divorce.”
Ex. 21:7 And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do.
Ex. 21:8 If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her.
Ex. 21:9 And if he have betrothed her unto his son, he shall deal with her after the manner of daughters.
Ex. 21:10 If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish.
Ex. 21:11 And if he do not these three unto her, then shall she go out free without money.
The one thing that stands out is that these laws seem clearly to address the protection of the rights of the person in servitude.
Although it is obvious that the master has rights and choices, he is not the only one with rights and choices.
A woman sold to become another man’s wife assumes a position of privilege as part of the family.
The woman was sold with the expectation of marriage. Verse 8 makes it clear that to not follow through with the marriage was a deceitful act.
If she was rejected as a wife, she was to be released with honor intact.
The man who bought her could not demand that the money used to purchase her be returned.
If her husband takes another wife, he was to continue to provide for the first wife.
She could not be sold to foreigners.
*referencing the word “maidservant”
Dummelow: “The word* denotes a slavewife, a consort of inferior rank, like Hagar. Her position was permanent. She did not go out at the end of six years, which would have been a degradation. If she were the wife of the master of the house, she was to be treated as a wife; if of the son, as a daughter. If she were dismissed, it must be in an honourable way, and without repayment of the purchase money.”
Ellicott: “Polygamy is viewed as lawful in this passage, as elsewhere generally in the Mosaic Law, which did not venture to forbid, though to some extent discouraging it. The legislator was forced to allow many things to the Hebrews, ‘for the hardness of their hearts.’”
Matthew 19:8 “He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.”
Ex. 21:12 He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death.
Ex. 21:13 And if a man lie not in wait, but God deliver him into his hand; then I will appoint thee a place whither he shall flee.
Ex. 21:14 But if a man come presumptuously upon his neighbour, to slay him with guile; thou shalt take him from mine altar, that he may die.
I think this section is another emphasis on God’s sovereignty regarding the sanctity of life. Genesis 9:6 “Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.”
The emphasis is clearly on the intent of the attacker.
The penalty is death for one who chooses to reject God’s authority over life and intentionally kill another person. Only God has the right to decide when to begin and end a person’s life.
Although it is wrong to let our emotions rule our actions, mercy is shown to the one who attacks in the heat of emotion, but not with the intent to kill, or to the one who accidentally causes another person’s death.
It is made clear that God is in direct control of the outcome in these circumstances, and we must conclude that it is God’s will in the master plan of the lives affected.
Also implied is that taking the life of a murderer is in compliance with God’s directive and is not sinful, but rather an act of obedience.
City of refuge is referenced by the clause “I will appoint thee a place where he shall flee”; however, it is not described as such yet.
In the book of Numbers, we learn that capital punishment requires the testimony of two witnesses. In fact, more details regarding specific situations are addressed in Numbers 35 as well as the instruction for establishing cities of refuge to which one could flee for safety until his case could be tried.
Numbers 35:30–31 “Whoso killeth any person, the murderer shall be put to death by the mouth of witnesses: but one witness shall not testify against any person to cause him to die. Moreover ye shall take no satisfaction for the life of a murderer, which is guilty of death: but he shall be surely put to death.”
Ex. 21:15 And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death.
I felt the need to check the concordance on the Hebrew for “smiteth,” but it really didn’t clarify things. The word has a variety of implications from “strike” to “wound to kill.” The first thought is that the punishment reflects the killing of a parent. But in the next couple of verses the verdict/punishment is the same for “cursing” a parent. God’s intention is for one to honor one’s father and mother. The parents’ position of authority and honor is God-given. To dishonor a parent in such a way is to dishonor the one through whom God chose to give one life. More importantly, it shows direct rejection of God’s authority in one’s life.
Ex. 21:16 And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.
This is a direct statement forbidding kidnapping and human trafficking.
Ex. 21:17 And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death.
These last two verses describe other offenses that call for the death penalty.
Kidnapping, whether for intent to sell for profit or for personal use.
Cursing father or mother.
Capital punishment is ordained by God and was instituted with far broader application than would be acceptable today—at least in America.
Courson: “Some of the most vicious murders are committed with the mouth.”
Wiersbe: “Children who have no respect for their parents usually have no respect for any other authority and want only their own selfish way.”
Ellicott: “…curses can only be effectual as appeals to God, it is an attempt to enlist God on our side against His representative.”
Ex. 21:18 And if men strive together, and one smite another with a stone, or with his fist, and he die not, but keepeth his bed:
Ex. 21:19 If he rise again, and walk abroad upon his staff, then shall he that smote him be quit: only he shall pay for the loss of his time, and shall cause him to be thoroughly healed.
These verses establish responsibility for one who injures another in a fight to compensate the injured party for medical expenses and loss of work during the time required for healing from the inflicted injury.
Ex. 21:20 And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.
