Text -- Exodus 21:28-36 (NET)

Laws about Animals

21:28 “If an ox gores a man or a woman so that either dies, then the ox must surely be stoned and its flesh must not be eaten, but the owner of the ox will be acquitted. 21:29 But if the ox had the habit of goring, and its owner was warned, and he did not take the necessary precautions, and then it killed a man or a woman, the ox must be stoned and the man must be put to death. 21:30 If a ransom is set for him, then he must pay the redemption for his life according to whatever amount was set for him. 21:31 If the ox gores a son or a daughter, the owner will be dealt with according to this rule. 21:32 If the ox gores a male servant or a female servant, the owner must pay thirty shekels of silver, and the ox must be stoned. 21:33 “If a man opens a pit or if a man digs a pit and does not cover it, and an ox or a donkey falls into it, 21:34 the owner of the pit must repay the loss. He must give money to its owner, and the dead animal will become his. 21:35 If the ox of one man injures the ox of his neighbor so that it dies, then they will sell the live ox and divide its proceeds, and they will also divide the dead ox. 21:36 Or if it is known that the ox had the habit of goring, and its owner did not take the necessary precautions, he must surely pay ox for ox, and the dead animal will become his.

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

JFB: Exo 21:28-36

For the purpose of sanctifying human blood, and representing all injuries affecting life in a serious light, an animal that occasioned death was to be killed or suffer punishment proportioned to the degree of damage it had caused. Punishments are still inflicted on this principle in Persia and other countries of the East; and among a rude people greater effect is thus produced in inspiring caution, and making them keep noxious animals under restraint, than a penalty imposed on the owners.

JFB: Exo 21:30

Blood fines are common among the Arabs as they were once general throughout the East. This is the only case where a money compensation, instead of capital punishment, was expressly allowed in the Mosaic law.

Clarke: Exo 21:28

If an ox gore a man - It is more likely that a bull is here intended, as the word signifies both, see Exo 22:1; and the Septuagint translate the שור shor of the original by ταυρος, a bull. Mischief of this kind was provided against by most nations. It appears that the Romans twisted hay about the horns of their dangerous cattle, that people seeing it might shun them; hence that saying of Horace. Sat., lib. i., sat. 4, ver. 34: Faenum habet in cornu, longe fuge . "He has hay on his horns; fly for life!"The laws of the twelve tables ordered, That the owner of the beast should pay for what damages he committed, or deliver him to the person injured. See Clarke’ s note on Exo 22:1

Clarke: Exo 21:28

His flesh shall not be eaten - This served to keep up a due detestation of murder, whether committed by man or beast; and at the same time punished the man as far as possible, by the total loss of the beast.

Clarke: Exo 21:30

If there be laid on him a sum of money - the ransom of his life - So it appears that, though by the law he forfeited his life, yet this might be commuted for a pecuniary mulct, at which the life of the deceased might be valued by the magistrates.

Clarke: Exo 21:32

Thirty shekels - Each worth about three shillings English; see Gen 20:16; Gen 23:15. So, counting the shekel at its utmost value, the life of a slave was valued at four pounds ten shillings. And at this price these same vile people valued the life of our blessed Lord; see Zec 11:12, Zec 11:13; Mat 26:15. And in return, the justice of God has ordered it so, that they have been sold for slaves into every country of the universe. And yet, strange to tell, they see not the hand of God in so visible a retribution!

Clarke: Exo 21:33

And if a man shall open a pit, or - dig a pit - That is, if a man shall open a well or cistern that had been before closed up, or dig a new one; for these two cases are plainly intimated: and if he did this in some public place where there was danger that men or cattle might fall into it; for a man might do as he pleased in his own grounds, as those were his private right. In the above case, if he had neglected to cover the pit, and his neighbor’ s ox or ass was killed by falling into it, he was to pay its value in money. Exo 21:33 and Exo 21:34 seem to be out of their places. They probably should conclude the chapters, as, where they are, they interrupt the statutes concerning the goring ox, which begin at Exo 21:28

These different regulations are as remarkable for their justice and prudence as for their humanity. Their great tendency is to show the valuableness of human life, and the necessity of having peace and good understanding in every neighborhood; and they possess that quality which should be the object of all good and wholesome laws - the prevention of crimes. Most criminal codes of jurisprudence seem more intent on the punishment of crimes than on preventing the commission of them. The law of God always teaches and warns, that his creatures may not fall into condemnation; for judgment is his strange work, i.e., one reluctantly and seldom executed, as this text is frequently understood.

Calvin: Exo 21:28

28.=== If === an ox gore a man. Moses now descends even to the brute animals, so that, if they injured any one, by their punishment men may be more and more deterred from shedding blood. If, therefore, a goring ox have killed a man, he commands that it should be stoned, and that its carcass should be thrown away as abominable. Though censorious persons mock at this law, as if it were childish to punish a wretched animal, in which there is no criminality, their insolence requires but a brief refutation. For, since oxen were created for man’s good, so we need not wonder that their death, as well as their life, should be made to contribute to the public advantage. If, then, an ox that had killed a, man should be kept, men would undoubtedly grow hardened in cruelty by beholding it; and to eat its flesh, would be almost the same thing as eating the flesh of man. The cruelty of men, therefore, could not better be restrained, so that they should hold the murder of each other in abhorrence, than by thus avenging a man’s death. In the second place, God proceeds further, condemning the master of the ox himself to death, if he had been previously admonished to beware; for such a warning takes away the pretext of ignorance; nor should the punishment seem to be severe for gross neglect, because to give free outlet to dangerous beasts is equivalent to compassing men’s death. He who knowingly and willfully exposes the life of his brother to peril, is justly accounted his murderer. The exception which is finally added, at first sight contains a kind of contradiction, because it was forbidden by the Law to compound with a murderer for money. But inasmuch as a delinquency ( delictum) differs from a crime, although it was unlawful to covenant with murderers for the remission of their punishment, still the judges were permitted on their hearing of the case, to mitigate it, if a man were excused by his unconsciousness or inadvertency. This, then, is a special exception, which permits the judges to distinguish between the nature of offenses; viz., that, if they discovered a man not to be worthy of death, they should still punish his negligence by a pecuniary fine.

Calvin: Exo 21:31

31.=== Whether === he have gored a son. I know not whether they are correct who refer this to age, as if any young persons of either sex were meant by the words son and daughter; but I do not reject this opinion. Still Moses seems to extend the law, as if, in case a butting ox had killed its owner’s son, the father himself should be subject to the punishment, for not having taken more care of his children. It might, however, be doubted, whether it would be just to condemn to death a father already weighed down by the loss of his child; still it affords a useful example, that parents should not escape with impunity, if their sons or daughters should die by their fault.

Calvin: Exo 21:32

32.=== If === the ox shall push a man-servant. It is not unreasonable that the punishment for the death of a slave should now be set at less than for that of a free-man. As regarded the crime of voluntary murder, there was no distinction between slaves and masters; but in a case of mischance ( delicto) the severity might in some degree be mitigated; especially when the stoning of the ox sufficiently availed for bringing murder into detestation. God, therefore, showed admirable moderation in condemning the negligence of the master to be punished by the payment of thirty shekels; whilst He proposed the ox as an example, and reminded all by its death, how very precious in His sight is human blood.

Calvin: Exo 21:33

33.And if a man shall open a pit He enumerates still more cases of damage inflicted, in which restitution is to be demanded of the person who gave occasion for the occurrence. First, it is said, If a man shall open a pit, or cistern, and not cover it, and an animal shall fall into it, he is bound to pay its value; and justly, since his carelessness approaches to actual guilt. Here, again, we see how God would have all men to be anxious for their neighbor’s advantage; yet, inasmuch as there was no fraud or malice in the case, he is permitted, after paying its price, to appropriate the carcass to himself. But, if one man’s ox should be killed by another’s, a most just appointment is made, viz., that, if it happened unexpectedly, and by sudden accident, they should divide the dead ox between them, and, having sold the other, each should take half the price; but if the ox was a savage one, that its owner should undergo a greater penalty by paying its full price; because he ought to have anticipated the mischief, and thus was scarcely so kind as he should have been, giving occasion to the injury.

TSK: Exo 21:28

the ox : Exo 21:32; Gen 9:5, Gen 9:6; Lev 20:15, Lev 20:16

TSK: Exo 21:29

his owner also : Deu 21:1-9

TSK: Exo 21:30

for the ransom : Exo 21:22, Exo 30:12; Num 35:31-33; Pro 13:8

TSK: Exo 21:31

judgment : or, sentence, Exo 21:31

TSK: Exo 21:32

Gen 37:28; Zec 11:12, Zec 11:13; Mat 26:15, Mat 27:3-9; Phi 2:7

and the ox : Exo 21:28, Exo 21:29

TSK: Exo 21:33

Psa 9:15, Psa 119:85; Pro 28:10; Ecc 10:8; Jer 18:20, Jer 18:22

TSK: Exo 21:34

Exo 21:29, Exo 21:30, Exo 22:6, Exo 22:14

TSK: Exo 21:36

Exo 21:29

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: Exo 21:28-32

The animal was slain as a tribute to the sanctity of human life (Compare the marginal references and Gen 4:11). It was stoned, and its flesh was treated as carrion. Guilty negligence on the part of its owner was reckoned a capital offence, to be commuted for a fine.

In the case of a slave, the payment was the standard price of a slave, thirty shekels of silver. See Lev 25:44-46; Lev 27:3, and the marginal references for the New Testament application of this fact.

Barnes: Exo 21:33-34

The usual mode of protecting a well in the East was probably then, as now, by building round it a low circular wall.

Barnes: Exo 21:35-36

The dead ox in this case, as well as in the preceding one, must have been worth no more than the price of the hide, as the flesh could not be eaten. See Lev 17:1-6.

Poole: Exo 21:28

Under which you are to understand any other creatures of like nature which hurt a man in such a dangerous manner, whether with their horns, or teeth, or feet; but he mentions only the ox or bull, and his goring with his horn, because this is most frequently done.

Ox shall be stoned partly, to prevent future mischiefs from that creature; partly, to punish its master for his negligence in not keeping it in; and principally, for man’ s admonition, for whom seeing the beasts were made, it is not strange nor unjust if it be destroyed for man’ s good. God would hereby show that he would not, and men should not, spare a wilful murderer.

His flesh shall not be eaten both because it was forbidden food, its blood being not let out; and for the punishment of the owner, who was hereby hindered from the sale of it, to beget in all the greater detestation of murderers, when they observe the poor beast upon this account accursed, and therefore not to be touched or tasted.

Poole: Exo 21:29

It hath been testified which the Jews say was to be done thrice, and before the magistrate.

A man or a woman to wit, an Israelite, or a stranger who is free, by comparing this with Exo 21:32 .

Poole: Exo 21:30

If there be laid on him either by the avenger of blood, the next akin to the party slain, who is willing to exchange the punishment; or by the judge, who may discern some circumstances which may much lessen the crime, as if an ox had broken his cords wherewith he was tied, or broke forth through the carelessness or wickedness of his servant to whose care he was committed.

Poole: Exo 21:31

A son or a daughter names signifying their tender age, in respect of the man or woman , Exo 21:29 . And this is added, lest the foregoing sense should be restrained to their parents, whose lives were more precious, and therefore their loss greater.

Poole: Exo 21:32

The half the freeman’ s price . See Poole on "Mat 26:5" .

Poole: Exo 21:33

If a man shall either

open an old pit which hath been covered with earth; or

dig a new

pit to wit, in a public way, as the reason of the law shows; for if it were done in a man’ s own house or ground, there was no danger of such an accident, except the beast transgressed his bounds, and then the man was not culpable.

Poole: Exo 21:34

The owner of the pit i.e. he by whose hand or command it was made,

shall give money equal to the worth of the dead beast, in the opinion of the judge.

Poole: Exo 21:35

They shall divide the money not equally, for so the owner of the mischievous ox might be gainer by the mischief, his ox being much worse than that which was killed; but in such proportions as the judges shall think fit, considering the worth of the cattle, and the circumstances of the action.

Poole: Exo 21:36

Ox for ox an ox of equal value with that slain ox, or the price and worth of it.

Haydock: Exo 21:28

Stoned, that he may do no more harm, and that the owner may be punished at least by this loss. (Haydock) ---

Sentence was passed by the 23 judges. By the Roman law, the animal which struck a man was forfeited to him (Calmet); and its master had to make good all damages. ( Justinian iv. 9.)

Haydock: Exo 21:32

Bond man, &c., of any of those uncircumcised nations, (Jonathan) whom it was lawful to put to death; and hence their life was esteemed of less value. (Haydock) ---

Sicles. Septuagint, "didrachmas." This was the price of a slave, for which our Saviour was sold: that of a free-man was double. (Calmet)

Gill: Exo 21:28

If an ox gore a man or a woman, that they die,.... That are Israelites, of whom only Aben Ezra interprets it; but though they may be principally designed, yet not solely; for no doubt if one of another nation was gored to death by the ox of an Israelite, the same penalty would be inflicted, as follows:

then the ox shall be surely stoned; which is but an exemplification of the original law given to Noah and his sons, Gen 9:5, "at the hand of every beast will I require it"; i.e. the blood of the lives of men; which shows the care God takes of them, that even a beast must die that is the means of shedding man's blood:

and his flesh shall not be eaten; it being as an impure beast according to this sentence, as Maimonides ^l observes; and even though it might have been killed in a regular manner before it was stoned, it was not to be eaten; no, not even by Heathens, nor by dogs might it be eaten, as a dead carcass might by a proselyte of the gate, or a stranger; this might not be given nor sold to him; for, as Aben Ezra observes, all profit of them is here forbidden:

but the owner of the ox shall be quit; from punishment, as the last mentioned writer observes, from suffering death; he shall only suffer the loss of his ox: the Targum of Jonathan is,"he shall be quit from the judgment of slaughter (or condemnation of murder), and also from the price of a servant or maid,''which was thirty shekels, Exo 21:32.

Gill: Exo 21:29

But if the ox were wont to push with his horns in time past,.... Or "from or before yesterday, to the third" ^m that is, three days before, and had made three pushes, as Jarchi explains it:

and it hath been testified to his owner; by sufficient witnesses, who saw him push at people for three days past: the Targum of Jonathan is,"and it hath been testified to the face of his owner three days.''Concerning this testimony Maimonides ⁿ thus writes,"this is a testification, all that testify of it three days; but if he pushes, or bites, or kicks, or strikes even an hundred times on one day, this is no testification (not a sufficient one): three companies of witnesses testify of it in one day, lo, this is a doubt, whether it is a (proper) testimony or not; there is no testification but before the owner, and before the sanhedrim:"

and he hath not kept him in; in some enclosed place, house or field, not frequented by people, and where there was no danger of doing any hurt, if this care was not taken, after a proper testimony had been given of his vicious disposition. By the Roman laws ^o oxen that pushed with their horns were to have hay bound about them, that those that met them might beware of them; hence that of Horace ^p: but that he hath killed a man or a woman; by pushing and goring them with his horns, or any other way, as biting or kicking:

the ox shall be stoned; as is provided for the preceding law:

and his owner shall be put to death; since he was accessory to the death of the person killed, not keeping in his beast, when he had sufficient notice of his vicious temper: the Targum of Jonathan, and so other Jewish writers, interpret this of death sent upon him from heaven, or death by the immediate hand of God, as sudden death, or death by some disease inflicted, or before a man is fifty years of age; but there is no doubt to be made but this intends death by the civil magistrate, according to the original law, Gen 9:6.

