Deeper Commentary
Exo 22:1 If a man steals an ox or a sheep, and kills it, or sells
it; he shall pay five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep-
We note that the Mosaic law had no concept of prisons or custodial
sentences, even though this was practiced in the surrounding world. We
think of Joseph in prison in Egypt. God wanted issues to be decided
immediately, forgiven and resolved- and "play on". And this is reflected
in the law of Moses. Prison seems not to really reform many people. And
that is why we are to immediately reconcile with our brother.
Exo 22:2 If the thief is found breaking in, and is struck so that he dies,
there shall be no guilt of bloodshed for him-
The original text here is difficult. GNB suggests: "If a thief is
caught breaking into a house at night and is killed, the one who killed
him is not guilty of murder. But if it happens during the day, he is
guilty of murder". The idea would then be that if a man kills a thief while he is in the act of
breaking in to a home, this is not to be counted as murder. But if some
time passes and then the owner as an act of revenge murders the thief,
this is seen by God differently. Surely this reflects the fact that God is
more lenient to sins committed in hot blood than those more premeditated.
Yet on the other hand, sin is sin. His law, as law, can appear to make no
distinction between sins of passion and premeditated sins, if the same act
is committed in the end. However, this and other examples indicate God’s
willingness to concede to human weakness, and recognize sins of passion
more leniently than others. And our judgment in ecclesial life should
reflect this too.
Exo 22:3 If the sun has risen on him, guilt of bloodshed shall be for him;
he shall make restitution-
See on :2. There was perhaps the possibility of making restitution
with money even when guilty of murder.
If he has nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft-
This presumably speaks of the thief, if he survived; whereas the
first part of the verse speaks of the person who killed a thief.
Exo 22:4 If the stolen property is found in his hand alive, whether it is
ox, donkey, or sheep, he shall pay double-
The way God restored double to Job at the end has echoes of how a
thief had to restore double (Ex. 22:2-4)- as if God in His love for Job
wished to show Himself as having been somehow ‘guilty’ for taking away
from Job what He had? Is. 40:2, in the context of Israel's punishment by
the Babylonians, says that their judgment had been double what it ought to
have been; and yet Ezra says it was less than the promised proportionate
recompense for their sins. Here we have the utter, inconsistent grace of
God; almost taking guilt for punishing them (cp. how God likewise takes
the blame in Is. 54:6-8, as if He had forsaken Israel as a sweet innocent
young wife).
Exo 22:5 If a man causes a field or vineyard to be eaten, and lets his
animal loose, and it grazes in another man’s field, he shall make
restitution from the best of his own field, and from the best of his own
vineyard-
There was to be no excuse in claiming that an animal had done this,
and not the owner. The abiding principle is that we are not to manipulate
others of diminished responsibility, such as an animal in this case, and
claim we did nothing wrong.
Exo 22:6 If fire breaks out, and catches in thorns so that the stacks of
grain, or the standing grain, or the field are consumed; he who kindled
the fire shall surely make restitution-
"Breaks out" implies it gets out of control, burning beyond the
intended area within one property, catching thorns on fire and thereby
burning up harvested grain in time of harvest. The principle is that we
may unintentionally begin something which then ignites a third party, the
thorns, and this then causes huge damage. The fire in the standing grain
had in fact been kindled by the man who first kindled the fire in his own
territory. What we begin can have huge repercussions, because it is spread
further through a third party. And we must bear some responsibility, even
if the consequences were not envisaged by us initially. Thus a
relationship breakdown between two people within their own home may ignite
another person, who in turn spreads the breakdown on a massive scale, with
large scale damage. And thus many church divisions have come about.
Exo 22:7 If a man delivers to his neighbour money or stuff to keep, and it
is stolen out of the man’s house; if the thief is found, he shall pay
double-
But Zacchaeus paid back four times what he had stolen (Lk. 19:8). The
existence of God’s law shouldn’t inculcate a spirit of minimalism in us,
doing the letter of the law and no more. Rather if we perceive the
principles behind it, we will do far over and above what the letter of the
law requires.