Ex. 21:21 Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money.
One would assume that this beating is for disciplinary reasons. It’s interesting to note that the punishment is to be meted out but is not specified, neither is accommodation made according to intent. I would assume that the precedent of intent being already established, that beating with the intent to kill would demand the punishment already established. If the servant died as a result of the beating, the evidence would clearly support a charge of intentional murder.
If the servant did not die immediately, the man is given the benefit of the doubt. Verse 21 indicates that his punishment is the fact that he loses the services of his slave, his property, and that directly affects his financial well-being.
Guzik: “The idea was that if the victim did not die immediately, it was evidence that he was struck with the intention of discipline and not murder.”
Ex. 21:22 If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.
Ex. 21:23 And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,
Ex. 21:24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
Ex. 21:25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
It’s amazing how many specific situations the LORD addresses. Verse 22 speaks of men who are fighting and end up hurting a pregnant woman to the point of causing a premature birth. In this case, as long as mother and baby end up OK, the punishment is a fine levied by the husband as approved by the judges. If there is serious injury, then it is spelled out as life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, etc. In other words, in whatever way they had injured another, they were to be injured in return. No stipulations for motive are given here. If men choose to fight, then they must accept responsibility concerning innocent bystanders.
A woman with child represents a whole new category—she is nurturing new life, a new creation. It appears to me that importance is designated equally to mother and child. “If any mischief follow”—seems clear that any injury to mother or child is a basis for punishment. The child’s importance isn’t based on the stage of the pregnancy. The child is recognized as a person in its own right while still in the womb.
Ex. 21:26 And if a man smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it perish; he shall let him go free for his eye’s sake.
Ex. 21:27 And if he smite out his manservant’s tooth, or his maidservant’s tooth; he shall let him go free for his tooth’s sake.
My first thoughts are that this response seems to be out of proportion in comparison to verse 21. An owner that causes his servant to lose an eye or a tooth is commanded to set the servant free. In verse 21, if an owner beats a slave and the slave survives for a day or two (implying that he dies after that), the owner is not punished. I admit that this is hard to understand. Some commentators note that the eye would be considered a most valuable part of the body and a tooth the least valuable; therefore, making the judgment applicable to loss of any part of the body.
My second thought is that an eye and a tooth are of much different value, yet the loss of either results in freedom for the injured servant. Spiritually speaking, I know that God places significance on all parts of the body of Christ and the dependence of one part on another.
Ex. 21:28 If an ox gore a man or a woman, that they die: then the ox shall be surely stoned, and his flesh shall not be eaten; but the owner of the ox shall be quit.
Ex. 21:29 But if the ox were wont to push with his horn in time past, and it hath been testified to his owner, and he hath not kept him in, but that he hath killed a man or a woman; the ox shall be stoned, and his owner also shall be put to death.
Ex. 21:30 If there be laid on him a sum of money, then he shall give for the ransom of his life whatsoever is laid upon him.
Ex. 21:31 Whether he have gored a son, or have gored a daughter, according to this judgment shall it be done unto him.
Ex. 21:32 If the ox shall push a manservant or a maidservant; he shall give unto their master thirty shekels of silver, and the ox shall be stoned.
An animal that kills a man or woman is to be put to death. This affirms the instruction already given to Noah. Genesis 9:5 “And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man’s brother will I require the life of man.”
Awareness of the fact that an animal is dangerous makes the owner liable for its actions. Ignorance calls for the death of the animal only; knowledge calls for the death of animal and owner; however, the owner can pay a ransom to save his life. Even if ignorant, the owner is not to benefit from the death of the animal.
Again, a difference is made between injury to a family member vs. a slave. The bigger point being made seems to be the status of relationship and the significance of being a son or daughter.
The thirty pieces of silver automatically makes me think of the price Judas was paid for betraying Jesus—the price for a slave.
Ex. 21:33 And if a man shall open a pit, or if a man shall dig a pit, and not cover it, and an ox or an ass fall therein;
Ex. 21:34 The owner of the pit shall make it good, and give money unto the owner of them; and the dead beast shall be his.
Ex. 21:35 And if one man’s ox hurt another’s, that he die; then they shall sell the live ox, and divide the money of it; and the dead ox also they shall divide.
Ex. 21:36 Or if it be known that the ox hath used to push in time past, and his owner hath not kept him in; he shall surely pay ox for ox; and the dead shall be his own.
You are responsible for things that result from your careless actions. I think the main principle being addressed is responsible ownership.
Ex. 22:1 If a man shall steal an ox, or a sheep, and kill it, or sell it; he shall restore five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep.
The principle here seems to be that the consequence of the crime should be sufficient to be a deterrent. In the case of an ox, the thief would have to repay the man five oxen to replace the one killed or stolen; in the case of a sheep he would have to replace with four.