Gill: Exo 21:30

If there be laid on him a sum of money,.... By the decree of the judges, as Aben Ezra, or which the sanhedrim of Israel have laid upon him; if his sentence of death is commuted for a fine, with the consent of the relations of the deceased, who in such a case are willing to show mercy, and take a fine instead of the person's death; supposing it was through carelessness and negligence, and not with any ill design that he did not keep up his ox from doing damage, after he had notice:

then he shall give for the ransom of his life whatever, is laid upon him; whatever mulct or fine he is amerced with by the court, instead of the sentence of death first pronounced. Of this ransom Maimonides ^q thus writes:"the ransom is according as the judges consider what is the price (or value) of him that is slain; (i.e. according to his rank, whether a noble or common man, a free man or a servant) all is according to the estimation of him that is slain.--To whom do they give the ransom? to the heirs of the slain; and if a woman is killed, the ransom is given to the heirs of her father's (family), and not to her husband.''

Gill: Exo 21:31

Whether he have gored a son, or have gored a daughter,.... A little son or daughter, and both Israelites, as Jarchi and Aben Ezra; this is observed, because only a man or woman are made mention of in Exo 21:29 persons grown up; and lest it should be thought that only adult persons were intended, this is added, to show that the same regard is had to little ones as to grown persons, should they suffer by an ox in like manner as men and women may. The Targum of Jonathan restrains this to a son or daughter of an Israelite; but the life of everyone, of whatsoever nation, is equally provided for, and guarded against by the original law of God:

according to this judgment shall it be done unto him; to the owner of the ox that has gored a child, male or female; that is, he shall be put to death, if he has been warned of the practice of his ox for three days past, and has took no care to keep him in; or he shall pay the ransom of his life, as it has been laid by the court, with the consent of the relations of the children.

Gill: Exo 21:32

If the ox shall push a manservant, or a maidservant,.... Which the Targum of Jonathan and Jarchi interpret of a Canaanitish servant, man or maid; but no doubt the same provision was made for an Hebrew servant, man or maid, as for a Gentile one:

he shall give unto their master thirty shekels of silver; that is, the owner of the ox shall pay so much to the masters of the servants for the loss they have sustained by his ox goring them; and Maimonides ^r observes, that"the ransom of servants, whether great or small, whether male or female, is fixed in the law, thirty shekels of good silver, whether the servant is worth a hundred pounds, or whether he is worth but a penny.''This was the price our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ was sold at; see Gill on Mat 26:15.

Gill: Exo 21:33

If a man shall open a pit,.... That has been dug in time past, and filled up again, or take the covering from it, and leave it uncovered: "or if a man shall dig a pit, and not cover it": a new one, in the street, as the Targum of Jonathan; or in a public place, as Jarchi and Aben Ezra; otherwise a man might dig one for water, in his own fields, in enclosed places, where there was no danger of cattle coming thither, and falling therein:

and an ox or an ass fall therein; or any other beast, as Jarchi observes; for these are mentioned only as instances, and are put for all others. Maimonides ^s says,"if a man digs a pit in a public place, and an ox or ass fall into it and die, though the pit is full of shorn wool, and the like, the owner of the pit is bound to pay the whole damage; and this pit (he says) must be ten hands deep; if it is less than that, and an ox, or any other beast or fowl fall into it and die, he is free,''

Gill: Exo 21:34

The owner of the pit shall make it good,.... Repair the loss of the ox or ass:

and give the money unto the owner of them: the price of them, what they are worth: the Targum of Jonathan is,"the owner of the pit shall pay the silver, he shall return to its owner the price of the ox or ass:"

and the dead beast shall be his; either the owner of the pit; who pays the full value for the ox or ass killed, which seems but reasonable; or"the injured person as Jarchi, for he says, they reckon or estimate the carcass, and he takes it for the price;''that is, for part of the price it is valued at.

Gill: Exo 21:35

And if one man's ox hurt another's, that he die,.... By pushing with his horns, or his body, or by biting with his teeth, as Jarchi, or by any way whatever:

then they shall sell the live ox, and divide the money; the Scripture speaks, as the same writer observes, of one of equal value, otherwise the man that had his ox killed might be greatly a gainer by it; for if his ox was a poor one, and of little value, and the ox that killed his a good one, of value greatly superior, which according to this law was to be sold, and the money divided between the two owners, the man that lost his ox might have double the worth of it, or more, which was not equitable. On the other hand, according to the Jewish canons ^t, the case stood thus,"when an ox of the value of one pound strikes an ox of the value of twenty, and kills him, and, lo, the carcass is of the value of four pounds, the owner of the ox is bound to pay him eight pounds, which is the half of the damage, (added to the half part of the price of the carcass,) but he is not bound to pay, but of the body of the ox which hurts, because it is said, "they shall sell the live ox"; wherefore if an ox of the value of twenty pieces of money should kill one of two hundred, and the carcass is valued at a pound, the master of the carcass cannot say to the master of the live ox, give me fifty pieces of money; but it will be said to him, lo, the ox which did the hurt is before thee, take him, and go thy way, although he is worth no more than a penny:"

and the dead ox also they shall divide; the money the carcass is worth; or it is sold for.

Gill: Exo 21:36

Or if it be known that the ox hath used to push in time past,.... If it is a plain case, and a thing well known in the neighbourhood, and there are witnesses enough to testify it, that it has yesterday, and for two or three days running, pushed with his horns men and cattle, as they have come in his way; see Gill on Exo 21:29.

and his owner hath not kept him in; took no care to prevent his doing mischief by putting him into a barn or out house, or into an enclosure, where he could do no damage to any:

he shall surely pay ox for ox; that is, he shall give as good an ox to him, whose ox has been killed by his, as that was, or pay him the full worth and value of it: and the dead shall be his own; shall not be divided as in the preceding case, but shall be the proprietor's wholly, that is, the sufferer's; because the owner of the vicious ox took no care of him, though it was well known he was mischievous, for which negligence he was punished this way.

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: Exo 21:28

¹ sn The point that this section of the laws makes is that one must ensure the safety of others by controlling the circumstances.

² tn Traditionally “ox,” but “bull” would also be suitable. The term may refer to one of any variety of large cattle.

³ tn Heb “and he dies”; KJV “that they die”; NAB, NASB “to death.”

⁴ tn The text uses סָקוֹל יִסָּקֵל (saqol yissaqel), a Qal infinitive absolute with a Niphal imperfect. The infinitive intensifies the imperfect, which here has an obligatory nuance or is a future of instruction.

NET Notes: Exo 21:29

¹ tn The Hophal perfect has the idea of “attested, testified against.”

² tn Heb “he was not keeping it” or perhaps guarding or watching it (referring to the ox).

NET Notes: Exo 21:30

¹ sn The family of the victim would set the amount for the ransom of the man guilty of criminal neglect. This practice was common in the ancient world, rare in Israel. If the family allowed the substitute price, then the man would be able to redeem his life.

NET Notes: Exo 21:31

¹ tn Heb “it”; the referent (the ox) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

² tn Heb “he”; the referent (the owner) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

³ tn Heb “according to this judgment it shall be done to him.”

NET Notes: Exo 21:32

¹ tn Heb “he”; the referent (the owner) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

² sn A shekel was a unit for measure by means of a scale. Both the weight and the value of a shekel of silver are hard to determine. “Though there is no certainty, the shekel is said to weigh about 11,5 grams” (C. Houtman, Exodus, 3:181). Over four hundred years earlier, Joseph was sold into Egypt for 20 shekels. The free Israelite citizen was worth about 50 shekels (Lev 27:3f.).

³ sn See further B. S. Jackson, “The Goring Ox Again [Ex. 21,28-36],” JJP 18 (1974): 55-94.

NET Notes: Exo 21:34

¹ tn The verb is a Piel imperfect from שָׁלַם (shalam); it has the idea of making payment in full, making recompense, repaying. These imperfects could be given a future tense translation as imperfects of instruction, but in the property cases an obligatory imperfect fits better – this is what he is bound or obliged to do – what he must do.

² tn Heb “silver.”

³ tn Here the term “animal” has been supplied.

NET Notes: Exo 21:35

¹ tn Literally “its silver” or “silver for it.”

² tn Heb “divide the dead.” The noun “ox” has been supplied.

NET Notes: Exo 21:36

¹ tn The construction now uses the same Piel imperfect (v. 34) but adds the infinitive absolute to it for emphasis.

² sn The point of this section (21:28-36) seems to be that one must ensure the safety of others by controlling one’s property and possessions. This section pertained to neglect with animals, but the message would have applied to similar situations. The people of God were to take heed to ensure the well-being of others, and if there was a problem, it had to be made right.

Geneva Bible: Exo 21:28

If an ox gore a man or a woman, that they die: then the ox shall be surely ^{( t )} stoned, and his flesh shall not be eaten; but the owner of the ox [shall be] quit.

^{( t )} If the beast be punished, much more shall the murderer.

Geneva Bible: Exo 21:30

If there be laid on him a ^{( u )} sum of money, then he shall give for the ransom of his life whatsoever is laid upon him.

^{( u )} By the next of the kindred of him that is so slain.

Geneva Bible: Exo 21:32

If the ox shall push a manservant or a maidservant; he shall give unto their master thirty ^{( x )} shekels of silver, and the ox shall be stoned.

^{( x )} Read (Gen 23:15).

Geneva Bible: Exo 21:34

The owner of the pit shall ^{( y )} make [it] good, [and] give money unto the owner of them; and the dead [beast] shall be his.

^{( y )} This law forbids not only to hurt, but to beware lest any be hurt.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: Exo 21:1-36

1 Laws for men servants.

5 For the servant whose ear is bored.

7 For women servants.

12 For manslaughter.

16 For stealers of men.

17 For cursers of parents.

18 For smiters.

22 For a hurt by chance.

28 For an ox that gores.

33 For him that is an occasion of harm.

MHCC: Exo 21:22-36

The cases here mentioned give rules of justice then, and still in use, for deciding similar matters. We are taught by these laws, that we must be very careful to do no wrong, either directly or indirectly. If we have done wrong, we must be very willing to make it good, and be desirous that nobody may lose by us.

Matthew Henry: Exo 21:22-36

Observe here,

I. The particular care which the law took of women with child, that no hurt should be done them which might occasion their mis-carrying. The law of nature obliges us to be very tender in that case, lest the tree and fruit be destroyed together, Exo 21:22, Exo 21:23. Women with child, who are thus taken under the special protection of the law of God, if they live in his fear, may still believe themselves under the special protection of the providence of God, and hope that they shall be saved in child-bearing. On this occasion comes in that general law of retaliation which our Saviour refers to, Mat 5:38, An eye for an eye. Now, 1. The execution of this law is not hereby put into the hands of private persons, as if every man might avenge himself, which would introduce universal confusion, and make men like the fishes of the sea. The tradition of the elders seems to have put this corrupt gloss upon it, in opposition to which our Saviour commands us to forgive injuries, and not to meditate revenge, Mat 5:39. 2. God often executes it in the course of his providence, making the punishment, in many cases, to answer to the sin, as Jdg 1:7; Isa 33:1; Hab 2:13; Mat 26:52. 3. Magistrates ought to have an eye to this rule in punishing offenders, and doing right to those that are injured. Consideration must be had of the nature, quality, and degree of the wrong done, that reparation may be made to the party injured, and others deterred from doing the like; either an eye shall go for an eye, or the forfeited eye shall be redeemed by a sum of money. Note, He that does wrong must expect one way or other to receive according to the wrong he has done, Col 3:25. God sometimes brings men's violent dealings upon their own heads (Psa 7:16); and magistrates are in this the ministers of the justice, that they are avengers (Rom 13:4), and they shall not bear the sword in vain.

II. The care God took of servants. If their masters maimed them, though it was only striking out a tooth, that should be their discharge, Exo 21:26, Exo 21:27. This was intended, 1. To prevent their being abused; masters would be careful not to offer them any violence, lest they should lose their service. 2. To comfort them if they were abused; the loss of a limb should be the gaining of their liberty, which would do something towards balancing both the pain and disgrace they underwent. Nay,

III. Does God take care for oxen? Yes, it appears by the following laws in this chapter that he does, for our sakes, 1Co 9:9, 1Co 9:10. The Israelites are here directed what to do,

1. In case of hurt done by oxen, or any other brute-creature; for the law, doubtless, was designed to extend to all parallel cases. (1.) As an instance of God's care of the life of man (though forfeited a thousand times into the hands of divine justice), and in token of his detestation of the sin of murder. If an ox killed any man, woman, or child, the ox was to be stoned (Exo 21:28); and, because the greatest honour of the inferior creatures is to be serviceable to man, the criminal is denied that honour: his flesh shall not be eaten. Thus God would keep up in the minds of his people a rooted abhorrence of the sin of murder and every thing that was barbarous. (2.) To make men careful that none of their cattle might do hurt, but that, by all means possible, mischief might be prevented. If the owner of the beast knew that he was mischievous, he must answer for the hurt done, and, according as the circumstances of the case proved him to be more or less accessory, he must either be put to death or ransom his life with a sum of money, Exo 21:29-32. Some of our ancient books make this felony, by the common law of England, and give this reason, "The owner, by suffering his beast to go at liberty when he knew it to be mischievous, shows that he was very willing that hurt should be done."Note, It is not enough for us not to do mischief ourselves, but we must take care that no mischief be done by those whom it is in our power to restrain, whether man or beast.

2. In case of hurt done to oxen, or other cattle. (1.) If they fall into a pit, and perish there, he that opened the pit must make good the loss, Exo 21:33, Exo 21:34. Note, We must take heed not only of doing that which will be hurtful, but of doing that which may be so. It is not enough not to design and devise mischief, but we must contrive to prevent mischief, else we become accessory to our neighbours' damage. Mischief done in malice is the great transgression; but mischief done through negligence, and for want of due care and consideration, is not without fault, but ought to be reflected upon with great regret, according as the degree of the mischief is: especially we must be careful that we do nothing to make ourselves accessory to the sins of others, by laying an occasion of offence in our brother's way, Rom 14:13. (2.) If cattle fight, and one kill another, the owners shall equally share in the loss, Exo 21:35. Only if the beast that had done the harm was known to the owner to have been mischievous he shall answer for the damage, because he ought either to have killed him or kept him up, Exo 21:36. The determinations of these cases carry with them the evidence of their own equity, and give such rules of justice as were then, and are still, in use, for the decision of similar controversies that arise between man and man. But I conjecture that these cases might be specified, rather than others (though some of them seem minute), because they were then cases in fact actually depending before Moses; for in the wilderness where they lay closely encamped, and had their flocks and herds among them, such mischiefs as these last mentioned were likely enough to occur. That which we are taught by these laws is that we should be very careful to do no wrong, either directly or indirectly; and that, if we have done wrong, we must be very willing to make satisfaction, and desirous that nobody may lose by us.

Keil-Delitzsch: Exo 21:18-32

Fatal blows and the crimes placed on a par with them are now followed in simple order by the laws relating to bodily injuries .

Exo 21:18-19

If in the course of a quarrel one man should hit another with a stone or with his fist, so that, although he did not die, he " lay upon his bed, "i.e., became bedridden; if the person struck should get up again and walk out with his staff, the other would be innocent, he should " only give him his sitting and have him cured, "i.e., compensate him for his loss of time and the cost of recovery. This certainly implies, on the one hand, that if the man died upon his bed, the injury was to be punished with death, according to Exo 21:12; and on the other hand, that if he died after getting up and going out, no further punishment was to be inflicted for the injury done.