Exo 22:8 If the thief isn’t found, then the master of the house shall come
near to God, to find out if he hasn’t put his hand to his neighbour’s
goods-
"God" is the elohim, the judges or priests who represented
God. In the context of these situations which required a yes or no
decision, it could be that the urim and thummim were used. These two
stones in the breastplate flashed out binary answers to requests, so truly
the case came "to God". We note how the law given in the wilderness
envisaged Israel soon living in houses in the promised land.
Exo 22:9 For every matter of trespass, whether it be for ox, for donkey,
for sheep, for clothing, or for any kind of lost thing, about which one
says, ‘This is mine’, the cause of both parties shall come before God. He
whom God condemns shall pay double to his neighbour-
‘God’ here refers to the judges or elders; to come before God’s
representative is to come before God. Hence GNB "the two people claiming
the property shall be taken to the place of worship". LXX "according to
every injury alleged... and every alleged loss".
Exo 22:10 If a man delivers to his neighbour a donkey, an ox, a sheep, or
any animal to keep, and it dies or is injured, or driven away, no man
seeing it-
This again is a commandment particularly relevant to the infamous
quarrels between herdsmen, which would have been common in the wilderness
journey. For Israel left Egypt with much cattle, whom they herded through
the desert.
Exo 22:11 the oath of Yahweh shall be between them both, whether he hasn’t
put his hand to his neighbour’s goods; and its owner shall accept it, and
he shall not make restitution-
The initial intention was that Israel would so fear Yahweh that an
oath before Him was assumed to be sufficient. But the Lord Jesus saw that
there was a strong tendency to swear falsely, and so He urges us not to
take such oaths, but to make our "yes" or "no" mean just that. This was in
fact demanding an even higher level of truthfulness.
Exo 22:12 But if it is stolen from him, he shall make restitution to its
owner-
The man who had his neighbour's animal with him was responsible for
it if it were stolen, but not if it were killed by wild animals (:13).
This might imply that the person was held responsible for finding the
thief and getting restitution from him.
Exo 22:13 If it is torn in pieces, let him bring it for evidence. He shall
not make good that which was torn-
The brothers allowed Joseph to be stolen away (Gen. 40:15), and then
presented his garment as evidence that he had been "torn in pieces" by
wild animals (s.w. Gen. 37:33; 44:28). So again we see that the essence of
the Mosaic law was known well before, but was now being codified formally.
Exo 22:14 If a man borrows anything of his neighbour’s, and it is injured,
or dies, its owner not being with it, he shall surely make restitution-
We see the internal consistency of the Biblical record in the concern
over the loss of the axe head (2 Kings 6:5), which was a situation
directly envisaged in the law here. See on :15.
Exo 22:15 If its owner is with it, he shall not make it good. If it is a
leased thing, it came for its lease-
The requirement to restore the lost or damaged borrowed item (:14)
was only if the owner wasn't present. If the owner were present when it
was lost or broken, then he would know that the item had not been stolen.
It was the kind of loss which anyone who hires things out must be prepared
to bear. The intention of :14 was therefore to cut off any possibility of
suspicion that the item had not in fact been genuinely lost, but rather
had been stolen. By all means, we too should seek to develop situations
whereby the possibility of suspicion is removed.
Exo 22:16 If a man entices a virgin who isn’t pledged to be married, and
lies with her, he shall surely pay a dowry for her to be his wife-
Here again we have a law which spoke directly to the personal
conscience of the individual Israelite. If a young couple slept with each
other and she didn't get pregnant, then it was only up to their conscience
as to whether they were obedient to this. We notice that there was no
unduly heavy condemnation for consensual premarital sex. That is not at
all to justify it, but we should note that the New Testament's heavy
condemnation of "fornication", Greek pornos, is not generally
referring to this. Rather is the reference often to the casual sex which
accompanied idol worship.
Exo 22:17 If her father utterly refuses to give her to him, he shall pay
money according to the dowry of virgins-
The amount of this dowry isn't defined. The father would have to set
the amount; but if he had refused to let the man marry his daughter, it
would surely have had to be fairly small. See on :16.
