A Help for the Understanding of the Holy Scriptures, Exodus · Chapter 21
CHAP. XXI.
Verſ. 1. NOw theſe are the judgements which thou ſhalt ſet before them.]
That is, the judiciall laws.
Verſ. 2. If thou buy an Hebrew-ſervant, &c.]
Divers wayes the Hebrews came to be ſold for ſervants to their brethren: for 1. ſometimes being condemned for theft, they were ſold by the judges, that ſo ſatisfaction might be made to the owner for the goods they had ſtollen, if otherwiſe they were not able to make ſatisfaction, chap. 22. 3. If he have nothing, he ſhall be ſold for his theft; 2. by reaſon of poverty they might ſell their children for ſervants, as is …vident in the 12. verſe of this chapter; or themſelves, Lev. 25. 39. And if thy brother that dwelleth by thee be waxen poore, and be ſold unto thee, &c. 3. in caſe of debt which they were not able to pay, they and their children might be ſold as ſervants, for ſatisfaction of the debt; whence is that complaint of the poore widow, 2. King. 4. 1. The creditour is come to take unto him my two ſonnes to be bondmen; and that in the parable, Mat. 18. 25. For as much as he had not to pay, his Lord commanded him to be ſold, and his wife, and children, and all that he had, and payment to be made. Now in all theſe caſes, here is a law given concerning the time of their ſervice, namely that they ſhould ſerve thoſe that had bought them onelyonly ſix years, and that in the ſeventh year they ſhould ſet them free. Elſewhere it is evident, that if the year of Jubile fell within the compaſſe of thoſe ſix years, their ſervants were then alſo to be ſet free, though it were but a year after they had bought them, Lev. 25. 40, 41. but otherwiſe, they were to ſerve them ſix years, as here is expreſſed. Many learned Expoſitours, indeed the moſt, conceive that the ſeventh year, wherein the Hebrew ſervants were to be ſet free, was the Sabbaticall year, or the year of releaſe, which was every ſeventh year, at which time they were to ſet free their ſervants, how lately ſoever they had bought them: And if we thus underſtand this place, then the meaning of theſe words is this, If thou buy an Hebrew ſervant, ſix years he ſhall ſerve, that is, ſix years is the utmoſt he ſhall at any time ſerve thee, and in the ſeventh he ſhall go out free for nothing, that is, when the ſeventh year, the Sabbaticall year, comes, then however he ſhall go out free for nothing. But 1. becauſe where the Scripture ſpeaks of this Sabbaticall year, or year of releaſe, as in the 25. chapter of Leviticus, and in the fifteenth chapter of Deuteronomie, we find no expreſſe Law given for the ſetting free of ſervants; and 2. becauſe according to this expoſition of this Law their ſervants could never ſerve them ſix years, unleſſe they were ſold to be ſervants immediately after the end of the Sabbaticall year, and it ſeems manifeſt that this clauſe, ſix years he ſhall ſerve, is more generall then ſo, therefore I rather think that the ſetting free ſervants before they had ſerved ſix years was the peculiar priviledge of the year of Jubile, which was every fiftieth year; and that the ſeventh year in this Law intended, when they were to be ſet free, was alwayes counted from the year when they were firſt ſold to be ſervants. Now the reaſon why the Lord would not have the Iſraelites ſerve any longer, is expreſſed elſewhere, Lev. 25. 55. to wit, becauſe they were Gods ſervants, and ſo the Lord would teach them to put a difference betwixt his people, and others that were not his people. And though there is mention made here onelyonly of ſervants bought with money, yet if they became any other way ſervants to their brethren, as by being taken in the warre, when there came to be any civill warre amongſt them, it is probable that by the rule of Analogy this law was extended even to them alſo.
Verſ. 3. If he were married, then his wife ſhall go out with him.]
And ſo alſo by the rules of Analogy we may gather, that if he brought children with him, thoſe children ſhould alſo go out with him.
Verſ. 4. If his Master have given him a wife, &c.]