Exo 21:20-21

The case was different with regard to a slave. The master had always the right to punish or "chasten"him with a stick (Pro 10:13; Pro 13:24); this right was involved in the paternal authority of the master over the servants in his possession. The law was therefore confined to the abuse of this authority in outbursts of passion, in which case, " if the servant or the maid should die under his hand (i.e., under his blows), he was to be punished "( ינּקם נקם : "vengeance shall surely be taken"). But in what the נקם was to consist is not explained; certainly not in slaying by the sword, as the Jewish commentators maintain. The lawgiver would have expressed this by יוּמת מות . No doubt it was left to the authorities to determine this according to the circumstances. The law in Exo 21:12 could hardly be applied to a case of this description, although it was afterwards extended to foreigners as well as natives (Lev 24:21-22), for the simple reason, that it is hardly conceivable that a master would intentionally kill his slave, who was his possession and money. How far the lawgiver was from presupposing any such intention here, is evident from the law which follows in Exo 21:21, "Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two (i.e., remain alive), it shall not be avenged, for he is his money."By the continuance of his life, if only for a day or two, it would become perfectly evident that the master did not wish to kill his servant; and if nevertheless he died after this, the loss of the slave was punishment enough for the master. There is no ground whatever for restricting this regulation, as the Rabbins do, to slaves who were not of Hebrew extraction.

Exo 21:22-25

If men strove and thrust against a woman with child, who had come near or between them for the purpose of making peace, so that her children come out (come into the world), and no injury was done either to the woman or the child that was born,

(Note: The words ילדיה ויצאוּare rendered by the lxx καὶ ἐξέλθη τὸ παιδίον αὐτῆς μὴ ἐξεικονισμένον and the corresponding clause יהיה אסון ואםby ἐὰν δὲ ἐξεικονισμένον ᾖ ; consequently the translators have understood the words as meaning that the fruit, the premature birth of which was caused by the blow, if not yet developed into a human form, was not to be regarded as in any sense a human being, so that the giver of the blow was only required to pay a pecuniary compensation, - as Philo expresses it, "on account of the injury done to the woman, and because he prevented nature, which forms and shapes a man into the most beautiful being, from bringing him forth alive."But the arbitrary character of this explanation is apparent at once; for ילדonly denotes a child, as a fully developed human being, and not the fruit of the womb before it has assumed a human form. In a manner no less arbitrary אסוןhas been rendered by Onkelos and the Rabbins מותא, death, and the clause is made to refer to the death of the mother alone, in opposition to the penal sentence in Exo 21:23, Exo 21:24, which not only demands life for life, but eye for eye, etc., and therefore presupposes not death alone, but injury done to particular members. The omission of להּ, also, apparently renders it impracticable to refer the words to injury done to the woman alone.)

a pecuniary compensation was to be paid, such as the husband of the woman laid upon him, and he was to give it בּפללים by (by an appeal to) arbitrators. A fine is imposed, because even if no injury had been done to the woman and the fruit of her womb, such a blow might have endangered life. (For יצא roF( to go out of the womb, see Gen 25:25-26.) The plural ילדיה is employed for the purpose of speaking indefinitely, because there might possibly be more than one child in the womb. " But if injury occur (to the mother or the child), thou shalt give soul for soul, eye for eye,...wound for wound: "thus perfect retribution was to be made.

Exo 21:26-27

But the lex talionis applied to the free Israelite only, not to slaves. In the case of the latter, if the master struck out an eye and destroyed it, i.e., blinded him with the blow, or struck out a tooth, he was to let him go free, as a compensation for the loss of the member. Eye and tooth are individual examples selected to denote all the members, from the most important and indispensable down to the very least.

Exo 21:28-30

The life of man is also protected against injury from cattle (cf. Gen 9:5). " If an ox gore a man or a woman, that they die, the ox shall be stoned, and its flesh shall not be eaten; "because, as the stoning already shows, it was laden with the guilt of murder, and therefore had become unclean (cf. Num 35:33). The master or owner of the ox was innocent, sc., if his ox had not bee known to do so before. But if this were the case, " if his master have been warned ( בּבעליו הוּעד , lit., testimony laid against its master), and notwithstanding this he have not kept it in, "then the master was to be put to death, because through his carelessness in keeping the ox he had caused the death, and therefore shared the guilt. As this guilt, however, had not been incurred through an intentional crime, but had arisen simply from carelessness, he was allowed to redeem his forfeited life by the payment of expiation money ( כּפר , lit., covering, expiation, cf. Exo 30:12), " according to all that was laid upon him, "sc., by the judge.

Exo 21:31-32

The death of a son or a daughter through the goring of an ox was also to be treated in the same way; but that of a slave (man-servant or maid-servant) was to be compensated by the payment of thirty shekels of silver (i.e., probably the ordinary price for the redemption of a slave, as the redemption price of a free Israelite was fifty shekels, Lev 27:3) on the part of the owner of the ox; but the ox was to be killed in this case also. There are other ancient nations in whose law books we find laws relating to the punishment of animals for killing or wounding a man, but not one of them had a law which made the owner of the animal responsible as well, for they none of them looked upon human life in its likeness of God.

Keil-Delitzsch: Exo 21:33-36

Passing from life to property , in connection with the foregoing, the life of the animal, the most important possession of the Israelites, is first of all secured against destruction through carelessness. If any one opened or dug a pit or cistern, and did not close it up again, and another man's ox or ass (mentioned, for the sake of example, as the most important animals among the live stock of the Israelites) fell in and was killed, the owner of the pit was to pay its full value, and the dead animal to belong to him. If an ox that was not known to be vicious gored another man's ox to death, the vicious animal was to be sold, and its money (what it fetched) to be divided; the dead animal was also to be divided, so that both parties bore an equal amount of damage. If, on the other hand, the ox had been known to be vicious before, and had not been kept in, carefully secured, by its possessor, he was to compensate the owner of the one that had been killed with the full value of an ox, but to receive the dead one instead.

Constable: Exo 15:22--Lev 1:1

II. THE ADOPTION OF ISRAEL 15:22--40:38

The second major section of Exodus records the events associated with God's adoption of Israel as His chosen people. Having redeemed Israel out of slavery in Egypt He now made the nation His privileged son. Redemption is the end of one journey but the beginning of another.

Constable: Exo 19:1--24:12

B. The establishment of the Mosaic Covenant 19:1-24:11

The Lord had liberated Israel from bondage in Egypt, but now He adopted the nation into a special relationship with Himself.

"Now begins the most sublime section in the whole Book. The theme of this section is supremely significant, playing a role of decisive importance in the history of Israel and of humanity as a whole."³⁰⁶

At Sinai, Israel received the law and the tabernacle. The law expressed the obedience of God's redeemed people, and the tabernacle expressed their worship. Thus the law and the tabernacle deal with the two major expressions of the faith of the people redeemed by the grace and power of God.

The Mosaic Covenant is an outgrowth of the Abrahamic Covenant in the sense that it was a significant intimate agreement between God and Abraham's descendants. By observing it they could achieve their purpose as a nation. This purpose was to experience God's blessing and to be a blessing to all nations of the earth (Gen. 12:2). In contrast to the Abrahamic Covenant Israel had responsibilities to fulfill to obtain God's promised blessings (v. 5). It was, therefore, a conditional covenant. The Abrahamic Covenant--as well as the Davidic and New Covenants that contain expansions of the promises in the Abrahamic Covenant--was unconditional.

A further contrast is this.

"Whereas the Sinaitic covenant was based on an already accomplished act of grace and issued in stringent stipulations, the patriarchal covenant rested only on the divine promise and demanded of the worshipper only his trust (e.g., ch. 15:6)."³⁰⁷

"The covenant with Israel at Sinai is to bring Israel into a position of mediatorial service."³⁰⁸

"The major difference between the Mosaic covenant and the Abrahamic covenant is that the former was conditional and also was ad interim, that is, it was a covenant for a limited period, beginning with Moses and ending with Christ. . . .

"In contrast to the other covenants, the Mosaic covenant, though it had provisions for grace and forgiveness, nevertheless builds on the idea that obedience to God is necessary for blessing. While this to some extent is true in every dispensation, the Mosaic covenant was basically a works covenant rather than a grace covenant. The works principle, however, was limited to the matter of blessing in this life and was not related at all to the question of salvation for eternity."³⁰⁹

The Mosaic Covenant is the heart of the Pentateuch.

"First, it should be pointed out that the most prominent event and the most far-reaching theme in the Pentateuch, viewed entirely on its own, is the covenant between Yahweh and Israel established at Mount Sinai. . . .

"1) The author of the Pentateuch wants to draw a connecting link between God's original plan of blessing for mankind and his establishment of the covenant with Israel at Sinai. Put simply, the author sees the covenant at Sinai as God's plan to restore his blessing to mankind through the descendants of Abraham (Gen 12:1-3; Exod 2:24).

"2) The author of the Pentateuch wants to show that the Covenant at Sinai failed to restore God's blessing to mankind because Israel failed to trust God and obey his will.

"3) The author of the Pentateuch wants to show that God's promise to restore the blessing would ultimately succeed because God himself would one day give to Israel a heart to trust and obey God (Deut 30:1-10)."³¹⁰

The writer interrupted the narrative with blocks of other explanatory, qualifying, and cultic material in the chapters that follow.³¹¹

Narrative19:1-3a

Other19:3b-9

Narrative19:10-19a

Other19:19b-25

Narrative20:1-21

Other20:22-23:33

Narrative24:1-18

Other25-31

Narrative32-34

Constable: Exo 20:22--24:1

4. The stipulations of the Book of the Covenant 20:22-23:33

Israel's "Bill of Rights" begins here.

"It is worth noting that the stipulations are enfolded within matching frames that stress the exclusivity of Yahweh (Ex. 20:22-23; cf. 23:24-25, 32-33), His presence in specified places (20:24; cf. 23:14-17, 20, 28-31), and a proper protocol and ritual by which He may be approached by His servant people (20:24-26; cf. 23:18-19). It is within the context of a vertical covenant relationship, then, that the horizontal, societal, and interpersonal relationships of the Book of the Covenant take on their ultimate meaning."³⁴⁸

"The section before us has something to say about each of the ten commandments, even if only incidentally."³⁴⁹

Constable: Exo 21:1--23:13

The fundamental rights of the Israelites 21:1-23:12

It is very important to note that various law codes already existed in the ancient Near East before the giving of the Mosaic Covenant. These included laws in the Akkadian civilization located in Mesopotamia in the twentieth century B.C. (e.g., the Laws of Esnunna).³⁵⁴ There were also the laws in the Sumerian civilization, which replaced that of Akkad in the nineteenth century (e.g., the Code of Lipit-Istar).³⁵⁵ Moreover laws in the Babylonian civilization that followed the Sumerian in the eighteenth century (e.g., the Code of Hammurabi)³⁵⁶ existed, as did others. People living in the Near East at the time of the Exodus (fifteenth century) knew these laws and lived by them. The Mosaic Covenant presupposes this body of legal literature. It was not given as a comprehensive legal system to a people living without any laws. Rather it was a series of instructions God gave as Israel's king for His people to govern their behavior in certain specific matters. This fact explains why the Torah (Law of Moses, lit. instruction) does not contain fundamental instruction in many basic areas of law such as monogamy, for example. The instructions in the Law of Moses confirmed certain existing laws, cancelled other laws, and changed still others for the Israelites as the will of God for them.³⁵⁷

Moses revealed the laws that follow analogically (i.e., on the basis of the association of ideas). Analogical thinking has been more characteristic of eastern cultures and rational thinking more typical of western cultures throughout history generally speaking.

Constable: Exo 21:18-32

Bodily injuries 21:18-32

Moses cited five cases in this section, as was true in the preceding one (vv. 12-17).

21:18-19 The Torah made no distinction in the penalty an aggressor paid because of his intent (vv. 18-28). The inferior Hammurabi Code did by permitting the assailant to pay less damage if he claimed no intent to cause injury.³⁷⁰

21:20-21 As other people, slaves also enjoyed protection from murderers (v. 20; cf. v. 12). However the slave owner likewise experienced protection from execution if his punishment of a slave was not the direct cause of the slave's death. In this case the law regarded the loss of the slave as sufficient punishment of the master (v. 21).

21:22 Manslaughter of an unborn child carried a fine (v. 22). The reason seems to have rested on two assumptions. First, accidental killing is not as serious a crime as deliberate killing. Second, a fetus, though a human life, does not have the same status as a self-sufficient human being.³⁷¹

Pro-abortion advocates frequently appeal to Exodus 21:22 to support their claim that a fetus is not a person and, therefore, abortion is not murder.

"In other words, if you cause the death of the fetus, you merely pay a fine; if you cause the death of the woman, you lose your own life. Thus the Bible clearly shows that a fetus is not considered a person. If the fetus were considered to be a person, then the penalty for killing it would be the same as for killing the woman--death. Abortion, then, is not murder."³⁷²

However other Scriptures present the fetus as a person, a real human being (Job 10:8-12; 15:14; Ps. 51:5; 58:3; 139:13-16; Eccles. 11:5; Jer. 1:5; Gal. 1:15). This was the prevailing opinion in the ancient Near East as well.³⁷³

In contrast to other ancient Near Eastern law codes, the Torah made no differentiation on the basis of the woman's social class. It treated all equally. Also only the man who caused the injury was liable, not other members of his family who could suffer punishment for his offense and often did in other ancient Near Eastern societies. Principles explained elsewhere in the Torah determined the penalty the guilty party had to pay.³⁷⁴

21:23-25 God intended the "eye for eye" provision to limit punishment rather than giving free reign to it. The law of retaliation (lex talionis) became common in the ancient Near East. It sought to control the tendency of someone who had only suffered a minor injury to take major revenge. For example, a man might kill the person who beat up his brother (cf. Gen. 4:23). God forbade such excessive vengeance among His people, however, and limited them so that they should only exact equal payment for offenses committed against them and no more.

"This law of the talion, for a long time thought to be a more primitive kind of penalty, the reflection of a barbaric law form, has been shown by more recent comparative studies to be a later development, designed to remedy the inevitable abuses made possible by monetary payment for physical injury."³⁷⁵

"According to Num. xxxv 31 it is only from a willful murderer that it is forbidden to accept ransom [payment in place of punishment]; this implies that in all other instances the taking of a ransom is permitted. . . .

"This being so, the meaning here in our paragraph of the expression life for life [ v. 23] is that the one who hurts the woman accidentally shall be obliged to pay her husband the value of her life if she dies, and of her children if they die."³⁷⁶

21:26-27 In contrast to verse 27, the Code of Hammurabi prescribed that in such a case the offender had to pay the slave's master half the price of the slave.³⁷⁷ If a master blinded his own slave, this code required no penalty. The Torah shows greater concern for the slave. This law would have discouraged masters from physically abusing their slaves.

21:28-32 The Hammurabi Code specified the death of the son of the owner of the ox if the ox killed the son of another man (v. 31).³⁷⁸ The Torah required the owner's life or a ransom (v. 30). Note, too, that verses 31 and 32 value the lives of male and female slaves the same. The value of an adult slave under the Torah was 30 shekels of silver (cf. Matt. 26:15). Under the Code of Hammurabi it was 1/3 of a mina of silver (about 17 shekels).³⁷⁹ The ox also died by stoning. In this way God taught His people that they should view even slaves as created in His image (cf. Gen. 9:5). The goring ox (vv. 28-32) is the typical example of death caused by cattle or domestic animals.

"The fate of the ox gives clear evidence of the theological principle of the subordination of the animal world to human sovereignty. That the fatal goring of one ox by another required only compensation shows the relative insignificance of the animal-to-animal relationship (vv. 35-36)."³⁸⁰

Constable: Exo 21:33--22:16

Property damage 21:33-22:15

21:33-34 The pit represents a typical case of damage caused by an inanimate object or natural phenomenon. These specific cases doubtless served as precedents for other similar cases.

21:35-36 The law concerning a cattle fight is the same as one in the Laws of Esnunna, a twentieth century B.C. Akkadian law code.³⁸¹ However the Torah differentiated between an ox that gored habitually and one that did not in the case of one ox goring another. Thus the Torah showed higher regard for the rights and responsibilities of individuals.