Exo 22:18 You shall not allow a sorceress to live-
The feminine form shows that a particular kind of female sorceress
was in view. "To live" is literally "to revive, to live again". If the
idea was simply that she must be killed, then the phrase used in :19 would
be used. Hence LXX "Ye shall not save the lives of sorcerers". It seems
something specific was in view which may not be immediately apparent to
us.
Exo 22:19 Whoever has sex with an animal shall surely be put to death-
Such was God's desire to teach that we are made in His image, and
must not act as animals, bringing ourselves down to their level as if we
are equal only to them. So the message for us is that we are to respect
ourselves as made in God's image, and not act on a purely animal level.
Exo 22:20 He who sacrifices to any god, except to Yahweh only, shall be
utterly destroyed-
"Utterly destroyed" is haram, the word used for devotion to
Yahweh. The person who didn't want to devote themselves to Yahweh was to
be devoted to Yahweh through execution. So we see the choice which remains
before us for all generations- to either totally devote ourselves to
Yahweh, or be devoted to Him through the second death of condemnation at
the last day.
Exo 22:21 You shall not wrong an alien, neither shall you oppress him, for
you were aliens in the land of Egypt-
Israel were to be motivated in kindness to others by the recollection
that they had been redeemed from Egypt; the memory of our redemption
through the waters of baptism [cp. the Red Sea] should have the same
effect upon us.
Exo 22:22 You shall not take advantage of any widow or fatherless child-
"Take advantage" is the word used of how the Egyptians had afflicted
the Hebrews (Ex. 1:11,12). Repeatedly, Israel were taught that they were
to remember their redemption from affliction; and redeem others from their
affliction on that basis, and never to afflict people as Egypt had done to
them.
Exo 22:23 If you take advantage of them at all, and they cry at all to Me,
I will surely hear their cry-
As discussed on :22, "take advantage" is the word used of how the
Egyptians had afflicted the Hebrews (Ex. 1:11,12). And God had heard the
cry of the afflicted Hebrews. It is absolutely natural that the abused
seek to abuse. But God is here asking His people to consciously break that
natural cycle, and to not abuse others even if we have been abused. Only
the experience of grace can motivate us to do this.
Exo 22:24 and My wrath will grow hot, and I will kill you with the sword;
and your wives shall be widows, and your children fatherless-
We see here God's extreme anger against all taking advantage of
others (:22,23). And there are many ways in which we can do this; by not
paying bills on time, or paying low wages to workers. What we do to others
in this way will in some form have to be our experience.
Exo 22:25 If you lend money to any of my people with you who is poor, you
shall not be to him as a creditor; neither shall you charge him interest-
In
some ways, Moses became more demanding in Deuteronomy, whilst at the same
time there emphasizing grace and love. Thus under the Law, Israel were not to
lend to their poor brother upon usury (Ex. 22:25; Lev. 25:37); but in
Deuteronomy Moses forbids them to do this to any Israelite (Dt.
23:19).
Israelites weren’t to lend to each other for interest. Yet Jesus tells the rejected man that he should’ve done at least this (Mt. 25:7)- as if to say that the man should’ve done at least something with what God had given him, even if it wasn’t the ideal, and even if it technically infringed God’s law. Indifference and selfish laziness with God’s gifts is therefore highlighted as being so reprehensible to Jesus.
Exo 22:26 If you take your neighbour’s garment as guarantee of a loan, you
shall restore it to him before the sun goes down,-
Moses does not repeat every single commandment in the Law. Rather are
there several themes of Moses in Deuteronomy presented. His choice of
which ones he does repeat indicates his feelings towards Israel. His
sensitivity towards the weakest and poorest of Israel comes out in this.
He was reaching the spirit of the Lord Jesus, who said that the weakest of
his brethren represented him (Mt. 25:40 Gk.). Thus Moses stresses how they
were not to go into the house of a poor man to take back his pledge (Dt.