Here is an exception added to the former law, concerning the ſetting free of the wife together with the husband, to wit, that if his Maſter have given him a wife, in the time of his ſervice (namely one of his maidſervants, either an Hebrew woman, or ſtranger, both the manſervant and maidſervant conſenting thereto) and ſhe have born him ſonnes or daughters, in this caſe the man was to be ſet free alone by himſelf, and his wife and children were to continue ſtill ſervants to his Maſter. Nor yet can we hence inferre, That God approved any mans forſaking his wife: for doubtleſſe that Law ſtood firm which God had eſtabliſhed from the beginning, that a man muſt leave all and cleave to his wife, Gen. 2. 24. and that the bond of marriage ſhould be kept alwayes inviolable, What God hath joyned together let no man put aſunder. But for the reſolving of this doubt, we muſt conſider, firſt, that in ſome caſes this might be onelyonly a parting with mutuall conſent for a time, becauſe if his wife were a daughter of Iſrael, bought with money, ſhe alſo was to be ſet free at the end of her ſix years ſervice, if the year of Jubile did not happen before (Deut. 15. 12. If thy brother, an Hebrew man, or an Hebrew woman, be ſold unto thee, and ſerve thee ſix years, then in the ſeventh year thou ſhalt let them go free from thee) and then might ſhe return unto her husband: Secondly, that no man was by this law forced to leave his wife; by continuing in his former ſervice, he might ſtill enjoy her: onelyonly God takes order that when himſelf is ſet free, he muſt not think under that pretence to deprive his Maſter of her that was his lawfull ſervant, but ſhould rather endure the inlarging of his own bondage, that he might enjoy her. Thirdly, that this liberty given to a ſervant ſet free to go away, and leave his wife behind him, was not an approbation of his forſaking the wife he had taken: at the moſt, it was but a part or branch of that ſcope wherein this people were left to themſelves, for the hardneſſe of their hearts, as Chriſt ſaith in another caſe, Matth. 19. 8. and fourthly, That if the wife, given him in the time of his ſervice, was a ſtranger of another nation, and happely of another religion, theſe marriages were never pleaſing to God; and it was his fault that he would yield to marry ſuch a one.
Verſ. 6. Then his Master ſhall bring him to the judges, he ſhall alſo bring him to the doore, &c.]
To wit, that his Maſter might prove it fairly and openly, that it was his ſervants free and voluntary act to continue with him.
His Maſter ſhall bore his eare through with an aul, and he ſhall ſerve him for ever.]
That is, all his life time, to wit, unleſſe the yeare of Jubile fall in the mean time: for then indeed all Hebrew ſervants were abſolutely ſet free together with their children, Levit. 25. 40, 41. Now for the boring of his eare to the doore, or to the doore-poſt of his Maſters houſe, it was happely partly to ſhadow forth how blame-worthy they are that preferre not the liberty of the Goſpel before the bondage of the law; but doubtleſſe the main reaſon was, that his bored eare might be an evidence concerning ſuch a ſervant, that he had voluntarily diſclaimed the priviledge that God had granted him of being ſet free at the end of ſix years ſervice: it was not ſo much a puniſhment inflicted, as a mark ſet upon him to witneſſe his conſent to perpetuall ſervice, and the miſery thereof. And indeed a fit ſigne it was to ſignifie this. The eare is the embleme of obedience; becauſe they that are obedient, are willingly ready to hearken to the commands of their ſuperiours, that ſo they may do what is enjoyned. The boring therefore of his eare was to ſignifie that he was now tyed to his Maſters houſe, and that as a ſervant he would be ready alwayes to hearken to his voice in all he ſhould give him in charge: whence is that phraſe concerning the obedience of Chriſt, Pſal. 40. 6. Sacrifice and offering thou didſt not deſire: mine eares haſt thou opened, or, bored through, as the word in the originall ſignifies.
Verſ. 7. If a man ſell his daughter to be a maidſervant, ſhe ſhall not go out as the menſervants do.]
That is, ſhe ſhall not alwayes be tyed to ſix years ſervice as the menſervants are, as is made evident by ſome particular exceptions which are added in the following verſes: This courſe of parents ſelling their children is by many reckoned amongſt thoſe things which God did not approve but tolerate in this people, becauſe of the hardneſſe of their hearts. However Lord did here provide that in caſe parents, conſtrained perhaps by extreme neceſſity, ſhould ſell their children, if it were a daughter which they ſold, ſhe ſhould not go out as the menſervants do: and the meaning, I ſay, is onelyonly this, that the Law concerning the ſetting free of ſuch a maidſervant ſhould not be in all reſpects alike with that of menſervants, as namely becauſe though ordinarily maidſervants were to be ſet free alſo at ſix years end, Deut. 15. 12, &c. yet ſometimes they were to be freed before their ſix years ſervice was ended (which menſervants never were) as appears by thoſe caſes propounded in the following verſes.