22:1-4 According to the Code of Hammurabi a thief should die if he could not repay what he had stolen³⁸² or if he stole by breaking in.³⁸³ The Torah modified this law by annulling the death penalty and substituting the penalty of being sold into slavery in the first case. In the second case it annulled the death penalty and protected the life of the victim. Verses 1 and 4 of chapter 22 go together and deal with theft generally. The reason for the fivefold and fourfold penalties appears to be that the thief was taking the means of another person's livelihood.³⁸⁴ Verses 2 and 3, which deal with breaking and entering, address a special type of theft. Perhaps the law assumed that the thief's intent was murder as well as theft if he broke in at night but only theft if he broke in in daylight. If so, we might assume that if his intentions turned out to have been otherwise, the law would deal with him accordingly. The text gives only the typical case. Perhaps the logic was that at night the victim's life was in greater danger so the law allowed him to use more force in resisting his assailant than in the daytime.

22:5-6 The fourth case involves damage due to grazing or burning. In the first case (v. 5) the Torah required restitution from "the best" of the offender whereas the Code of Hammurabi required only restitution.³⁸⁵ These two cases further illustrate God's respect for the rights of others.

22:7-15 Next we have four cases involving property held in custody. In the Hammurabi Code the penalty for losing or allowing a thief to steal what someone else had committed to one's trust was death³⁸⁶ as was falsely accusing someone of this crime.³⁸⁷ The Torah required only twofold payment in both situations (v. 9).

Second, if what someone entrusted to his neighbor for safe keeping perished by accident (vv. 10-13) the neighbor was not responsible to make restitution. This was the law under the Code of Hammurabi too.³⁸⁸

Third, if someone borrowed something and it then suffered damage or it died (v. 14-15a) the borrower was responsible to make restitution. This was the case unless the owner (lender) was present when the damage or death took place. In that case the lender was responsible for his own property.

Fourth, if someone rented something and then damaged it or it died (v. 15b) the borrower was not responsible to make restitution since the fee he had paid covered his liability. The Code of Hammurabi specified no liability in either of these last two cases.³⁸⁹

Guzik: Exo 21:1-36

Exodus 21 - Laws To Direct Judges

A. Laws regarding servitude.

1. (1) These are the judgments.

"Now these are the judgments which you shall set before them:

a. Which you shall set before them: These next three chapters present laws establishing precedent for the legal system of Israel, the judges appointed by Moses.

2. (2-4) The general law concerning Hebrew slaves (indentured servants).

"If you buy a Hebrew servant, he shall serve six years; and in the seventh he shall go out free and pay nothing. If he comes in by himself, he shall go out by himself; if he comes in married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master has given him a wife, and she has borne him sons or daughters, the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself.

a. If you buy a Hebrew servant: "The first words of God from Sinai had declared that He was Jehovah Who brought them out of slavery. And in this remarkable code, the first person whose rights are dealt with is the slave." (Chadwick)

b. A Hebrew servant: There were four basic ways a Hebrew might become a slave to another Hebrew.

· In extreme poverty, they might sell their liberty (Leviticus 25:39).

· A father might sell his children into servitude (Exodus 21:7).

· In the case of bankruptcy, a man might become servant to his creditors (2 Kings 4:1).

· If a thief had nothing with which to pay proper restitution (Exodus 22:3-4).

c. He shall serve six years; and in the seventh he shall go out free and pay nothing: In such cases, the servitude was never obligated to be life-long. The Hebrew servant worked for six years and then was set free. At the end of the six years, went out with what he came in with. If the master provided a wife (and therefore children), the wife and children had to stay with the master or be redeemed.

3. (5-6) The bond-slave: a willing slave for life.

"But if the servant plainly says, 'I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free,' then his master shall bring him to the judges. He shall also bring him to the door, or to the doorpost, and his master shall pierce his ear with an awl; and he shall serve him forever.

a. But if the servant plainly says, "I love my master": If, after the six years of servitude, a servant wished to make a life-long commitment to his master - in light of the master's goodness and his blessings for the servant - he could, through this ceremony, make a life-long commitment to his master.

i. This commitment was not motivated by debt or obligation, only by love for the master.

b. His master shall pierce his ear with an awl: In the ceremony, the servant's ear would be pierced - opened - with an awl, in the presence of witnesses - then, he shall serve him for ever.

i. Psalms 40:6 speaks of this ceremony taking place between the Father and the Son, where the Psalmist spoke prophetically for the Messiah: Sacrifice and offering You did not desire; my ears You have opened. Jesus was a perfect bond-slave to the Father (Philippians 2:7).

c. He shall serve him forever: Jesus gave us the right to be called friends instead of servants (John 15:15). Yet the writers of the New Testament found plenty of glory in simply being considered bondservants of Jesus (Romans 1:1; James 1:1; 2 Peter 1:1; Jude 1:1).

i. Pagans had a custom of branding the slave with the name or the sign of the owner. Paul referred to himself as just such a slave in Galatians 6:17: From now on, let no one trouble me, for I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus. Paul was a slave for life to Jesus.

4. (7-11) The rights of female maid-servants.

"And if a man sells his daughter to be a female slave, she shall not go out as the male slaves do. If she does not please her master, who has betrothed her to himself, then he shall let her be redeemed. He shall have no right to sell her to a foreign people, since he has dealt deceitfully with her. And if he has betrothed her to his son, he shall deal with her according to the custom of daughters. If he takes another wife, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, and her marriage rights. And if he does not do these three for her, then she shall go out free, without paying money.

a. If a man sells his daughter to be a female slave: The maid-servant was bought, but not really to be a slave, but to be the master's wife or the wife of the master's son one day.

b. He shall let her be redeemed: If her master did not marry her, or decided not to give her to his son, the master was still obligated to respect her rights under God's law.

c. He shall not diminish her food, her clothing, and her marriage rights: The idea of women - and women of lower classes - having such rights, respected by God and society was revolutionary in an age when women were usually regarded as property.

B. Laws regarding violence and disability.

1. (12-14) Appropriate punishment for both murder and manslaughter.

"He who strikes a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death. However, if he did not lie in wait, but God delivered him into his hand, then I will appoint for you a place where he may flee. But if a man acts with premeditation against his neighbor, to kill him by treachery, you shall take him from My altar, that he may die.

a. He who strikes a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death: The principle for capital punishment goes back to Genesis 9:6: Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed; for in the image of God He made man. The right for the state to wield the sword of execution is also stated in the New Testament (Romans 13:3-4).

b. If he did not lie in wait . . . if a man acts with premeditation: The issue is clearly one of premeditation and treachery. God did not place crimes of passion or neglect on the same plane as crimes of premeditation and treachery.

c. You shall take him from My altar, that he may die: The principle of punishing murderers is so important to God that He denied murderers refuge at His altar.

i. God said also that unpunished murderers defiled the land: Moreover you shall take no ransom for the life of a murderer who is guilty of death, but he shall surely be put to death . . . So you shall not pollute the land where you are; for blood defiles the land, and no atonement can be made for the land, for the blood that is shed on it, except by the blood of him who shed it. Therefore do not defile the land which you inhabit, in the midst of which I dwell; for I the LORD dwell among the children of Israel. (Numbers 35:31, 33-34)

ii. Therefore, there must be no mercy towards the "first-degree" murderer. You shall take him from My altar, that he may die refers to a practice common among many pagan cultures, where a criminal - even a murderer - could find refuge at the altar of a god, and as long as he stayed in the temple, he was given sanctuary. God here says that even if a first-degree murderer comes to His altar, he is to be punished.

d. Then I will appoint for you a place where he may flee: Later (Numbers 35 and Joshua 20) God commanded and Israel made cities of refuge - a place where he may flee - cities where one could flee in a case of manslaughter, and be protected until his case was properly heard.

2. (15-17) Laws concerning murder of a parent.

"And he who strikes his father or his mother shall surely be put to death. He who kidnaps a man and sells him, or if he is found in his hand, shall surely be put to death. And he who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death.

a. He who strikes his father or mother: Strikes must be taken in the context of Exodus 21:12, which says He who strikes a man so that he dies. A child who murders, or attempts the murder of a parent, is to receive capital punishment.

b. He who kidnaps a man and sells him, or if he is found in his hand, shall surely be put to death: Kidnapping was also considered a capital offense. In the eyes of God, criminally enslaving a man was not far from murdering him.

c. He who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death: The idea is of an adult child who threatens their parent. Though this law is severe, it preserves a critical foundation for civilized society: respect between generations.

i. It also has a built-in protection for the rights of the child, according to Deuteronomy 21:18-21. This passage states that the parent did not have the right to carry out this punishment, but they had to bring the accused child before the elders and judges of the city. This meant that the parent - against all contemporary custom - did not have the absolute power of life and death over their children. As a practical matter, the judges of Israel rarely if ever administered the death penalty in such cases, yet the child was held accountable.

ii. Yet the law discouraging conflict between generations is important. The elder generation, as they grow older, is at the mercy of the younger generation. If the younger generation is allowed to carry on open warfare with the older generation, the very foundations of society are shaken.

iii. Unfortunately, modern euthanasia laws allow murder of the older generation by the younger generation - all approved by law.

3. (18-19) Regarding compensation for personal injury.

"If men contend with each other, and one strikes the other with a stone or with his fist, and he does not die but is confined to his bed, if he rises again and walks about outside with his staff, then he who struck him shall be acquitted. He shall only pay for the loss of his time, and shall provide for him to be thoroughly healed.

a. If men contend with each other, and one strikes the other: If, because of a conflict, a man is unable to work (confined to his bed) because of an injury received at the hand of another, the one who injured him must pay compensation to the man and his family.

b. If he rises again and walks about outside with his staff: However, if the man can recover from the injury, the guilty party was only required to pay for his medical recovery and for his lost time.

c. And shall provide for him to be thoroughly healed: Though these principles have been abused by the greedy in our modern day, the principles themselves still stand.

4. (20-21) Regarding the beating and death of a servant.

"And if a man beats his male or female servant with a rod, so that he dies under his hand, he shall surely be punished. Notwithstanding, if he remains alive a day or two, he shall not be punished; for he is his property.

a. So that he dies under his hand, he shall surely be punished: This shows that in ancient Israel servants could be "murdered." In other cultures, the master was held blameless if he murdered a servant, because the servant was not considered a person.

b. Notwithstanding, if he remains alive a day or two, he shall not be punished: Yet the master not be punished if the servant did not die immediately. Perhaps this is a way to determine intent, with the idea that if the servant lived for several days, it was an indication that the master must not have intended to murder him.

i. If the slave died, the loss of property was thought to be penalty enough to the master.

c. He shall surely be punished . . . he is his property: These laws together paint a picture of the ideas behind slavery in ancient Israel. A servant was a person (who could not be murdered), yet they were also considered the property of the master.

i. Spiritually speaking, we are the property of whom we serve. We are either slaves to Satan or to Jesus Christ.

5. (22-25) Laws of retribution.

"If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman's husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

a. He shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman's husband imposes on him: This is an example of a case of retribution, where a pregnant woman is injured in a conflict, and she gives birth prematurely. A penalty is only to be assessed if there is lasting damage.

i. If no lasting damage results, there are no damages awarded. Here, God recognizes that some bad things just happen, and we get over them - and move on.

b. But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye: If lasting damage results, retribution is always limited by the eye for an eye principle. This law was meant to block our desire for vengeance, and not given as a license for revenge.

i. Our tendency is to want to do more to the offending party than what they have done to us. This principle can apply to our modern practice of assessing huge punitive damages in lawsuits, and this law presents the principle that only the loss itself is to be compensated.

6. (26-27) The law of retribution as it regards masters and servants.

"If a man strikes the eye of his male or female servant, and destroys it, he shall let him go free for the sake of his eye. And if he knocks out the tooth of his male or female servant, he shall let him go free for the sake of his tooth.

a. If a man strikes the eye of his male or female servant, and destroys it, he shall let him go free for the sake of his eye: The principle of eye for an eye has a different application for servants. The servant, if injured by the master, received something more precious than an eye - his freedom.

b. If he knocks out the tooth of his male or female servant, he shall let him go free: "If this did not teach them humanity, it taught them caution, as one rash blow might have deprived them of all right to the future services of the slave; and this self-interest obliged them to be cautious and circumspect." (Clarke)

C. Laws regarding animal control and damage.

1. (28-32) Determining guilt when an animal kills a human.

"If an ox gores a man or a woman to death, then the ox shall surely be stoned, and its flesh shall not be eaten; but the owner of the ox shall be acquitted. But if the ox tended to thrust with its horn in times past, and it has been made known to his owner, and he has not kept it confined, so that it has killed a man or a woman, the ox shall be stoned and its owner also shall be put to death. If there is imposed on him a sum of money, then he shall pay to redeem his life, whatever is imposed on him. Whether it has gored a son or gored a daughter, according to this judgment it shall be done to him. If the ox gores a male or female servant, he shall give to their master thirty shekels of silver, and the ox shall be stoned.

a. The ox shall surely be stoned . . . but the owner of the ox shall be acquitted: This law illustrates the principle of intent and neglect. An owner of a man-killing ox cannot be held guilty if the animal had no history of aggression towards people - yet the animal must die, and the owner is forbidden to profit from the animal or its death (its flesh shall not be eaten).

b. But if the ox tended to thrust with its horn in times past . . . the ox shall be stoned and its owner also shall be put to death: Yet, if an ox owner has an ox whom he knows to be aggressive, and he fails to control the animal, he shall be held guilty of murder and punished as such.

c. If there is imposed on him a sum of money, then he shall pay to redeem his life: It seems that if the survivors of the dead man accepted monetary restitution in lieu of the owner's death, this was an acceptable settlement.

d. Whether it has gored a son or gored a daughter, according to this judgment it shall be done to him: The same principles must be applied even if a minor is killed. They were regard as people with rights to respect as well as adults.

e. If the ox gores a male or female servant, he shall give to their master thirty shekels of silver: If a servant was killed under such circumstances, the price of restitution was thirty shekels of silver, which was considered the price of a slave.

i. Significantly, this was the same price Jesus was "sold" for. Judas betrayed Jesus for thirty pieces of silver (Matthew 26:15).

2. (33-36) More laws giving the principle of negligence and restitution.

"And if a man opens a pit, or if a man digs a pit and does not cover it, and an ox or a donkey falls in it, the owner of the pit shall make it good; he shall give money to their owner, but the dead animal shall be his. If one man's ox hurts another's, so that it dies, then they shall sell the live ox and divide the money from it; and the dead ox they shall also divide. Or if it was known that the ox tended to thrust in time past, and its owner has not kept it confined, he shall surely pay ox for ox, and the dead animal shall be his own.

a. He shall give money to their owner, but the dead animal shall be his: These laws communicate the principle of "you-break-it-you-bought-it." If your negligence resulted in the death of your neighbor's animal, you were obligated to recompense your neighbor.

b. If one man's ox hurts another's, so that it dies, then they shall sell the live ox and divide the money from it: These laws required the investigation and analysis of judges, so that the application of the law took into account findings of intent and negligence. There is a sense in which these are simply amplifications of the principle, "do what is fair."

© 2004 David Guzik - No distribution beyond personal use without permission

Commentary -- Other

Critics Ask: Exo 21:29

EXODUS 21:29-30 —Why was capital punishment commuted in the case of some murders?

PROBLEM: Numbers 35:31 commands that “you shall take no ransom for the life of a murderer who is guilty of death, but he shall surely be put to death.” However, Exodus 21 says if the guilty one has “imposed on him a sum of money, then he shall pay to redeem his life, whatever is imposed on him” (v. 30 ). But these are contrary instructions about punishing murderers.