Ex. 22:2 If a thief be found breaking up, and be smitten that he die, there shall no blood be shed for him.
Ex. 22:3 If the sun be risen upon him, there shall be blood shed for him; for he should make full restitution; if he have nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft.
Ex. 22:4 If the theft be certainly found in his hand alive, whether it be ox, or ass, or sheep; he shall restore double.
If you are defending yourself and your loved ones in the dark of night, you obviously can’t tell if the thief is armed or not; so you would not be guilty of murder for killing in defense of your property. In the light of day, however, you can see whether or not he is armed and would be guilty of murder if you killed an unarmed man. If caught, the thief is required to make restitution or become a slave to pay the debt by double the amount of what he stole. If he cannot make restitution, he can be sold.
Ex. 22:5 If a man shall cause a field or vineyard to be eaten, and shall put in his beast, and shall feed in another man’s field; of the best of his own field, and of the best of his own vineyard, shall he make restitution.
Ex. 22:6 If fire break out, and catch in thorns, so that the stacks of corn, or the standing corn, or the field, be consumed therewith; he that kindled the fire shall surely make restitution.
These verses continue thoughts regarding responsible ownership, respect for the property of others and the penalty for irresponsibility.
Ex. 22:7 If a man shall deliver unto his neighbour money or stuff to keep, and it be stolen out of the man’s house; if the thief be found, let him pay double.
Ex. 22:8 If the thief be not found, then the master of the house shall be brought unto the judges, to see whether he have put his hand unto his neighbour’s goods.
Ex. 22:9 For all manner of trespass, whether it be for ox, for ass, for sheep, for raiment, or for any manner of lost thing, which another challengeth to be his, the cause of both parties shall come before the judges; and whom the judges shall condemn, he shall pay double unto his neighbour.
Ex. 22:10 If a man deliver unto his neighbour an ass, or an ox, or a sheep, or any beast, to keep; and it die, or be hurt, or driven away, no man seeing it:
Ex. 22:11 Then shall an oath of the LORD be between them both, that he hath not put his hand unto his neighbour’s goods; and the owner of it shall accept thereof, and he shall not make it good.
Ex. 22:12 And if it be stolen from him, he shall make restitution unto the owner thereof.
Ex. 22:13 If it be torn in pieces, then let him bring it for witness, and he shall not make good that which was torn.
Ex. 22:14 And if a man borrow ought of his neighbour, and it be hurt, or die, the owner thereof being not with it, he shall surely make it good.
Ex. 22:15 But if the owner thereof be with it, he shall not make it good: if it be an hired thing, it came for his hire.
These verses emphasize the seriousness of taking responsibility for someone else’s possessions. Many commentators note that this was a common practice before banks came into being. I think I would have thought long and hard before agreeing to do that as an Israelite. It seems that the phrase “no man seeing it” in verse 10 is important, because you can be diligent in care but yet be unable to see everything going on around you.
Observations:
A man’s word should be trustworthy.
We should treat the possessions of others with great care and return items in the same condition in which they were received.
Risk is included as part of the cost of anything hired or rented.
If you rented something and it was damaged or died, the rent you paid is considered sufficient reimbursement.
Coffman: “Right here then is the embryo of that cornerstone of American justice, that one is held as ‘innocent until proved guilty.’ There is absolutely nothing in any of these God-given pronouncements which is narrow, discriminatory, or inappropriate.”
Clarke: “This is called pledging in the law of bailments; it is a deposit of goods by a debtor to his creditor, to be kept till the debt be discharged. Whatever goods were thus left in the hands of another person, that person, according to the Mosaic law, became responsible for them; if they were stolen, and the thief was found, he was to pay double; if he could not be found, the oath of the person who had them in keeping, made before the magistrates, that he knew nothing of them, was considered a full acquittance.”
Ex. 22:16 And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife.
Ex. 22:17 If her father utterly refuse to give her unto him, he shall pay money according to the dowry of virgins.
This law pertains to a man who has seduced an unmarried girl; he is under obligation to marry her and pay her dowry or bride price. Allowance is made for the father to assess the man involved and protect his daughter from being given to a dangerous or untrustworthy person. If deemed unworthy, he still has to pay her full dowry to the father. We learn in Deuteronomy that the dowry is set at 50 shekels of silver.
Deuteronomy 22:28–29 “If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.”
Ex. 22:18 Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.
According to the Hebrew, a witch is one who “enchants or practices magic or whispers spells.” Such practices call for the death penalty. It should be noted that such a law implies the reality of those who possess such abilities. I believe such people have yielded themselves to Satan and are empowered by him through evil “familiar spirits.” Jannes and Jambres, the magicians of Pharaoh, were obvious examples.
Leviticus 20:27 “A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death….”
Deuteronomy 18:10–12 “There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch, Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer. For all that do these things are an abomination unto the LORD….”