Verſ. 8. If ſhe pleaſe not her Master, who hath betrothed her to himſelf, &c.]
That is, if her Maſter after he hath bought he… betroth her to himſelf, and afterwards diſlike her, and ſo repenting of what he hath done will not take her to be his wife (which was likewiſe one of thoſe things which God did tolerate in this people, but not approve) he muſt let her be redeemed, that is, he muſt not think to keep her ſtill to be a ſervant, or ſell her to be a ſervant to others; at leaſt he muſt procure her to be redeemed, either by her ſelf, or by her kindred, or by ſome other that would take her to be his wife. In which caſe doubtleſſe order was taken by the Judges, that it ſhould be done at a very reaſonable price: for though the next clauſe may ſeem to imply, that he was onelyonly reſtrained from ſelling her to one that was not an Iſraelite, To ſell her unto a ſtrange nation he ſhall have no power; yet ſince they might not do that to any Iſraelite ſervant whatſoever, therefore by a ſtrange nation here is meant (as Calvin takes it) any of another family, though an Hebrew; or elſe his ſelling her to a ſtrange nation is onelyonly expreſſely forbidden, becauſe the Hebrews would not buy her, knowing it to be contrary to Gods law. And indeed the like favour is granted to a ſervant whom her Maſter had marryed, though ſhe were not an Iſraelite: for concerning ſuch a one the law was, Deut. 21. 14. that her Maſter ſhould let her go whither ſhe would, but ſhould not ſell her and make merchandiſe of her, becauſe he had humbled her.
Verſ. 9. And if he have betrothed her unto his ſonne, he ſhall deal with her after the manner of daughters.]
That is, both in the matter of dowry, and in all other things he ſhall deal with her as if ſhe had been a freewoman.
Verſ. 10. If he take him another wife, her food, her rayment, and her duty of marriage ſhall he not diminiſh.]
Now another caſe is propounded, What ſhall be done, if a man having betrothed his ſervant to himſelf, or to his ſonne (for both may be here underſtood) do not in diſlike caſt her off, but take him another wife? This we muſt not think God approves of, onelyonly he tolerates it for the hardneſſe of their hearts; but in this caſe he provides that the true wife be not wronged, Her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage ſhall he not diminiſh, which laſt clauſe may be meant of dowry, and all other things due by marriage covenant; but doubtleſſe that which St Paul calls due benevolence, 1. Cor. 7. 3. is included, and indeed principally (if not onelyonly) intended.
Verſ. 13. If a man lie not in wait, but God deliver him into his hand; then I will appoint thee a place whither he ſhall fly.]
To wit, the altar, whileſt they were in the deſert; in Canaan, both the altar and the cities of refuge alſo.
Verſ. 16. And he that ſtealeth a man and ſelleth him, or if he be found in his hand, &c.]
This law is again repeated by Moſes, though in tearms ſomewhat different, Deut. 24. 7. If a man be found ſtealing any of his brethren the children of Iſrael, and maketh merchandiſe of him, or ſelleth him, then that thief ſhall d…e; ſo that by comparing them together we may ſee, firſt, That though this place ſpeaks generally of ſtealing a man, yet it is meant onelyonly of ſtealing thoſe that were their brethren of Iſrael: There was doubtleſſe ſome puniſhment inflicted on thoſe that ſtole ſervants that were ſtrangers of another nation, to wit, according to the puniſhment of other thefts (for their ſervants were their money) but it was onelyonly the ſtealing of Iſraelites, whether men or women, that was puniſhed with death: ſecondly, That whereas it is ſaid here, He that ſtealeth a man and ſelleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he ſhall ſurely be put to death, the meaning is not, that though the manſtealer had not yet ſold his brother whom he had ſtollen, but had him ſtill in his own poſſeſſion, he ſhould notwithſtanding be put to death, no leſſe then if he had ſold him (for the law in Deuteronomi… doth plainly enough intimate that the manſtealer was onelyonly to be put to death, in caſe that he had ſold, and made merchandiſe of his brother whom he had ſtollen; and indeed when the party ſtollen might be reſtored, and had not yet endured the miſery of being ſold for a ſlave, it is not probable that the thief was in this caſe to be put to death) but the meaning is this, that though it could not be proved againſt the manſtealer that he had ſold him, yet if it could be proved that he had been in his …and, it ſhould be taken for granted that he had ſold him, and he ſhould be put to death: and thirdly, That the reaſon why this theft alone was puniſhed with death amongſt the Iſra…lites, we may well conceive to have been this, to wit, becauſe it was ſuch a debaſing of man, made after Gods image, and much more of Gods people redeemed from bondage by his outſtretched arm, to be ſold as beaſts; and becauſe the miſeries which ſuch poore wretches endured in bondage were indeed worſe then death, eſpecially when they were ſold to heathens (of which this law was meant; for they could not hope to conceal their theft if they ſold them in the land of Iſrael) where no mercy could be expected, and where beſides their ſouls were expoſed to manifeſt peril. By all which we may likewiſe gather what a grievous ſinne it is to bring men into the worſe bondage of ſinne and Satan, or of ſubjecting the conſcience of Gods people to be in thraldome to men, of which the Apoſtle ſpeaks, 1. Cor. 7. 23. Ye are bought with a price, be not ye the ſervants of men.