SOLUTION: The reason for the difference is clearly stated in the text—one was willful murder, and the other was just negligent homicide. In the first case there was malice, but in the second case there was no evil intent. In fact, in the latter instance the guilty had not actually taken the other person’s life. Rather, he had simply been negligent about confining an ox that was known to gore people ( Ex. 21:28-29 ). In such a case a fine could be levied rather than capital punishment.   

Critics Ask: Exo 21:30

EXODUS 21:29-30 —Why was capital punishment commuted in the case of some murders?

PROBLEM: Numbers 35:31 commands that “you shall take no ransom for the life of a murderer who is guilty of death, but he shall surely be put to death.” However, Exodus 21 says if the guilty one has “imposed on him a sum of money, then he shall pay to redeem his life, whatever is imposed on him” (v. 30 ). But these are contrary instructions about punishing murderers.

SOLUTION: The reason for the difference is clearly stated in the text—one was willful murder, and the other was just negligent homicide. In the first case there was malice, but in the second case there was no evil intent. In fact, in the latter instance the guilty had not actually taken the other person’s life. Rather, he had simply been negligent about confining an ox that was known to gore people ( Ex. 21:28-29 ). In such a case a fine could be levied rather than capital punishment.   

Introduction / Outline

JFB: Exodus (Book Introduction)

EXODUS, a "going forth," derives its name from its being occupied principally with a relation of the departure of the Israelites from Egypt, and the incidents that immediately preceded as well as followed that memorable migration. Its authorship by Moses is distinctly asserted by himself (Exo 24:4), as well as by our Lord (Mar 12:26; Luk 20:37). Besides, the thorough knowledge it exhibits of the institutions and usages of the ancient Egyptians and the minute geographical details of the journey to Sinai, establish in the clearest manner the authenticity of this book.

JFB: Exodus (Outline)

• INCREASE OF THE ISRAELITES. (Exo. 1:1-22)
• BIRTH AND PRESERVATION OF MOSES. (Exo 2:1-10) there went a man of the house of Levi, &c. Amram was the husband and Jochebed the wife (compare Exo 6:20; Num 26:59). The marriage took place, and two children, Miriam and Aaron, were born some years before the infanticidal edict.
• HIS SYMPATHY WITH THE HEBREWS. (Exo 2:11-25)
• DIVINE APPEARANCE AND COMMISSION TO MOSES. (Exo. 3:1-22)
• MIRACULOUS CHANGE OF THE ROD, &c. (Exo. 4:1-31)
• FIRST INTERVIEW WITH PHARAOH. (Exo. 5:1-23)
• RENEWAL OF THE PROMISE. (Exo 6:1-13)
• THE GENEALOGY OF MOSES. (Exo. 6:14-30)
• SECOND INTERVIEW WITH PHARAOH. (Exo. 7:1-25)
• PLAGUE OF FROGS. (Exo 8:1-15)
• PLAGUE OF LICE. (Exo 8:16-19)
• PLAGUE OF FLIES. (Exo 8:20-32)
• MURRAIN OF BEASTS. (Exo 9:1-7)
• PLAGUE OF BOILS. (Exo 9:8-17)
• PLAGUE OF HAIL. (Exo. 9:18-35)
• PLAGUE OF LOCUSTS. (Exo. 10:1-20)
• PLAGUE OF DARKNESS. (Exo 10:21-29)
• DEATH OF THE FIRST-BORN THREATENED. (Exo 11:1-10)
• THE PASSOVER INSTITUTED. (Exo 12:1-10)
• THE RITE OF THE PASSOVER. (Exo 12:11-14)
• UNLEAVENED BREAD. (Exo. 12:15-51)
• THE FIRST-BORN SANCTIFIED. (Exo 13:1-2)
• MEMORIAL OF THE PASSOVER. (Exo 13:3-10)
• FIRSTLINGS OF BEASTS. (Exo 13:11-16)
• JOURNEY FROM EGYPT. (Exo 13:17-21)
• GOD INSTRUCTS THE ISRAELITES AS TO THEIR JOURNEY. (Exo. 14:1-31)
• SONG OF MOSES. (Exo. 15:1-27)
• MURMURS FOR WANT OF BREAD. (Exo. 16:1-36)
• THE PEOPLE MURMUR FOR WATER. (Exo 17:1-7)
• ATTACK OF AMALEK. (Exo 17:8-16)
• VISIT OF JETHRO. (Exo. 18:1-27)
• ARRIVAL AT SINAI. (Exo. 19:1-25)
• THE TEN COMMANDMENTS. (Exo. 20:1-26)
• LAWS FOR MENSERVANTS. (Exo 21:1-6)
• LAWS FOR MAIDSERVANTS. (Exo. 21:7-36)
• LAWS CONCERNING THEFT. (Exo. 22:1-31)
• LAWS CONCERNING SLANDER, &c. (Exo. 23:1-33)
• DELIVERY OF THE LAW AND COVENANT. (Exo. 24:1-18)
• CONCERNING AN OFFERING. (Exo. 25:1-40)
• TEN CURTAINS. (Exo. 26:1-37)
• ALTAR FOR BURNT OFFERING. (Exo. 27:1-21)
• APPOINTMENT TO THE PRIESTHOOD. (Exo. 28:1-43)
• CONSECRATING THE PRIESTS AND THE ALTAR. (Exo. 29:1-35)
• CONSECRATION OF THE ALTAR. (Exo 29:36-37)
• INSTITUTION OF DAILY SERVICE. (Exo 29:38-46)
• THE ALTAR OF INCENSE. (Exo. 30:1-38)
• BEZALEEL AND AHOLIAB. (Exo. 31:1-18)
• THE GOLDEN CALF. (Exo. 32:1-35)
• THE LORD REFUSES TO GO WITH THE PEOPLE. (Exo. 33:1-23)
• THE TABLES ARE RENEWED. (Exo. 34:1-35)
• CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE TABERNACLE. (Exo. 35:1-35)
• OFFERINGS DELIVERED TO THE WORKMEN. (Exo. 36:1-38)
• FURNITURE OF THE TABERNACLE. (Exo. 37:1-29)
• FURNITURE OF THE TABERNACLE. (Exo. 38:1-31)
• GARMENTS OF THE PRIESTS. (Exo. 39:1-43)
• THE TABERNACLE REARED AND ANOINTED. (Exo. 40:1-38)

TSK: Exodus (Book Introduction)

The title of this Book is derived from the Septuagint; in which it is called ΕΞΟΔΟΣ , " Exodus;" or, as it is in the Codex Alexandrinus, ΕΞΟΔΟΣ Αιγυπτου , " the Exodus or departure from Egypt;" but it is called in Hebrew Bibles ואלה שׁמות , Weelleh Shemoth , " these are the names," or merely, שׁמות , Shemoth , " names," from the words with which it commences.

Moses was undoubtedly the author of this Book, which forms a continuation of the preceding, and was evidently written after the promulgation of the law. it embraces the history of about 145 years. Moses, having in the Book of Genesis described the creation of the world, the origin of nations, and the peopling of the earth, details in the Book of Exodus the commencement and nature of the Jewish Church and Polity, which has very properly been termed a Theocracy (Θεοκρατια , from Θεος [Strong’s 2316], God, and κρατεω [Strong’s 2902], to rule), in which Jehovah appears not merely as their Creator and God, but as their King. Hence this and the following books of Moses are not purely historical; but contain not only laws for the regulation of their moral conduct and the rites and ceremonies of their religious worship, but judicial and political laws relating to government and civil life. The stupendous facts connected with these events, may be clearly perceived by consulting the marginal references; and many of the circumstances are confirmed by the testimony of heathen writers. Numenius, a Pythagorean philosopher, mentioned by Eusebius, speaks of the opposition of the magicians, whom he calls Jannes and Jambres, to the miracles of Moses. Though the names of these magicians are not preserved in the Sacred Text, yet tradition had preserved them in the Jewish records, from which St. Paul (2Ti 3:8) undoubtedly quotes. Add to this that many of the notions of the heathen respecting the appearance of the Deity, and their religious institutions and laws, were borrowed from this book; and many of their fables were nothing more than distorted traditions of those events which are here plainly related by Moses.

TSK: Exodus 21 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

Exo 21:1, Laws for men servants; Exo 21:5, For the servant whose ear is bored; Exo 21:7, For women servants; Exo 21:12, For manslaughter; Exo 21:16, For stealers of men; Exo 21:17, For cursers of parents; Exo 21:18, For smiters; Exo 21:22, For a hurt by chance; Exo 21:28, For an ox that gores; Exo 21:33, For him that is an occasion of harm.

Poole: Exodus (Book Introduction)

SECOND BOOK OF MOSES CALLED EXODUS.

THE ARGUMENT.

AFTER the death of Joseph, who had sent for his father’ s house into Egypt, the children of Israel exceedingly multiplied, notwithstanding Pharaoh’ s cruel oppressing of them; from under which God, hearing their cry, brought them with a strong hand. Wherefore this book is called by the Greeks EXODUS, i.e. a going forth; containing an historical account of passages for about one hundred and forty years; with the wonderful raising up of Moses, who, together with Aaron, were to be instruments of their deliverance; and accordingly, after the inflicting ten dreadful plagues upon Pharaoh, brought them into the wilderness through the Red Sea, wherein Pharaoh (his heart being hardened under all these plagues) and all his host pursuing of them were drowned; God having first instituted the passover, as an abiding sacrament to bring to their remembrance in after-times this great deliverance.

In their conduct through the wilderness, God gave them the signal mark of his presence in the pillar of a cloud, and the pillar of fire; who, notwithstanding their great and reiterated murmurings, gave them food, both bread and flesh from heaven, and drink out of the rock; and when they were come to Mount Sinai, he there gave them the moral law, beside other both politic and ecclesiastical ordinances. Afterwards, the breaking of the tables being occasioned by the idolatry of the golden calf, God graciously renewed his covenant with them. There being also a tabernacle, and ark, and other things to be made by God’ s command, the bounty of the people, in order to the making and furnishing thereof, is here set down; which, being finished, the tabernacle is anointed, and filled with the glory of God.

Poole: Exodus 21 (Chapter Introduction)

CHAPTER 21

Law concerning bond-men or slaves, Exo 21:1-5 . Servants bored through the ear, Exo 21:6 . Ordinances for bond-women, Exo 21:7-11 . Of murderers, Exo 21:12 . Of them that curse their parents, Exo 21:17 . Of strikers, Exo 21:18,19 . Of them that hurt a woman with child, Exo 21:22-25 . Of a master of a family that strikes out an eye or tooth of his man or maid servant, Exo 21:26,27 . Of a pushing ox, Exo 21:29 . Of them that hurt their neighbour’ s ox by digging a pit, Exo 21:33 . Of one ox killing another, Exo 21:35,36 .

Or, the judicial laws , by which thou and the judges before mentioned shall govern thyself and the people in civil and criminal causes.

MHCC: Exodus (Book Introduction)

The Book of Exodus relates the forming of the children of Israel into a church and a nation. We have hitherto seen true religion shown in domestic life, now, we begin to trace its effects upon the concerns of kingdoms and nations. Exodus signifies " the departure;" the chief event therein recorded is the departure of Israel from Egypt and Egyptian bondage; it plainly points out the fulfilling of several promises and prophecies to Abraham respecting his seed, and shadows forth the state of the church, in the wilderness of this world, until her arrival at the heavenly Canaan, an eternal rest.

MHCC: Exodus 21 (Chapter Introduction)

(Exo 21:1-11) Laws respecting servants.

(Exo 21:12-21) Judicial laws.

(Exo 21:22-36) Judicial laws.

Matthew Henry: Exodus (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The Second Book of Moses, Called Exodus

Moses (the servant of the Lord in writing for him as well as in acting for him - with the pen of God as well as with the rod of God in his hand) having, in the first book of his history, preserved and transmitted the records of the church, while it existed in private families, comes, in this second book, to give us an account of its growth into a great nation; and, as the former furnishes us with the best economics, so this with the best politics. The beginning of the former book shows us how God formed the world for himself; the beginning of this shows us how he formed Israel for himself, and both show forth his praise, Isa 43:21. There we have the creation of the world in history, here the redemption of the world in type. The Greek translators called this book Exodus (which signifies a departure or going out ) because it begins with the story of the going out of the children of Israel from Egypt. Some allude to the names of this and the foregoing book, and observe that immediately after Genesis, which signifies the beginning or original, follows Exodus, which signifies a departure; for a time to be born is immediately succeeded by a time to die. No sooner have we made our entrance into the world than we must think of making our exit, and going out of the world. When we begin to live we begin to die. The forming of Israel into a people was a new creation. As the earth was, in the beginning, first fetched from under water, and then beautified and replenished, so Israel was first by an almighty power made to emerge out of Egyptian slavery, and then enriched with God's law and tabernacle. This book gives us, I. The accomplishment of the promises made before to Abraham (ch. 1-19), and then, II. The establishment of the ordinances which were afterwards observed by Israel (ch. 20-40). Moses, in this book, begins, like Caesar, to write his own Commentaries; nay, a greater, a far greater, than Caesar is here. But henceforward the penman is himself the hero, and gives us the history of those things of which he was himself an eye and ear-witness, et quorum pars magna fuit - and in which he bore a conspicuous part. There are more types of Christ in this book than perhaps in any other book of the Old Testament; for Moses wrote of him, Joh 5:46. The way of man's reconciliation to God, and coming into covenant and communion with him by a Mediator, is here variously represented; and it is of great use to us for the illustration of the New Testament, now that we have that to assist us in the explication of the Old.

Matthew Henry: Exodus 21 (Chapter Introduction)

The laws recorded in this chapter relate to the fifth and sixth commandments; and though they are not accommodated to our constitution, especially in point of servitude, nor are the penalties annexed binding on us, yet they are of great use for the explanation of the moral law, and the rules of natural justice. Here are several enlargements, I. Upon the fifth commandment, which concerns particular relations. 1. The duty of masters towards their servants, their men-servants (Exo 21:2-6), and the maidservants (Exo 21:7-11). 2. The punishment of disobedient children that strike their parents (Exo 21:15), or curse them (Exo 21:17). II. Upon the sixth commandment, which forbids all violence offered to the person of a man. Here is, 1. Concerning murder (Exo 21:12-14). 2. Man-stealing (Exo 21:16). 3. Assault and battery (Exo 21:18, Exo 21:19). 4. Correcting a servant (Exo 21:20, Exo 21:21). 5. Hurting a woman with child (Exo 21:22, Exo 21:23). 6. The law of retaliation (Exo 21:24, Exo 21:25). 7. Maiming a servant (Exo 21:26, Exo 21:27). 8. An ox goring (Exo 21:28-32). 9. Damage by opening a pit (Exo 21:33, Exo 21:34). 10. Cattle fighting (Exo 21:35, Exo 21:36).

Constable: Exodus (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Title

The Hebrew title of this book (we'elleh shemot) originated from the ancient practice of naming a Bible book after its first word or words. "Now these are the names of" is the translation of the first two Hebrew words.

"The Hebrew title of the Book of Exodus, therefore, was to remind us that Exodus is the sequel to Genesis and that one of its purposes is to continue the history of God's people as well as elaborate further on the great themes so nobly introduced in Genesis."¹

Exodus cannot stand alone. It would not make much sense without Genesis. The very first word of the book, translated "now," is a conjunction that means "and."

The English title "Exodus" is a transliteration of the Greek word exodos from the Septuagint translation meaning "exit," "way out," or "departure." The Septuagint translators gave the book this title because of the major event in it, namely, the Israelites' departure from Egypt.