Constable: “Magic constituted an attempt to override God’s will.”
Coffman: “"The Greek translation of the Hebrew word for witch is [@pharmakeus], a close relative of our word ‘pharmacy,' meaning one who deals in drugs and poisons, a poisoner!"
Ex. 22:19 Whosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death.
GROSS! It’s unbelievable the things that man will choose to do if left without God’s moral compass. Again, if it weren’t a practice among men, the law would not have been unnecessary.
Constable: “Having intercourse with animals (bestiality) was something the Canaanites and Mesopotamians attributed to their gods and which they practiced in worshipping those gods.”
Ex. 22:20 He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed.
This instruction was certainly not followed in future generations.
(My bible has an interesting footnote—The Hebrew term refers to the irrevocable giving over of things or persons to the LORD by destruction. Maybe this was intended to emphasize that human sacrifice was not acceptable to God. This may seem like an unnecessary statement except for the fact that many peoples of that time did practice such terrible types of sacrifice to their dead, impotent gods.)
Deuteronomy 12:30–31 “Take heed to thyself that thou be not snared by following them, after that they be destroyed from before thee; and that thou enquire not after their gods, saying, How did these nations serve their gods? even so will I do likewise. Thou shalt not do so unto the LORD thy God: for every abomination to the LORD, which he hateth, have they done unto their gods; for even their sons and their daughters they have burnt in the fire to their gods.”
Jeremiah 7:30–31 “For the children of Judah have done evil in my sight, saith the LORD: they have set their abominations in the house which is called by my name, to pollute it. And they have built the high places of Tophet, which is in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire; which I commanded them not, neither came it into my heart.”
Ex. 22:21 Thou shalt neither vex a stranger, nor oppress him: for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Remember what it was like to be a mistreated foreigner.
Ex. 22:22 Ye shall not afflict any widow, or fatherless child.
Ex. 22:23 If thou afflict them in any wise, and they cry at all unto me, I will surely hear their cry;
Ex. 22:24 And my wrath shall wax hot, and I will kill you with the sword; and your wives shall be widows, and your children fatherless.
God has a heart for those left at the mercy of others. To mistreat them is to incur God’s wrath to the point of death.
Ex. 22:25 If thou lend money to any of my people that is poor by thee, thou shalt not be to him as an usurer, neither shalt thou lay upon him usury.
Ex. 22:26 If thou at all take thy neighbour’s raiment to pledge, thou shalt deliver it unto him by that the sun goeth down:
Ex. 22:27 For that is his covering only, it is his raiment for his skin: wherein shall he sleep? and it shall come to pass, when he crieth unto me, that I will hear; for I am gracious.
You are not to charge interest when lending to the poor. Implication is that anyone borrowing money for a valid reason would be a poor person. You are to be willing to help provide for others with sensitivity to their needs. A person’s raiment was often his only protection against the cold of the night.
Coffman: “The garment in view here is that large, substantial blanket, or pancho, used not only as the principal covering in daytime, but also as the only bedclothes the man had.”
We learn in Deuteronomy that one was allowed to charge interest to foreigners.
Deuteronomy 23:20 “Unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury; but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon usury….”
Ex. 22:28 Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people.
After looking up the word for “gods” in the Hebrew, it would seem that this is referring to those in authority—magistrates, judges, rulers, etc. In other words, be careful how you talk about the president and government leaders.
It was expected that men in such positions in Israel would be God-fearing, honorable men. If only there were such a valid expectation in America today!
Clarke: “He who can indulge himself in speaking evil of the civil ruler, will soon learn to blaspheme God. The highest authority says, Fear God: honor the king.”
Wiersbe: “God has established human government (Romans 13), and even if we don’t respect the officer, we must respect the office.”
Ex. 22:29 Thou shalt not delay to offer the first of thy ripe fruits, and of thy liquors: the firstborn of thy sons shalt thou give unto me.
Ex. 22:30 Likewise shalt thou do with thine oxen, and with thy sheep: seven days it shall be with his dam; on the eighth day thou shalt give it me.
This is a repeat of a command that was given to the Israelites after they came out of Egypt in remembrance of God’s provision for them during the plague of the death of the firstborn and which is remembered through the Passover feast. Added, however, is the firstfruits of the harvest and juices (wine and oil).
Leviticus sheds more light on verse 30.
Leviticus 22:27 “When a bullock, or a sheep, or a goat, is brought forth, then it shall be seven days under the dam; and from the eighth day and thenceforth it shall be accepted for an offering made by fire unto the LORD.”
Ex. 22:31 And ye shall be holy men unto me: neither shall ye eat any flesh that is torn of beasts in the field; ye shall cast it to the dogs.
“holy” = consecrated, set apart, dedicated
I believe these statements are coupled together because you can’t be clean (holy) if you partake of what is unclean.