Verſ. 17. And he that curſeth his father or his mother ſhall ſurely be put to death.]
By curſing here is not meant onelyonly expreſſe imprecations, when a child ſhould wiſh any miſchief might befall his father or mother, nor yet any unreverent and undutifull language, but all kind of malitious reviling ſpeeches, whether by way of imprecation or otherwiſe, as manifeſtly argued a contempt of their parents: and therefore we ſee that Solomon ſaith, with reſpect doubtleſſe to this law, The eye that mocketh at his father, and deſpiſeth to obey his mother, the ravents of the valley ſhall pick it out, &c. Prov. 30. 17. and Chriſt having joyned this law with the fifth Commandment, Matth. 15. 4. God commanded ſaying, Honour thy father and thy mother; and he that curſeth father or mother let him die the death, he applyeth it to the condemning of that Tradition of the Phariſes, who allowed men to withhold neceſſary ſuſtenance from their parents, ſo that what they withheld from them they gave to the Temple, and concludes that hereby they made the commandment of God of none effect by their Tradition: whence it is manifeſt that by the judgement of Chriſt they tranſgreſſe this law, and deſerve death before God, that ſhall either revile their parents, or under the pretence of any religious vow ſhall whithhold from them that relief which by the law and light of nature they are bound to afford them.
Verſ. 18. If men ſtrive together, and one ſmite another with a ſtone, &c.]
That is, by throwing any thing at him, or by the ſtroke of any thing held in his hand.
Verſ. 19. If he riſe again, and walk abroad upon his ſtaff, then ſhall he that ſmote him be quit, &c.]
That is, if he recover ſo farre as to go forth though weakly, he that ſtruck him ſhall not be put to death, though he die afterward.
Verſ. 20. If a man ſmite his ſervant or his maid with a rod, &c.]
Some Expoſitours underſtand this law thus, that if a man, with any thing fit to give correction with, do correct or beat his manſervant or maidſervant, yet if he do it ſo immoderately that the ſervant dies under his hands, he ſhall be puniſhed, to wit, as a manſlayer, with death: for the word in the originall ſignif…eth, he ſhall be avenged, and the vengeance to be in…licted by the civill magiſtrate was the putting them to death that had wilfully been the death of others. Now this law was concerning ſervants that were not Iſraelites: for it is meant of ſervants that were abſolutely their Maſte…s money, as is expreſſed in the following verſe, which the Hebrew ſervants were not, but were onelyonly bought for a time; and for Hebrew ſervants there is another law given, Levit. 25. …9. If thy brother that dwelleth by thee be waxen poore and be ſold unto thee, thou ſhalt not compell him to ſerve as a bondſervant, &c. But now others again hold that the Iſraelites were not to be put to death for this correcting their ſervants here ſpoken of, to wit, when their ſervants dyed under their hands. And indeed it may well be queſtioned why it ſhould not be ſaid here as in other laws of that nature, he ſhall ſurely die, but onelyonly, he ſhall be ſurely puniſhed, if it were not purpoſely done becauſe in this caſe the guilty party was to be left to the wiſdome of the Judges to be puniſhed as they ſhould ſee cauſe.
Verſ. 21. If he continue a day or two, he ſhall not be puniſhed; for he is his money.]
That is, it may be thought he intended not to bring that loſſe upon himſelf, by killing him whom he had purchaſed with his money: and ſince it may well be judged that he did not do it willingly, even the loſſe of his ſervant, bought with his money, ſhall be deemed ſufficient puniſhment.
Verſ. 22. If men ſtrive, and hurt a woman with child, ſo that her fruit depart from her, and yet no miſchief follow, &c.]