"The exodus is the most significant historical and theological event of the Old Testament . . ."²

Date and Writer

Moses, who lived from about 1525 to 1405 B.C., wrote Exodus. He could have written it under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit any time after the events recorded (after about 1444 B.C.). He may have written it during the year the Israelites camped at the base of Mt. Sinai. He may have done so during the 38-year period of wandering in the wilderness following the Israelites' failure to enter the land from Kadesh Barnea (cf. Num. 13-14; ca. 1443-1405 B.C.). On the other hand he may have written it on the plains of Moab just before his death (cf. 16:35).³

Scope

Exodus embraces about 431 years of history, from the arrival of Jacob and his family in Egypt (ca. 1876 B.C.) to the erection of the tabernacle in the wilderness of Sinai (ca. 1445 B.C.). However 1:1-7 is a review of Jacob's family. If we eliminate this section, the narrative resumes the story of the Israelites where Genesis ends, after the death of Joseph. About 364 years elapsed between the death of Joseph and the building of the tabernacle. The bulk of the book (chs. 3-40) deals with only two of these years, the year before and the year after the Exodus from Egypt. The Exodus event is clearly the focus of this book.

The Israelites lived in Egypt 430 years (12:40). Genesis 15:13 has the round number 400 years as the time of Israel's oppression in Egypt.⁴

Purpose

"The purpose of the Book of Exodus is to celebrate God's gracious deliverance of His chosen people Israel from Egyptian slavery to the freedom of covenant relationship and fellowship with Him."⁵

Importance

"No other biblical book surfaces elsewhere in the OT as frequently as the Book of Exodus does; in the NT only the Books of Psalms and Isaiah are cited more, and that for the fairly obvious reasons of liturgy and messianism."⁶

Message⁷

The great contribution of this book is the revelation that Yahweh is the sovereign God who provides deliverance for man from the slavery in which he finds himself.

The major teaching of Exodus is primarily threefold.

1. The sovereignty of God.

2. The salvation of man.

3. The methods by which the sovereign God affects man's salvation.

First, Exodus teaches the sovereignty of God.

In Genesis we learned that the only way we can realize the purpose for which God created us is through faith in a trustworthy God that expresses itself in obedience.

In Exodus we learn that the God with whom we can have a relationship is not only trustworthy but sovereign. This realization should produce within us the double effect of worship and obedience.

Sovereignty is the attribute of God that expresses the fact that Yahweh is the ultimate ruler of the universe. There is no one higher in authority than He. As sovereign, He has all power. Sovereignty does not refer to how God rules, the method by which He governs. In particular, it does not imply that God controls every detail of life immediately (directly). God exercises His sovereignty by allowing human beings certain freedoms. He does not control us like puppets on strings but as a father controls his children. We have limited freedom.

We can see God's sovereignty clearly in His superiority over all the so-called gods of Egypt. He displayed His great power in all of His activity that resulted in the liberation of the Israelites and His adoption of them as His people. Scripture teaches both the sovereignty of God and the responsibility of man. No one has been able to explain this mystery adequately (cf. Job).

Second, Exodus teaches the salvation of man.

In Genesis we saw the need for salvation (i.e., the Fall and the repeated failures of man).

In Exodus, God revealed the method of salvation and explained the consequences of salvation initially.

Exodus teaches that God provides salvation for man. Man does not provide it for himself. It also reveals that man appropriates what God has provided by faith.

Two activities become prominent as major expressions of faith in Exodus: worship and obedience. Worship and obedience are the Godward and the manward expressions of faith respectively.

Worship consists of putting God at the center of life (cf. Rom. 12:1-2). Worship was to characterize the Israelites nationally and personally. God illustrated the importance of placing Him at the center of life by locating the ark of the covenant in the center of the tabernacle. He further did so by placing the tabernacle in the center of the Israelite camp.

Obedience consists of arranging all the parts of life in proper relation to God who is at the center. If something in life does not orient toward God properly, there is disobedience. In this way Exodus deepens the revelation concerning obedience that God has given us in Genesis.

Third, Exodus teaches the methods by which the sovereign God affects man's salvation.

God's method of dealing with the human race generally (outside Israel) was by creating a pattern, namely, the nation of Israel. God created the nation of Israel so that He could demonstrate through Israel for all other nations and peoples to see how glorious it can be to live under God's government. God's election of Israel was not the selection of a pet that God would favor at the expense of all others. It was the construction of a pattern. Israel was to be a demonstration to all the world of how wonderful life can be under the rule of Yahweh (cf. 19:5-6).

God's method of dealing with Israel was by revealing a person, namely, Himself. In many revelations to the Israelites, God sought to deepen their understanding of and appreciation for Himself and His will. The special privilege of receiving the revelation was a blessing to them and should have resulted in their being a blessing to the whole world. Israel was to do this by demonstrating how good it is to live under God's kingship. Some of the most important revelations occur in the following passages: 3:4-16; 6:2-8; 19:3-6; 20:1-7; 24:1, 9-11; 34:5-8; and 40:34-35. They are not all different, but God intended them to have the cumulative effect of deepening the Israelites' concept of God. They came to the people like waves beating on the shore. All the details of the Mosaic Code, which begins in Exodus and continues through Numbers, reinforce the main point of this revelation, which is the character of God.

God's method of dealing with individuals was by providing opportunities, choices.

We can see this most easily in God's dealing with the two major characters in Exodus, Moses and Pharaoh. God's method of dealing with both men was the same, but their responses were different and consequently so were their fates.

Pharaoh was a strong, wise leader who acted wholly by sight rather than by faith in Yahweh. He is typical of people of the world. God's method of dealing with him was to give him opportunities to make the right choices and so experience the blessing of God. Pharaoh chose not to trust God, and his disobedience resulted in personal tragedy for himself and national tragedy for Egypt.

Moses on the other hand was also a strong, wise leader, but he acted by faith rather than by sight (Heb. 11:27). God's method of dealing with him in Exodus was the same. He gave him opportunities to make the right choices and so experience God's blessing. Moses chose to trust and obey God, and his life is a story of personal triumph and national triumph for Israel.

In both cases God patiently worked with these representative individuals and gently encouraged them to do His will. Moses developed into a noble character because he chose to submit to God's government even though he was faulty, failing, and fearful. Pharaoh was a more admirable person in many respects, but he sank into destruction because he chose to refuse to submit to God's government (authoritative rule).

Exodus teaches that individuals are personally responsible under God, and their choices determine their destinies. There is ample New Testament evidence for this in John 1:12; 3:16, 36; 5:24; 6:47; 20:31; et al. Divine sovereignty does not negate human responsibility.

If we look at the record of God's activity in Exodus, we see progress. The unbelief of His enemies does not frustrate Him. His ultimate purposes for Israel came to fruition.

However if we look at the record of man's activity in this book, we see failure. Even Moses, Aaron, and the Israelites who trusted God constantly failed. We observed this in the lives of the characters in Genesis as well.

While man constantly falls short of what God requires, human failure does not frustrate God's ultimate purposes. This proves that God is indeed sovereign.

Constable: Exodus (Outline)

Outline

I. The liberation of Israel 1:1-15:21

A. God's preparation of Israel and Moses chs. 1-4

1. The growth of Jacob's family 1:1-7

2. The Israelites' bondage in Egypt 1:8-22

3. Moses' birth and education 2:1-10

4. Moses' flight from Egypt to Midian 2:11-15

5. Moses' life in Midian 2:16-25

6. Moses' call 3:1-4:18

7. Moses' return to Egypt 4:19-31

B. God's demonstrations of His sovereignty chs. 5-11

1. Pharaoh's response to Moses and Aaron's initial request 5:1-6:1

2. Moses and Aaron's equipment as God's messengers 6:2-7:7

3. The attestation of Moses and Aaron's divine mission 7:8-13

4. The first three plagues 7:14-8:19

5. The fourth, fifth, and sixth plagues 8:20-9:12

6. The seventh, eight, and ninth plagues 9:13-10:29

7. The proclamation of the tenth plague ch. 11

C. God's redemption of His people 12:1-13:16

1. The consecration of Israel as the covenant nation 12:1-28

2. The death of the first-born and the release of Israel 12:29-36

3. The exodus of Israel out of Egypt 12:37-42

4. Regulations concerning the Passover 12:43-51

5. The sanctification of the first-born 13:1-16

D. God's completion of Israel's liberation 13:17-15:21

1. The journey from Succoth to Etham 13:17-22

2. Israel's passage through the Red Sea ch. 14

3. Israel's song of deliverance 15:1-21

II. The adoption of Israel 15:22-40:38

A. God's preparatory instruction of Israel 15:22-18:27

1. Events in the wilderness of Shur 15:22-27

2. Quails and manna in the wilderness of Sin ch. 16

3. The lack of water at Rephidim 17:1-7

4. The hostility of the Amalekites 17:18-36

5. The friendliness of Jethro the Midianite ch. 18

B. The establishment of the Mosaic Covenant 19:1-24:11

1. Preparation for the Covenant ch. 19

2. The Ten Commandments 20:1-17

3. The response of the Israelites 20:18-21

4. The stipulations of the Book of the Covenant 20:22-23:33

5. The ratification of the Covenant 24:1-11

C. Directions regarding God's dwelling among His people 24:12-31:18

1. The revelation of these directions 24:12-18

2. Contributions for the construction of the sanctuary 25:1-9

3. The tabernacle furnishings 25:10-41

4. The tabernacle structure ch. 26

5. The tabernacle courtyard 27:1-19

6. The investiture of the priests 27:20-28:43

7. The consecration of the priests 29:1-37

8. The service of the priests 29:38-30:38

9. The builders of the tabernacle 31:1-11

10. The sign of the Sabbath 31:12-18

D. The breaking and renewing of the covenant chs. 32-34

1. The failure of Israel ch. 32

2. The re-establishment of fellowship ch. 33

3. The renewal of the covenant ch. 34

E. The construction and dedication of the objects used in Israel's worship chs. 35-40

1. Preparations for construction 35:1-36:7

2. Execution of the work 36:8-39:43

3. The erection and consecration of the tabernacle ch. 40

In an interesting and original chart of Exodus, Ted Grove suggested the following structural outline of Exodus.⁸

I. Israel's liberation chs. 1-18

A. Israel's affliction (Israel is Egypt's possession) 1:1-2:14

B. Deliverance 2:15-18:27

Ted saw the following chiastic structure in this section.

A Midian: Moses' commission 2:15-4:28

B Enemy: Egypt defeated 4:29-15:21

C Water: bitter to sweet and 12 springs 15:22-27

D Food: manna and quail ch. 16

C' Water: out of rock 17:1-7

B' Enemy: Amalek defeated 17:8-16

A' Midian: Moses accepts wisdom ch. 18

II. Israel's adoption chs. 19-40

A. Covenant delivered 19:1-24:11

B. Sanctuary planned 24:12-31:18

C. Covenant broken ch. 32

D. Covenant renewed chs. 33-34

E. Sanctuary's construction 35:1-40:33

F. Covenant sealed (Israel is God's possession) 40:34-38

Ted also saw a chiasm in this part of the book.

A Covenant delivered 19:1-24:11

B Tabernacle planned 24:12-27:21

C Priestly instructions chs. 28-30

D Craftsmen's direction 31:1-11

E Sabbath instructions 31:12-18

F Covenant broken ch. 32

F' Covenant renewed chs. 33-34

E' Sabbath reminded 35:1-3

D' Craftsmen and construction 35:4-38:31

C' Priests prepared ch. 39

B' Tabernacle completed 40:1-33

A' Covenant sealed 40:34-38

The center of the first chiasm is the manna. The center of the second chiasm is the tablets of the Law. These were the two items God instructed Moses to preserve in the ark of the covenant.

Ted saw the key verse of the book as 34:9.

Constable: Exodus

Exodus

Bibliography

Adams, Dwayne H. "The Building Program that Works (Exodus 25:4--36:7 [31:1-11])." Exegesis and Exposition 1:1 (Fall 1986):82-92.

Aharoni, Yohanan. "Kadesh-Barnea and Mount Sinai." In God's Wilderness: Discoveries in Sinai, pp. 115-70. Edited by B. Rothenberg, Y. Aharoni, and A Hashimshoni. New York: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1962.

Aharoni, Yohanan, and Michael Avi-Yonah. The Macmillan Bible Atlas. Revised ed. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1977.

Albright, William Foxwell. The Archaeology of Palestine. 1949. Revised ed. Pelican Archaeology series. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England: Penguin Books, 1956.

_____. "Northwest-Semitic Names in a List of Egyptian Slaves from the Eighteenth Century B.C." Journal of the American Oriental Society 74 (1954):222-33.

Aldrich, Roy L. "The Mosaic Ten Commandments Compared to Their Restatements in the New Testament." Bibliotheca Sacra 118:471 (July-September 1961):251-58.

Alexander, John F. "Sabbath Rest." The Other Side 146 (November 1983):8-9.

Aling, Charles F. "The Biblical City of Ramses." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 25:2 (June 1982):129-37.

Allen, Ronald B. "The Bloody Bridegroom' in Exodus 4:24-26." Bibliotheca Sacra 153:611 (July-September 1996):259-69.

_____. "The Pillar of the Cloud." Bibliotheca Sacra 153:612 (October-December 1996):387-95.

Anati, Emmanuel. "Has Mt. Sinai Been Found?" Biblical Archaeology Review 11:4 (July-August 1985):42-57.

Archer, Gleason L., Jr. "Old Testament History and Recent Archaeology from Abraham to Moses." Bibliotheca Sacra 127:505 (January-March 1970):3-25.

_____ "Old Testament History and Recent Archaeology from Moses to David." Bibliotheca Sacra 127:506 (April-June 1970):99-115.

_____ A Survey of Old Testament Introduction. Revised ed. Chicago: Moody Press, 1974.

Bacchiocchi, Samuele. "Sabbatical Typologies of Messianic Redemption." Journal for the Study of Judaism 17:2 (December 1986):153-76.

Baldwin, Joyce G. "The Role of the Ten Commandments." Vox Evangelica 13 (1983):7-18.

Barlow, Robert Andres. "The Passover Seder." Exegesis and Exposition 3:1 (Fall 1988):63-68.

Batto, Bernard F. "Red Sea or Reed Sea?" Biblical Archaeology Review 10:4 (July-August 1984):57-63.

Beale, G. K. "An Exegetical and Theological Consideration of the Hardening of Pharaoh's Heart in Exodus 4-14 and Romans 9." Trinity Journal 5NS:2 (Autumn 1984):129-54.

Beit-Arieh, Itzhaq. "Fifteen Years in Sinai." Biblical Archaeology Review 10:4 (July-August 1984):28-54.

Berghuis, Kent D. "A Biblical Perspective on Fasting." Bibliotheca Sacra 158:629 (January-March 2001):86-103.

Bimson, John J. "Redating the Exodus." Biblical Archaeology Review 13:5 (September-October 1986):40-53, 66-68.

_____. Redating the Exodus and the Conquest. JSOT supplement series. Sheffield: University of Sheffield Press, 1978.

Blosser, Oliver R. "Did the Pharaoh of the Exodus Drown in the Red Sea?" It's About Time (July 1987), pp. 8-12.

_____ "The Impact of the Ten Plagues and Mosaic Monotheism on the Religion of Akenaton: Part I." It's About Time (July 1987), pp. 3-7.

Bodenheimer, F. S. "The Manna of Sinai." Biblical Archaeologist 10:1 (February 1947):2-6.

Booij, Thijs. "Mountain and Theophany in the Sinai Narrative." Biblica 65:1 (1984):1-26.

Brichto, Herbert Chanan. "The Worship of the Golden Calf: A Literary Analysis of a Fable on Idolatry." Hebrew Union College Annual 54 (1983):1-44.

Bright, John. A History of Israel. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1959.