24:10); Moses could enter into the sense of shame and embarrassment of the
poor man when a richer man enters his home. The Law in Exodus 22:26 did
not stipulate that the house of the poor man should not be entered; by
making this point in his farewell speech, Moses was showing his
sensitivity, his ability now to enter into the feelings of the poorest of
God's people. Indeed, the whole passage in Deuteronomy (Dt. 24:6-17) about
pledges is quite an expansion upon what the Law actually said in Ex. 22.
And this from a man who could have been the king of Egypt, who could have
had the world. What marvellous similarity with our Lord!
Exo 22:27 for that is his only covering, it is his garment for his skin.
What would he sleep in? It will happen, when he cries to Me, that I will
hear, for I am gracious-
Israel had cried to God in Egypt, and had been heard, by His grace.
And they were to respond likewise. They were to give nobody any reason to
cry to God because of how they were being oppressed by their brothers. And
yet many are those who have cried to God in pain at how their brethren
have treated them, through excluding them or judging them. God is
extremely sensitive to the suffering of the abused; He could imagine the
poor man shivering at night because his warm jacket was being held by his
creditor.
Lev. 25:38 reasons that because of Israel's experience of the Red Sea
redemption, therefore they were to have a generous spirit to their
brother. Because the Egyptians were hard taskmasters, and Israel had been
graciously saved from them, therefore they were not to be hard on
each other (Lev. 25:40). If the oppressed [as Israel were oppressed] cry
out unto you [as Israel cried out for their affliction], you must hear
them, otherwise God will hear them and punish you, as if you are the
Egyptian taskmaster (Ex. 22:24-27). Indeed, the whole Law of Moses is shot
through with direct and indirect reference to the Red Sea experience. It
was as if this was to be the motivator for their obedience and upholding
of the culture of kindness which the Law sought to engender (Lev. 23, 24;
Dt. 17:7; 24:19-24). And our experience of redemption from this world
ought to have the same effect.
Exo 22:28 You shall not blaspheme God, nor curse a ruler of your
people-
Clearly the elohim, rendered "God", were the rulers of the
people. The two are here placed in parallel. Paul understood 'cursing' as
threatening a person with Divine judgment and calling them names like
'hypocrite' (Acts 23:3,5).
Exo 22:29 You shall not delay to offer from your harvest and from the
outflow of your presses. You shall give the firstborn of your sons to Me-
"The outflow" refers to liquid products. When you perceive an opportunity to do the Lord's service, respond
immediately. Say yes straight away. See it as another opportunity for "redeeming the time".
This is a major Biblical theme. Israel were not to delay in offering their
firstfruits to God (Ex. 22:29), lest their intentions weren't translated
into practice. The disciples immediately left the ship, simply put their
nets down and followed (Mt. 4:20,22); Matthew left his opened books and
queue of clients in the tax office and walked out never to return (Lk.
5:17,18 implies). There is a marked theme in the NT of men and women
hearing the Gospel and immediately responding by accepting baptism.
Exo 22:30 You shall do likewise with your cattle and with your sheep.
Seven days it shall be with its mother, then on the eighth day you shall
give it to Me-
This implies that there would be local sanctuaries (as Ex. 20:24);
the intention was not that they should travel up to Jerusalem every time
an animal gave birth to its firstborn. Animals often died after birth, and
it was only by the eighth day that it was apparent whether or not it was
deformed. This was to remind them that they were to offer the best to God,
and not to offer that which cost them nothing (2 Sam. 24:24).
Exo 22:31 You shall be holy men to Me, therefore you shall not eat any
flesh that is torn by animals in the field. You shall cast it to the dogs-
This command wasn’t only for hygienic reasons. God wished to
encourage His people to have a healthy work ethic, not taking short cuts,
but eating animals they had raised themselves for that purpose. We live in
a society where laziness and trying to live for free has become almost an
art form. We cannot ultimately get around the curse, that we shall eat
only as a result of the sweat of our own labour. We have to accept our
humanity and our fallen condition, looking for the lifting of the curse in
God’s future Kingdom.
Previous Chapter