That is, if a woman with child come in to help her husband, or friend, when men are fighting together, or to part them, or upon any other occaſion be nigh them, and ſo do caſually receive ſome hurt, and by that means miſcarry, yet ſo as that no miſchief follow thereupon, that is, neither the woman nor child die, or be maimed, in this caſe the party that was the cauſe of the womans miſcarrying ſhall pay ſuch a penalty as the womans husband will lay upon him; onelyonly it is in the next clauſe provided that the womans husband ſhall not be his own judge, but ſhall onelyonly require to have ſuch or ſuch a penalty impoſed upon him, which ſhall there be accordingly awarded him by the judge, and he ſhall pay as the judges determine; whereby alſo is implyed, that the judges had power to moderate the penalty, if the womans husband demanded that which was unre… ſonable.
Verſ. 23. And if any miſchief follow, then thou ſhalt give life for life.]
Whether of the mother, or child having ſhape and life, as appears by that which follows.
Verſ. 24. Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.]
This was the law amongſt the Hebrews, which we call the law of Retaliation, whereby the Magiſtrate was authoriſed to puniſh man that had done voluntarily any hurt to their neighbours, according to the hurt which they had done them: And it was doubtleſſe moſt equall▪ as thoſe times were, and frequently practiſed amongſt them; yet withall very probable it is that it was in the Judges power in ſome caſes to allow a change or commutation of this penalty, and in ſtead of this to award a pecuniary mulct or fine of money: firſt, Becauſe in ſome caſes the law of retaliation could not be equall; as for example, If a man that had but one eye ſhould put out one of his neighbours eyes, the putting out of this mans onelyonly eye in l…ew thereof would not be perfectly equall; or if the man that had cut off his neighbours arm were of ſuch a weak conſtitution, that it was altogether unlikely that he ſhould eſcape death if his arm ſhould be cut off too, by way of puniſhing that harm he had done his neighbour: ſ…condly, Becauſe that law, Numb. 35. 31. Ye ſhall take no ſatisfaction for the life of a murderer which is guilty of death, may ſeem to imply that except onelyonly in that caſe of life and death they were allowed to take ſatisfaction in ſtead of corporall puniſhments: thirdly, Becauſe it is evident in the thirtieth verſe of this chapter, that when a mans ox had killed a man after warning had been given to the owner to keep him in, though the owner was by the law to be ſtoned, yet the Judges were allowed in ſome caſes not to adjudge him to be ſtoned, but in ſtead thereof to impoſe a ſumme of money: whence by the rule of analogy we may conceive, that in this caſe of taking eye for eye, and tooth for tooth, &c. the Judges had likewiſe the ſame liberty. In Matth. 5. 39. our Saviour having repeated this law, addeth, But I ſay unto you that ye reſist not evil; whereby he never intended to aboliſh this law, but onelyonly to clear it from the falſe expoſition of the Jews, who thence took unto themſelves liberty for private revenge, which Chriſt condemnes, and rather enjoyns his diſcipiles to bear patiently any wrong done them then to be Judges and revengers in their own cauſe.
Verſ. 26. He ſhall let him go free for his eyes ſake.]
And ſo alſo for the loſſe of any other member, the chiefeſt the eye, and the meaneſt the tooth, being onelyonly expreſſed.
Verſ. 28. If an ox gore a man or a woman that they die, then the ox ſhall be ſurely ſtoned, &c.]
One kind of beaſt (moſt uſuall amongſt the Hebrews) is here put for all.
Verſ. 31. Whether he have gored a ſonne, or have gored a daughter, &c.]
The ſame puniſhment that was allotted in the former verſes, for the puniſhment of him whoſe ox had killed any man or woman of grown years, is here alſo allotted, though it be onelyonly a mans child, whether ſonne or daughter, that is killed by ſuch an ox.
Verſ. 32. If an ox ſhall puſh a manſervant or a maidſervant, he ſhall give unto their Master thirty ſhek…ls.]
The price at which Chriſt was valued, who became a ſervant for our ſakes, is here appointed to be paid in liew of a ſervant killed.
Verſ. 33. And if a man ſhall open a pit, &c.]
Some conceive, that this muſt onelyonly▪ be meant of pits mad… in open and publick wayes, not of thoſe which men digged in their own private grounds. And whereas there is no puniſhment appointed in caſe a child or any man or woman in the dark ſhould fall into ſuch a pit, it is probable that this was left to the judges to be determined proportionably to that which is determined in this and the former law, verſ. 28. 29, 30.