Budge, E. A. W. The Gods of the Egyptians. New York: Dover Press, 1969.

Bunn, John T. "The Ark of the Covenant." Biblical Illustrator 9:4 (Summer 1983):50-53.

Burden, Jasper J. "A Stylistic Analysis of Exodus 15:1-21: Theory and Practice." OTWSA 29 (1986):34-70.

Bury, J. B.; S. A. Cools; and F. E. Adcock, eds. The Cambridge Ancient History. 12 vols. 2nd ed. Reprinted. Cambridge: University Press, 1928.

Bush, George. Notes on Exodus. 2 vols. Reprint ed. Minneapolis: James and Klock, 1976.

Cassuto, Umberto. A Commentary on the Book of Exodus. Translated by Israel Abrahams. Reprinted. English ed. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1983.

Childs, Brevard S. The Book of Exodus. The Old Testament Library series. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1974.

Chirichigno, G. C. "The Narrative Structure of Exod 19-24." Biblia 68:4 (1987):457-79.

Chisholm, Robert B., Jr. "Divine Hardening in the Old Testament." Bibliotheca Sacra 153:612 (October-December 1996):410-34.

_____. "Does God Change His Mind'?" Bibliotheca Sacra 152:608 (October-December 1995):387-99.

_____. "The Polemic against Baalism in Israel's Early History and Literature." Bibliotheca Sacra 151:603 (July-September 1994):267-83.

Chismar, Douglas E. and David A Raush. "Regarding Theonomy: An Essay of Concern." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 27:3 (September 1984):315-23.

Clapham, Phillip. "In Search of the Exodus." Catastrophism and Ancient History 8:2 (July 1986):97-133.

Clapp, Rodney. "Democracy as Heresy." Christianity Today 31:3 (February 20, 1987):17-23.

Cole, R. Alan. Exodus: An Introduction and Commentary. Tyndale Old Testament Commentary series. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1973.

Congdon, Robert N. "Exodus 21:22-25 and the Abortion Debate." Bibliotheca Sacra 146:582 (April-June 1989):132-47.

Constable, Thomas L. "What Prayer Will and Will Not Change." In Essays in Honor of J. Dwight Pentecost. Edited by Stanley D. Toussaint and Charles H. Dyer. Chicago: Moody Press, 1986.

Craigie, Peter C. The Problem of War in the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1978.

_____ Ugarit and the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1983.

Cross, Frank Moore, Jr. "The Song of the Sea and Canaanite Myth." In God and Christ: Existence and Province, pp. 1-25. Edited by Robert W. Funk. New York: Harper and Row, 1968.

_____ "The Tabernacle." Biblical Archaeologist 10:3 (September 1947):45-68.

Curtis, Edward M. "The Theological Basis for the Prohibition of Images in the Old Testament." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 28:3 (September 1985):277-87.

Darby, John Nelson. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. Revised ed. 5 vols. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Davis, John J. Moses and the Gods of Egypt. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1971.

Deere, Jack S. "Deuteronomy." In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament, pp. 259-324. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1985.

DeHaan, Martin Ralph. The Chemistry of the Blood and Other Stirring Messages. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1943.

Deist, F. E. "Who is to blame: the Pharaoh, Yahweh or circumstance? On human responsibility, and divine ordinance in Exodus 1-14." OTWSA 29(1986):91-110.

Dennett, Edward. Typical Teachings of Genesis. London: G. Morrish, n.d.

Dennison, James T., Jr. "The Exodus: Historical Narrative, Prophetic Hope, Gospel Fulfillment." Covenant Seminary Review 8:2 (Fall 1982):1-12.

Dictionary of the Bible, ed. by James Hastings, 1909 ed. S.v. "Tabernacle," by A. R. S. Kennedy.

Dillow, Joseph C. The Reign of the Servant Kings. Miami Springs, Fl.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1992.

Dumbrell, William J. Covenant and Creation. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1984.

Dunnam, Maxie D. Exodus. The Communicator's Commentary series. Waco: Word Books, 1987.

Dunnett, Dolores E. "Evangelicals and Abortion." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 33:2 (June 1990):215-25.

Durham, John I. Exodus. Word Biblical Commentary series. Waco: Word Books, 1987.

Dyer, Charles H. "The Date of the Exodus Reexamined." Bibliotheca Sacra 140:559 (July-September 1983):225-43.

Dyer, Charles H., and Eugene H Merrill. The Old Testament Explorer. Nashville: Word Publishing, 2001.

Ellison, H. L. Exodus. Daily Study Bible series. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1982.

Encyclopaedia Judica. S.v. "Cuneiform Law," by J. Finkelstein, 16:1505i.

Exum, J. Cheryl. "You Shall Let Every Daughter Live': A Study of Exodus 1:8-2:10." Semeia 28 (1983):63-82.

Fass, David E. "The Molten Calf: Judgment, Motive, and Meaning." Judaism 39:2 (Spring 1990):171-83.

Fawver, Jay D., and R. Larry Overstreet. "Moses and Preventive Medicine." Bibliotheca Sacra 147:587 (July-September):270-85.

Fensham, F. C. "Extra-Biblical Material and the Hermeneutics of the Old Testament with Special Reference to the Legal Material of the Covenant Code." OTWSA 20 & 21 (1977 & 78):53-65.

Finegan, Jack. Let My People Go. New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1963.

Finkelstein, Israel. "Raider of the Lost Mountain--An Israeli Archaeologist Looks at the Most Recent Attempt to Locate Mt. Sinai." Biblical Archaeology Review 15:4 (July-August 1988):46-50.

Frankfort, Henri. Ancient Egyptian Religion. New York: Columbia University Press, 1948; reprint ed., New York: Harper and Row; Harper Torchbooks, 1961.

Franz, Gordon. "Mt. Sinai Is Not Jebel El-Lawz in Saudi Arabia." A paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society, Nov. 15, 2001, Colorado Springs, Colo.

Free, Joseph P. Archaeology and Bible History. 5th ed. revised. Wheaton: Scripture Press, 1956.

Fruchtenbaum, Arnold G. "Israel and the Church." In Issues in Dispensationalism, pp. 113-30. Edited by Wesley R. Willis and John R. Master. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

_____. "The Sabbath Controversy." Biblical Research Monthly 49:4 (July-August 1984):14-16.

Gardner, Joseph L., ed. Reader's Digest Atlas of the Bible. Pleasantville, N.Y.: Reader's Digest Association, 1985.

Gevirtz, Stanley. "Heret, in the Manufacture of the Golden Calf." Biblica 65 (1984):377-81.

Gianotti, Charles R. "The Meaning of the Divine Name YHWH." Bibliotheca Sacra 142:565 (January-March 1985):38-51.

Gispen, William H. Exodus. Translated by Ed van der Maas. Bible Student's Commentary series. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1982.

Gnuse, Robert. "Jubilee Legislation in Leviticus: Israel's Vision of Social Reform." Biblical Theology Bulletin 15:2 (April 1985):43-48.

Goldberg, Michael. "Expository Articles: Exodus 1:13-14." Interpretation 37:4 (October 1983):389-91.

Gunn, David M. "The Hardening of Pharaoh's Heart': Plot, Character and Theology in Exodus 1-14." In Art and Meaning: Rhetoric in Biblical Literature, pp. 72-96. Edited by David J. A. Clines, David M. Gunn, and Alan J. Hauser. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series, vol. 19. Sheffield: University of Sheffield, 1982.

Gurney, O. R. The Hittites. Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1964.

Habel, N. "The Form and Significance of the Call Narratives." Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 77 (1965):316-23.

Hagin, Kenneth E. Redeemed from Poverty, Sickness, and Death. Tulsa: Faith Library Publications, 1983.

Hannah, John D. "Exodus." In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: Old Testament, pp. 103-62. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1985.

Hasel, Gerhard F. "The Sabbath in the Pentateuch." In The Sabbath in Scripture and History, pp. 21-43. Edited by Kenneth A. Strand. Washington: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1982.

Hengstenberg, Ernst W. Egypt and the Books of Moses. Translated by R. D. C. Robbins. New York: M. H. Newman, 1843.

Hiebert, D. Edmond. Working with God: Scriptural Studies in Intercession. New York: Carlton Press, Hearthstone Book, 1987.

Hilber, John W. "Theology of Worship in Exodus 24." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 39:2 (June 1996):177-89.

Hindson, Edward E. The Philistines and the Old Testament. Baker Studies in Biblical Archaeology series. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983.

Hoehner, Harold W. "The Duration of the Egyptian Bondage." Bibliotheca Sacra 126:504 (October-December 1969):306-16.

Holmgren, Fredrick. "Before the Temple, the Thornbush: An Exposition of Exodus 2:11-3:12." Reformed Journal 33:3 (March 1983):9-11.

Hopkins, Ezekiel. "Understanding the Ten Commandments." In Classical Evangelical Essays in Old Testament Interpretation, pp. 41-58. Edited by Walter C. Kaiser, Jr. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1972.

Hoppe, Leslie J. "Elders and Deuteronomy." Eglise et Theologie 14 (1983):259-72.

Horn, Siegfried H. Biblical Archaeology: A Generation of Discovery. Washington: Biblical Archaeology Society, 1985.

Hort, Greta. "The Plagues of Egypt." Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 69 (1957):84-103; 70 (1958):48-59.

Houtman, C. "A Note on the LXX Version of Exodus 4, 6." Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 97:2 (1983):253-54.

_____ "On the Meaning of Uba'esim Uba'abanim in Exodus VII 19." Vetus Testamentum 36:3 (1986):347-52.

Hughes, R. Kent. Living on the Cutting Edge. Westchester, Il.: Good News Publishers, Crossway Books, 1987.

Hyatt, J. Philip. Exodus. New Century Bible Commentary series. London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1971; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1983.

Isser, Stanley. "Two Traditions: The Law of Exodus 21:22-23 Revisited." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 52:1 (January 1990):30-45.

Jacob, B. The Second Book of the Bible: Exodus. Hoboken: KTAV, 1992.

Johnson, John E. "The Old Testament Offices as Paradigm for Pastoral Identity." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:606 (April-June 1995):182-200.

Johnston, Gordon H. "I Will Multiply Your Seed." Exegesis and Exposition 1:1 (Fall 1986):19-32.

Josephus, Flavius. The Works of Flavius Josephus. Translated by William Whiston. Antiquities of the Jews. London: T. Nelson and Sons, 1866.

Kaiser, Walter C., Jr. "Exodus." In Genesis--Numbers. Vol. 2 of The Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein and Richard P. Polcyn. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1990.

_____. Toward Old Testament Ethics. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1983.

Kalland, Lloyd. "Fetal Life." Eternity, February 1971, pp. 18-21, 24.

Keil, C. F., and Franz Delitzsch. The Pentateuch. 3 vols. Translated by James Martin. Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament. N.p.; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., n.d.

Kempinski, Aharon. "Jacob in History." Biblical Archaeology Review 14:1 (January-February 1988):42-47.

Kennedy, James M. "The Social Background of Early Israel's Rejection of Cultic Images: A Proposal." Biblical Theology Bulletin 17:4 (October 1987);138-44.

Kiene, Paul F. The Tabernacle of God in the Wilderness. Translated by John S. Crandall. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1977.

King, Geoffrey R. "Where Is the Ark of the Covenant?" Prophetic Witness 8:2 (February 1984):9-10.

Kitchen, Kenneth A. Ancient Orient and Old Testament. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1966.

_____ The Bible In Its World. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1977.

_____ "Labour Conditions in the Egypt of the Exodus." Buried History 20:3 (September 1984):43-49.

_____ "The Old Testament in its Context: 2 From Egypt to the Jordan." Theological Students' Fellowship Bulletin 60 (1971):3-11.

Kline, Meredith G. "Comments on an Old-New Error." Westminster Theological Journal 41:1 (Fall 1978):172-89.

_____. "Deuteronomy." In The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 155-204. Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F. Harrison. Chicago: Moody Press, 1962.

_____. "The Feast of Cover-over." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 37:4 (December 1994):497-510.

_____ "Lex Talionis and the Human Fetus." Simon Greenleaf Law Review 5 (1985-86):75-89.

_____ The Treaty of the Great King. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1963.

Kubo, Sakae. "Why then the law?" Ministry (March 1980), pp. 12-14.

Labuschagne, C. J. The Incomparability of Yahweh in the Old Testament. Leiden: Brill, 1966.

Laney, J. Carl. "God's Self-Revelation in Exodus 34:6-8." Bibliotheca Sacra 158:629 (January-March 2001):36-51.

Lange, John Peter, ed. Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures. 12 vols. Reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960. Vol. 1: Genesis-Leviticus, by John Peter Lange and Frederic Gardiner. Translated by Tayler Lewis, A. Gosman, and Charles M. Mead.

Lev, Mordecai J., ed. Sepher Mitzvoth. Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Kook, 1990.

Lewis, C. S. Mere Christianity. New York: Macmillan, 1958.

Lightner, Robert P. "Theological Perspectives on Theonomy." Bibliotheca Sacra 143:569 (January-March 1986):26-36; 570 (April-June 1986):134-45; 571 (July-September 1986):228-45.

Livingston, G. Herbert. "A Case Study of the Call of Moses." Asbury Theological Journal 42:2 (Fall 1987):89-113.

_____.The Pentateuch in Its Cultural Environment. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1974.

Loewenstamm, Samuel E. "The Making and Destruction of the Golden Calf." Biblica 48 (1967):481-90.

_____ "The Making and Destruction of the Golden Calf--a Rejoinder." Biblica 56 (1975):330-43.

Lubarsky, Sandra B. "Judaism and the Justification of Abortion for Non-Medical Reasons." Journal of Reform Judaism 31:4 (Fall 1984):1-13.

M[ackintosh], C. H. Notes on the Book of Exodus. American ed. New York: Loizeaux Brothers, 1879.

MacLurg, Jeffrey E. "An Ode to Joy: The Song of the Sea (Exodus 15:1-21)." Exegesis and Exposition 1:1 (Fall 1986):43-54.

Magonet, Jonathan. "The Rhetoric of God: Exodus 6.2-8." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 27 (1983):56-67.

Marcus, David. "Juvenile Delinquency in the Bible and the Ancient Near East." Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society of Columbia University 13 (1981):31-52.

Mazar, Amihai. "Bronze Bull Found in Israelite High Place' from the Time of the Judges." Biblical Archaeology Review 9:5 (September-October 1983):34-40.

Mendenhall, George E. Law and Covenant in Israel and the Ancient Near East. Pittsburgh: Presbyterian Board of Colportage of Western Pennsylvania, 1955.

Merrill, Eugene H. Deuteronomy. New American Commentary series. N.c.: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1994.

_____. Kingdom of Priests. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1987.

_____. "The Mosaic Covenant: A Proposal for Its Theological Significance." Exegesis and Exposition 3:1 (Fall 1988):25-33.

_____. "A Theology of the Pentateuch." In A Biblical Theology of the Old Testament, pp. 7-87. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1991.

Meyer, Frederick Brotherton. Devotional Commentary on Exodus. London: Purnell, n.d.; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1981.

Milgrom, Jacob. "Thou Shalt Not Boil a Kid in It's Mother's Milk.'" Bible Review 1:3 (Fall 1985):48-55.

Mills, Watson E. "Childbearing in Ancient Times." Biblical Illustrator 13:1 (Fall 1986):54-56.

Minter, Steve. "Ten Timeless Words (Exodus 20:1-17)." Exegesis and Exposition 1:1 (Fall 1986):67-80.

Mitchell, Bill. "Leviticus 24.6: The Bread of the Presence--Rows or Piles?" Bible Translator 33:4 (October 1982):447-48.

Mitchell, T. C. "The Meaning of the Noun HTN in the Old Testament." Vetus Testamentum 19 (1969):93-112.

Montet, Pierre. Eternal Egypt. Translated by Doreen Weightman. New York: New American Library, 1964.

Morgan, G. Campbell. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Morgan, J. P. "The Morality of Suicide: Issues and Options." Bibliotheca Sacra 148:590 (April-June 1991):214-30.

Mowinckel, Sigmund. "The Name of the God of Moses." Hebrew Union College Annual 32 (1961):121-33.

Mowvley, Henry. "John 1:14-18 in the Light of Exodus 33:7-34:35." Expository Times 95:5 (February 1984):135-37.

Munro, John "Prayer to a Sovereign God." Interest 56:2 (February 1990):20-21.

Myers, John V. "What Was Brimstone?" Kronos 9:1 (Fall 1983):57-60.

Naville, Edouard. The Store-City of Pithom and the Route of the Exodus. London: Egypt Exploration Fund, 1885.

New Bible Dictionary. 1962. S.v. "Plagues of Egypt," by Kenneth A. Kitchen.

Nichol, Francis David, ed. The Seventh-Day Adventist Bible Commentary. 7 vols. Washington: Review and Herald Publishing Assoc., 1953-57.

Nicholson, E. W. "The Decalogue As the Direct Address of God." Vetus Testamentum 27 (October 1977):422-33.

Nowell, Irene. "Sabbath: Sign of the Covenant." The Bible Today 24:6 (November 1986):376-80.

Oosthuizen, M. J. "Some thoughts on the interpretation of Exodus 4:24-26." OTWSA 29(1986):1-30.

Patterson, Richard D. "Wonders in the Heavens and on the Earth: Apolcalyptic Imagery in the Old Testament." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 43:3 (September 2000):385-403.

Paul, Shalom. Studies in the Book of the Covenant in the Light of Cuneiform and Biblical Law. Leiden: Brill, 1970.

Pentecost, J. Dwight. A Faith That Endures: The Book of Hebrews Applied to the Real Issues of Life. Grand Rapids: Discovery House Publishers, 1992.

_____. "The Purpose of the Law." Bibliotheca Sacra 128:511 (July-September 1971):227-33.

_____. Thy Kingdom Come. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1990.

Perevolotsky, Aviram, and Israel Finkelstein. "The Southern Sinai Exodus Route in Ecological Perspective." Biblical Archaeology Review 11:4 (July-August 1985):26-41.

Petrie, Flinders. Egypt and Israel. New York: E. S. Gorham, 1911.

Pfeiffer, Charles F. Ras Shamra and the Bible. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1962.

Phillips, Anthony. Ancient Israel's Criminal Law. New York: Schocken, 1970.

_____ "A Fresh Look at the Sinai Pericope." Vetus Testamentum 34 (January 1984): 39-52; 34 (July 1984):282-94.

_____ The Laws of Slavery: Exodus 21:2-11." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 30 (October 1984):51-66.

_____ "Some Aspects of Family Law in Pre-Exilic Israel." Vetus Testamentum 23 (1973):349-61.

Pollock, Algernon J. The Tabernacle's Typical Teaching. London: Pickering & Inglis, n.d.

Pritchard, James B., ed. Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament. 3rd ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1969.

Proffitt, T. D., III. "Moses and Anthropology: A New View of the Exodus." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 27:1 (March 1984):19-25.

Radday, Yehuda T. "The Spoils of Egypt." Annual of the Swedish Theological Institute 12 (1983):127-47.

Ramey, William D. "The Great Escape (Exodus 14)." Exegesis and Exposition 1:1 (Fall 1986):33-42.

Ramm, Bernard L. His Way Out. Glendale: Gospel Light Publications; Regal Books, 1974.

Reviv, Hanoch. "The Traditions Concerning the Inception of the Legal System in Israel: Significance and Dating." Zeitschrift fur die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 94:4 (1982):566-75.

Ridout, Samuel. Lectures on the Tabernacle. Bible Truth Library series. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, n.d.

Robinson, Bernard P. "Symbolism in Exod. 15:22-27 (Marah and Elim)." Revue Biblique 94:3 (July 1987):376-88.

_____. "Zipporah to the Rescue: A Contextual Study of Exodus IV 24-6." Vetus Testamentum 36:4 (October 1986):447-61.

Rodriguez, Angel Manuel. "Sanctuary Theology in the Book of Exodus." Andrews University Seminary Studies 24:2 (Summer 1986):127-45.

Rooker, Mark F. Leviticus. The New American Commentary series. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2000.

Ross, Allen P. "When God Gives His People Bitter Water." Exegesis and Exposition 1:1 (Fall 1986):55-66.

Rowley, Harold H. "Moses and the Decalogue." Bulletin of the John Rylands Library of the University of Manchester 34:1 (September 1951);81-118.

Ryrie, Charles C. "The End of the Law." Bibliotheca Sacra 124:495 (July-September 1967):239-47.

Sailhamer, John H. "Exegetical Notes: Genesis 1:1-2:4a." Trinity Journal 5 NS (Spring 1984):73-82.

_____. "The Mosaic Law and the Theology of the Pentateuch." Westminster Theological Journal 53 (Fall 1991):241-61.

_____. The Pentateuch as Narrative. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

Sarles, Ken L. "An Appraisal of the Signs and Wonders Movement." Bibliotheca Sacra 145:577 (January-March 1988):57-82.

_____ "A Theological Evaluation of the Prosperity Gospel." Bibliotheca Sacra 143:572 (October-December 1986):329-52.

Sarna, Nahum M. Exodus. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1991.

_____. "Exploring Exodus--The Oppression." Biblical Archaeologist 49:2 (June 1986):68-79.

Sasson, J. M. "Circumcision in the Ancient Near East." Journal of Biblical Literature 85 (1966):473-76.

Schwantes, Siegfried J. A Short History of the Ancient Near East. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1965.

Shafer, B. E., ed. Religion in Ancient Egypt: Gods, Myths, and Personal Practice. Ithica: Cornell University Press, 1991.

Sheriffs, Deryck. "Moving on with God: Key motifs in Exodus 13-20." Themelios 15:2 (January-February 1990):49-60.

Siker-Gieseler, Jeffrey. "The Theology of the Sabbath in the Old Testament: A Canonical Approach." Studia Biblica et Theologica 11:1 (April 1981):5-20.

Soltau, Henry W. The Tabernacle, the Priesthood and the Offerings. London: Morgan and Scott, n.d.

Speiser, E. A. "An Angelic Curse': Exodus 14:20." Journal of the American Oriental Society 80 (1960):198-200.

Spurgeon, Graham. "Is Abortion Murder?" In The Religious Case for Abortion, pp. 15-27. Edited by Hamilton Gregory. Asheville: Madison and Polk, 1983.

Steuer, Axel D. "The Freedom of God and Human Freedom." Scottish Journal of Theology 36:2:163-80.

Stiebing, William H., Jr. "Should the Exodus and the Israelite Settlement in Canaan Be Redated?" Biblical Archaeology Review 11:4 (July-August 1985):58-69.

Strange, James F. "The Jewish Calendar." Biblical Illustrator 13:1 (Fall 1986):28-32.

Strauss, Lehman. The Eleven Commandments. 2nd ed. Neptune, N.J.: Loizeaux Brothers, 1975.

Student Map Manual. Jerusalem: Pictorial Archive (Near Eastern History) Est., 1979.

Sring, Margit L. "The Horn-Motifs of the Bible and the Ancient Near East." Andrews University Seminary Studies 22:3 (Autumn 1984):327-40.

Tan, Paul Lee. Principles of Literal Interpretation of the Bible. By the Author, 1967.

Tolhurst, A. H. "Whatever Happened to the Ark?" Ministry, June 1984, pp. 13-15.

Unger, Merrill F. Archaeology and the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1954.

_____ Biblical Demonology. 7th ed. Wheaton: Scripture Press, 1967.

_____ Demons in the World Today. Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers, 1974.

_____ "The Significance of the Sabbath." Bibliotheca Sacra 123:489 (January-March 1966):53-59.

Unger's Bible Dictionary, 3rd ed. S.v. "Cherub," by Merrill F. Unger.

_____ S.v. "Metrology," by E. McChesney, revised by Merrill F. Unger.

van der Meulen, Henry E. Faber. "One or two veils in front of the holy of holies?" Theologia Evangelica 18:1 (March 1985):22-27.

Van Seters, John. The Hyksos. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1966.

Voss, Robert J. "Who Am I That I Should Go? Exodus 3:11 (Ex. 2:25--4:18)." Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly 80:4 (Fall 1983):243-47.

Wagner, Maurice E. "How to Honor Your Parents When They've Hurt You." Psychology for Living 28:6 (June 1986):12-14.

Waltke, Bruce K. "Cain and His Offering." Westminster Theological Journal 48:2 (Fall 1986):363-72.

_____ "Palestinian Artifactual Evidence Supporting the Early Date of the Exodus." Bibliotheca Sacra 129:513 (January-March 1972):33-47.

_____ "Reflections from the Old Testament on Abortion." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 19:1 (Winter 1976):3-13.

Walvoord, John F. "The New Covenant." In Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 186-200. Edited by Charles H. Dyer and Roy B. Zuck. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1994.

Ward, William A. The Spirit of Ancient Egypt. Beirut: Khayats, 1965.

Watson, Thomas. The Ten Commandments. 1692. Reprint ed. Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1976.

Wenham, Gordon J. The Book of Leviticus. New International Commentary on the Old Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1979.

Wenham, John W. The Goodness of God. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1974.

Westcott, Brooke Foss. The Epistle to the Hebrews. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., n.d.

Whybray, R. Norman. Introduction to the Pentateuch. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1995.

Williams, Gary R. "The Purpose of Penology in the Mosaic Law and Today." Bibliotheca Sacra 133:529 (January-March 1976):42-55.

Wilson, Robert Dick. "Yahweh (Jehovah) and Exodus 6:3." In Classical Evangelical Essays in Old Testament Interpretation, pp. 29-40. Edited by Walter C. Kaiser, Jr. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1972.

Wilson, Robert R. "The Hardening of Pharaoh's Heart." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 41:1 (1979):18-36.

Winter, Ralph D. "The Growth of Israel in Egypt (The Phenomenon of Exponential Growth)." Paper published by the Institute of International Studies, Pasadena, Ca., 14 April 1993.

Wolinski, Arelene. "Egyptian Masks: The Priest and His Role." Archaeology 40:1 (January-February 1987):22-29.

Wood, Leon. A Survey of Israel's History. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1970.

Woudstra, Marten H. The Book of Joshua. New International Commentary on the Old Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1981.

Wright, G. Ernest. "The Significance of the Temple in the Ancient Near East." Biblical Archaeologist 7:4 (December 1944):65-77.

Wyatt, N. "The Significance of the Burning Bush." Vetus Testamentum 36:3 (July 1986):361-65.

Wyrick, Stephen Von. "Israel's Golden Calves." Biblical Illustrator 13:1 (Fall 1986):3-12.

Youngblood, Ronald F. Exodus. Everyman's Bible Commentary series. Chicago: Moody Press, 1983.

_____ "A New Look at an Old Problem: The Date of the Exodus." Christianity Today 26:20 (December 17, 1982):58, 60.

Zuck, Roy B. "The Practice of Witchcraft in the Scriptures." Bibliotheca Sacra 128:512 (October-December 1971):352-60.

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: Exodus (Book Introduction)

THE BOOK OF EXODUS.

INTRODUCTION.

The second Book of Moses is called Exodus from the Greek word Exodos, which signifies going out; because it contains the history of the going out of the children of Israel out of Egypt. The Hebrews, from the words with which it begins, call it Veelle Shemoth : These are the names. (Challoner) --- It contains the space of 143 years, till the beginning of the second year after the liberation of the Israelites. (Tirinus) --- Their slavery is described in the first chapters; and is supposed to have continued ninety years. (Du Hamel) --- The laws prescribed by God to his people, the sacrifices, tabernacle, &c., were all intended to prefigure the Christian dispensation. (St. Augustine, City of God vii. 31.) --- Moses himself was a type of Jesus Christ, who was rejected by the synagogue, and received by the Gentiles, as the Jewish Legislator was abandoned by his mother, and educated by the Egyptian princess. She delivers him back to his mother; and thus the Jews will, at last, acknowledge our Saviour. (Du Hamel) --- God deigns to address his people in the character of a powerful Eastern monarch, and requires the like attention. He appoints his ministers, like guards, to attend before his tabernacle, &c. The laws which he enacts, are such as suited the Jewish people: they were not to rise all at once to perfection; but these laws guide them, as it were, on the road. They are infinitely more perfect than those of the surrounding nations. (Calmet)

Gill: Exodus (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO EXODUS

This book is called by the Jews Veelleh Shemoth, from the first words with which it begins, and sometimes Sepher Shemoth, and sometimes only Shemoth. It is by the Septuagint called Exodus, from whom we have the name of Exodus, which signifies "a going out"; see Luk 9:31, because it treats of the going of the children of Israel out of Egypt; and hence in the Alexandrian copy it is called the Exodus of Egypt; and so the Syriac version entitles it the second book of the law, called "the going out"; and to the same purpose the Arabic version. The Jews sometimes give it the name of Nezikin, as Buxtorf ^a observes out of the Masora on Gen 24:8 because in it some account is given of losses, and the restitution of them. That this book is of divine inspiration, and to be reckoned in the canon of the sacred writings, is sufficiently evident to all that believe the New Testament; since there are so many quotations out of it there by Christ, and his apostles; particularly see Mar 12:26 and that it was wrote by Moses is not to be doubted, but when is not certain; it must be after the setting up of the tabernacle in the wilderness; the greatest part of what is contained in it, he was an eye and ear witness of; it plainly points out the accomplishment of the promises and prophecies delivered to Abraham, that his posterity would be very numerous, that they would be afflicted in a land not theirs, and in the fourth generation come out of it with great substance. It treats of the afflictions of the Israelites in Egypt, after the death of Joseph, until their deliverance by Moses; of his birth, calling, and mission to Pharaoh, to demand of him to let the children of Israel go; of the ten plagues upon him and his people, for refusing to dismiss them; of the departure of Israel from Egypt, and the institution of the passover on that account; of their passage through the Red sea into the wilderness, and of the various exercises and afflictions, supplies and supports they met with there; of the giving of a body of laws unto them, moral, ceremonial, and judicial; and of the building of the tabernacle, and all things appertaining to it; and throughout the whole, as there is a figure and representation of the passage of the people of God out of spiritual Egypt, through the wilderness of this world, to the heavenly Canaan, and of various things they must meet with in their passage, so there are many types of Christ, his person, office, and grace, and of his church, his word, and ordinances, which are very edifying and instructing. The book contains a history of about one hundred and forty years, from the death of Joseph, to the erection of the tabernacle.

Gill: Exodus 21 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO EXODUS 21

In this, and the two following chapters, are delivered various laws and precepts, partly of a moral, and partly of a religious, but chiefly of a civil nature, respecting the commonwealth of Israel, and its political good. This chapter treats of servants, and laws relating to them; to menservants, how long they shall serve, and what is to be done to those who are desirous of staying with their masters after their time is up, Exo 21:1, to maidservants, and especially betrothed ones, either to a father or a son, Exo 21:7, likewise it contains laws concerning the slaughter of men, whether with design or unawares, Exo 21:12, and concerning the ill usage of parents, Exo 21:15, and man stealing, Exo 21:16 and of mischief that comes by men's quarrelling and fighting, Exo 21:18 and by smiting a man or maidservant, Exo 21:20, to a woman with child, that is, by means of men's striving and contending with each other, Exo 21:22 and of damages that come by oxen, or to them, Exo 21:28.